university research committee meeting no. 24

UNIVERSITY RESEARCH COMMITTEE Meeting No. 24

NOTICE OF MEETING

Date Friday, 5 November 2021

Time 9.30am – 12.30pm

Location Videoconference

Join Zoom Meeting https://charlessturt.zoom.us/j/64765874658

Meeting ID 647 6587 4658

Members Position Term Ends Professor Michael Friend Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

(Chair) Ex-officio position

Associate Professor Jason White

Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Innovation)

Ex-officio position

Dr Alison Matthews Acting Director of Research Services and Dean of Graduate Studies

Ex-officio position

Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman

Associate Dean (Research) Faculty of Arts and Education

Ex-officio position

Professor Mark Morrison Associate Dean (Research) Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences

Ex-officio position

Associate Professor Jane Quinn Ms Helen Hobbs

Associate Dean (Research) Faculty of Science Acting Executive Director, Division of Library Services

Ex-officio position

Ex-officio position

Professor Leigh Schmidtke Research Centre Director 30 June 2022 Associate Professor Andrew Hall

Research Centre Director 30 June 2022

Professor Frank Marino Research-active academic staff member (Level E)

30 June 2023

Associate Professor Amy MacDonald

Research-active academic staff member (Level D)

30 June 2022

Dr Jennifer Bond Research-active academic staff member (Level B)

30 June 2023

Vacant Head of School nominated by HOS Forum 30 June 2023 Associate Professor Rhonda Shaw

Head, School of Psychology 30 June 2023

Ms Susan Penn-Turrall Higher Degree by Research Student 30 June 2022 Mr Muhammad Rana Higher Degree by Research student 30 June 2023 Professor Susan Green Nominee of Academic Senate with

experience and expertise in Indigenous-focused research

30 June 2023

001

https://charlessturt.zoom.us/j/64765874658

University Research Committee Meeting No. 24

AGENDA 5 November 2021

No Item Responsibility Purpose Time Page

1 Welcome and Apologies * Chair Noting 9.30am

2 Declaration of Interests * Chair Decision

3 Confirmation of Agenda * Chair Decision

4 Previous Minutes * Chair Decision

5 Action Sheet * Chair Discussion

6 Annual Plan * Chair Discussion

For Decision/Discussion

7 Chair’s Report * Chair Discussion 10.00am

8 Academic Risk * Risk Advisor N/A

9 Review of Admissions Policy Policy and Compliance Officer, DoS

Decision 10.20am

10 Draft University Student Performance Report

ADVCA / DRSDGS

Discussion 10.30am

11 Annual Research Report for URC ADVCR Discussion 10.40am

12 Annual Combined Faculty Research Report - FOAE

ADR FOAE Discussion 10.50am

13 Annual Combined Faculty Research Report - FOBJBS

ADR FOBJBS Discussion 11.00am

14 Annual Combined Faculty Research Report - FOSH

ADR FOSH Discussion 11.10am

15 Abridged Report on Ethics and Compliance Breaches

Manager, Research, Integrity, Ethics and Compliance

Discussion 11.20am

16 Research Integrity Training Modules' completion rates among adjunct staff

Manager, Research, Integrity, Ethics and Compliance

Discussion 11.30am

17 Principles for Draft Guidelines for HDR Supervisory Load

DRSDGS Discussion 11.45am

For Noting

18 Read and Publish Agreements Executive Director, DLS

Discussion/Noting

12.00pm

19 Faculty of Arts and Education Report to URC

ADR FOAE Noting

20 2022 Schedule of Meetings Director, Governance

Noting

21 Review of Annual Plan Director, Governance /Chair

Noting

4

6

7

20

2425

26

86

293

318

372

402

443

441

452

476

484

487

493

5

002

17

*Standing Item

22 Graduate Research Experience Survey

ADRDGS Noting

Close

23 Other business * Chair Discussion 12.10pm

24 Meeting Summation * Chair Discussion

25 Next meeting * Chair Noting

Closed Session

26 Director Research Services Report DRSDGS Discussion 12.15pm

Meeting Close 12.30pm

497

520

521522

523

003

Item 1: Welcome and Apologies

Acknowledgement of Country

“We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of the Lands on which we are meeting today and recognise their continuing connection to land, waters and culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.”

Apologies

Associate Professor Rhonda Shaw Professor Michael Friend

004

Item 2: Declaration of Interests

Members are responsible for disclosing circumstances that give rise or may give rise to actual, potential or perceived conflicts of interest.

Declarations should be submitted to Governance Services prior to the meeting (or prior to voting if the meeting is conducted by flying minute).

The University Research Committee will determine the appropriate course of action, which may include the member leaving the meeting for the duration of the item or abstaining from discussion and/or decision. If the meeting is held by flying minute a determination will be made by the Chair in consultation with Governance Services.

005

Item 3: Confirmation of Agenda

006

Item 4: Previous Minutes

PURPOSE

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

The University Research Committee resolves to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 3 September 2021 as a true and accurate record.

ATTACHMENT

A. URC23 Unconfirmed Minutes 3 September 2021

007

1

UNIVERSITY RESEARCH COMMITTEE

Meeting No. 23

Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting held on Friday 3 September 2021 by videoconference.

008

2

1. Welcome and Apologies

The Chair opened the meeting at 9.34am with an Acknowledgement of Country and welcomed members

and attendees.

Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman, Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Arts and Education

(ADRFOAE); Ms Helen Hobbs, Acting Executive Dean, Division of Library Services (AEDLS); and Ms

Nicole Adler, (Governance Officer), were all welcomed to their first meeting of the University Research

Committee (URC).

Acknowledgement was made of the fine work done by Dr Alison Matthews, noting her departure from the

University.

Members Present Professor Michael Friend (Chair) Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) (ADVCR) Associate Professor Jason White

Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Innovation) (APVCRI)

Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman

Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Arts and Education

Professor Mark Morrison Associate Professor Jane Quinn Ms Helen Hobbs

Acting Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Science and Health Acting Executive Director, Division of Library Services

Professor Leigh Schmidtke Research Centre Director (Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation) (National Wine and Grape Industry Centre)

Associate Professor Andrew Hall Research Centre Director (Institute for Land, Water and Society)

Dr Jennifer Bond Level A or B Research Active Academic (Level B) Professor Frank Marino Level E Research Active Academic Ms Susan Penn-Turrall Higher Degree by Research Student

Attendees Ms Elizabeth Harangozo Risk Adviser Professor Oliver Burmeister Mr Tony Heywood

Presiding Officer, Human Ethics Research Committee Acting Director, Governance

Ms Nicole Adler (minutes) Governance Adviser Apologies Ms Kate Organ Professor Stephen Currow Associate Professor Rhonda Shaw Associate Professor Amy MacDonald Professor Susan Green

Manager, Research Integrity, Ethics and Compliance Vice-President, Academic – Avondale University College Head of School, nominated by the Heads of Schools Forum Level C or D Research Active Academic (Level D) Staff member with experience and expertise in Indigenous-focused research

Note was made of the need, or otherwise, for continuing representation from Avondale University

College (AUC).

ACTION URC23/1 The Chair to discuss, in consultation with Governance, the ongoing need for representation from AUC on University Research Committee. [Chair]

2. Declaration of Interests

Associate Professor Hall identified that he acted as principal supervisor to a student on the list of

approvals to graduate under Item 21. Professor Leigh Schmidtke also identified his supervision of two

students on the list. Agreed that both would remove themselves from that part of Committee discussion.

009

3

3. Confirmation of Agenda

A question was raised as to any further documentation for Item 11. It was confirmed that the item was as

presented with no further attachments. The agenda was confirmed.

4. Previous Minutes

The minutes of the previous meeting were accepted subject to

RESOLUTION URC23/1 The University Research Committee resolved to approve the minutes of the meetings held on 25th June 2021 and 5 July 2021 FM as a true and accurate record, subject to the amendment to include Associate Professor Jane Quinn as being present at the June meeting.

5. Action Sheet

The Committee noted the Action Sheet and updates provided on each item have been captured on the

Action Sheet.

The Committee discussed specific progress as follows

• Proposal to combine Actions 3.2 and URC12/3 given that they both pertain to the linked issues of

scholarships, stipends and providing an environment for Higher Degree Research (HDR) students.

Research Training Program allocation spending, goals and pathways, growing the applicant load,

targeted recruitment and support, appropriate budget allocation, and the lag between investment and

outcome, were all issues raised. The Coaldrake Report is to be kept in the forefront of

considerations.

ACTION URC23/2 Prepare a paper on growing HDR student numbers, for consideration by the University Research Committee at the November meeting. [APVRI, AADRBJBS]

• The APVRI noted that Item 3.3 was more operational than governance in concern. Project is to

address the conflict between exact start dates as opposed to Census dates. Item will continue to

progress.

• URC17/2. The committee noted the need to see the minutes from the last Research Advisory

Committee before further progress could be made. To be included in the URC November meeting.

• URC19/9 No Higher Degree Research Committee meeting had been held since the last URC

meeting. This action to be held over to the November meeting. The Associate Dean (Research),

Faculty of Science and Health (ADRFOSH) confirmed that in relation pre- or post- oral defence of a

thesis that it is post- submission.

• URC19/14. Dot point 2 is completed after being raised at Academic Progress Leadership Team

meeting. Dot point 1 is still pending.

• URC19/15 ADRFOAE to follow up for next meeting of URC.

• URC20/3 Hold over until the November meeting until Kate Organ is present.

• URC20/4 External audit of ethics to be checked for reference to an animal ethics component. Chair

to confirm whether these reports are approved to be made public yet and the process for doing this

appropriately.

• URC21/2 Confirmed that adjustment to the Annual Plan can be made to move the Annual Research

Report to Academic Senate to after the URC meeting in November. Action to be closed.

• URC21/3 Still on hold. APVCRI incorrectly referred to in this item. The importance of linking the work

being done in faculties on Fields of Research (FoR) codes to avoid any disconnect between

University and Faculty strategies. The question over the need for wider University discussion was

raised. The action relates to communication after the outputs are linked to the new codes.

ACTION URC21/3 continued Update to consider work already being undertaken at the Faculty level. [Chair, GO]

Ms Elizabeth Harangozo (Risk Adviser) joined the meeting at 10.15am.

010

4

• URC21/4 Three new suitable fieldwork vehicles and two replacement vehicles are on order.

Continuing concerns raised about the lack of understanding on meeting contracting research

obligations. Access to vehicles remains an ongoing issue across many parts of the University. Action

to be closed.

• URC21/7 Closely linked to URC21/8. Action to be closed.

ACTION URC21/8 continued Update to incorporate appropriate wording from URC21/7 in relation to intellectual climate and opportunity of researchers to undertake engagement initiatives. [Chair, GO]

6. Annual Plan

Item 6 was considered after Item 17 on the Agenda.

The Committee discussed relevant items on the Annual Plan and provided feedback as assigned to the

following items:-

• Student Academic Integrity and Misconduct Report – as there were no HDR student matters noted in the report it has not been placed on the URC agenda.

• Professional Accreditation Report – to be pushed back to November meeting to allow time for Associate Deans Academic (ADA) to submit reports to Faculty Boards (FB) and then refer onto URC.

• Receipt of Reports from FB – GO to follow up for next meeting

• Abridged Ethics Report – decision made at June meeting for it to occur annually though confirmation of month not determined.

ACTION URC23/3

1. Update the timing of the Abridged Report on Ethics and Compliance to occur annually at the November meeting of URC. [GO]

2. Present an updated Annual Plan to the November meeting. [GO]

RESOLUTION URC 23/2 The University Research Committee resolved to note the updated Annual Plan

7. Chair’s Report

The Chair provided a verbal report of the following items.

7.1 New Vice-Chancellor

The Chair welcomed the appointment of Professor Renée Leon as the new Vice Chancellor. The Vice-

Chancellor’s Leadership Team met with her this week, and she expressed great interest in improving the

University’s research performance. The Chair is currently preparing a list of issues on which to brief her

at their coming meeting.

7.2 University Council

The continued and increased support of research was clear as part of the new University strategy.

7.3 Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA)

Consultations will start soon though in reality there will be relatively small changes to Excellence in

Research (ERA) assessments in 2023 but significant changes would flow thereafter. Recoding is currently

in progress.

011

5

7.4 Research Productivity Index (RPI)

The data is now available, and it is expected that Heads of School will have the discussion with staff

around research performance. Acknowledgement made of the ADRBJBS and his leadership in this

regard.

7.5 Drought Hub

A large number of expressions of interest were being developed for the Hub.

7.6 Deputy Vice Chancellor (Research) recruitment

The Chair noted that applications closed at the end of last month and the selection process will continue

over the next month or so. Consequently, the current ADVCR appointment has been extended until the

end of the year.

7.7 Issues arising from Chair’s Report

• Access to the Agriculture, Water and Environment research strategy report was raised. The Chair

agreed to share this out of session

ACTION URC23/4 Distribution to be made of the AWE and Campus One reports. [Chair]

• It was noted that the Intellectual Property (IP) Policy was overdue for review but that it would in

time be made available for open comment.

• Clarification requested around the Drought Hub in relation to in-kind and support-for grants. Agreed

to take offline as it was not a governance issue.

• Confirmation given that schools will be approached to confirm which staff require/should have

access to the RPI.

• Information on median and exemplary performance from RPI would be helpful.

• In relation to commercialisation, more structure and organisation may be needed to ensure staff

are getting the correct information.

• Possible misunderstandings around the link between funding and RPI means the use of the RPI

needs to be carefully considered when determining performance.

• Division of Library Services would welcome off-line discussions as strategy streams are firmed up.

RESOLUTION URC23/3 The University Research Committee resolved to note the verbal report of the Chair.

Professor Oliver Burmeister joined the meeting at 11:36.

8 Review of Risk

Prior to presenting the update on matters pertaining to Academic Risk 2, the Risk Advisor noted that

linked to the discussion in the Chair’s Report on IP, that Council had recently approved the Fraud and

Corruption Prevention Policy which will have some links and ramifications for the protection of IP.

.

The Risk Advisor spoke to the report as presented

• highlighting the new reporting structure through the University committees

• “treatments’ should be viewed as works in progress

• clarifying that the ‘key controls’ mentioned are relevant down to Tier 3 and do not necessarily include

frontline management risk control

RESOLUTION URC23/4 The University Research Committee resolved to note the Risk Management Report.

012

6

The Risk Advisor left the meeting at 10.55am.

9 Response to recommendation of the Human Research Ethics Committee

Professor Oliver Burmeister, Presiding Officer, Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) was

welcomed by the Chair and was commended for his outstanding work on HREC, which was supported in

full by the Committee. The focus was on two of the recommendations contained in the report, namely 8

and 6.

Recommendation 8

• this item is not for implementation by the URC but would need to be considered at a higher level

• much closer consideration of the increase in workload needs to be given as it threatens the effective

working of HREC

• concerns raised on how HREC involvement is viewed in relation to promotions

Recommendation 6 (linked to 19)

• relatively low quality of applications are still being submitted

• medical institute will no doubt result in an upswing in applications

Further discussion noted

• agreement that the 200 workload hours for general membership was about correct though with some

31% of applications in the last quarter classed as being via the low risk pathway, the workload for the

HREC executive has increased significantly

• URC was pleased to note the move back to HREC focussing on ethics rather the minutiae of the

research being presented. HREC recommendations to applications would in future be divided into

research and ethics.

• the potential involvement, though not lead, of HREC in the clinical trials process was flagged by the

APVCRI.

• noted that training for the Research Integrity Advisors was not being led by HREC but rather the

Research Integrity and Compliance Unit.

In response to this report, the action item URC20/4 is to be closed.

ACTION URC23/5 The Chair to investigate gaining access to the Animal Care and Ethics Review [Chair, GO]

RESOLUTION URC23/5 The University Research Committee resolved to note the HREC Report and endorse submission of the report to Academic Senate.

The Chair offered a comfort break of 5 minutes, with the Committee reconvening at 11.22am.

10 Research and Research Training – Academic Quality Policy

The APVCRI spoke to the submission noting the focus was on Table 4. The following were highlighted

by committee members.

• no reference to IP in 4.2

• research strategy does not fully align with the University strategy

• clarification that the wording is the exact wording of the standards – remove the word ‘maintain’ at

4.3

• more emphasis in the wording needed in relation to support of HDR students

• HESF Standards on University engagement are in Part B of the Standards so not necessary to

include here

013

7

ACTION URC23/6 The APVCRI to consult with the Manager, Policy and Records to confirm process required for wording changes and whether resubmission to Academic Senate for approval was necessary [APVCRI]

RESOLUTION URC23/6 Note and endorse the Academic Quality Standards related to Research and Research Training, subject to the minor wording changes.

11 HDR Examinations Committee Composition

The APVCRI spoke to the submission, and discussion at Academic Senate on the wording in clause

115. The Committee confirmed agreement with the revised wording subject to the addition of an extra

dot point indicating the academic should be research experienced.

ACTION URC23/7 The APVCRI to include additions and provide revised wording to Academic Senate [APVCRI].

RESOLUTION URC23/7 The University Research Committee resolved to endorse the revised wording to the HDR Policy for reporting to Academic Senate, subject to the minor wording change.

12 Proposed changes to the Higher Education Provider Category Standards

The ADVCR spoke to the submission on where research would like to be positioned at ERA2023,

ensuring it aligns with the University strategy related to the three new institutes, and how we move

forward to ERA2028. The document presents the early thinking around this issue as requested by

Academic Senate. Whilst the Committee agreed the document was appropriate for Senate

consideration, the details contained within would be something worked on for some time ahead.

Discussion occurred under the relevant Fields of Education (FoE).

FoE01

• FoR31 to be considered more strategically

FoE02

• There may some codes missing – cyber, data mining and image processing

• Chair, APVCRI and ADRBJBS to work offline on this

FoE03

• Good quality output - a case to be made for investing in this to gain greater improvements

• Shift to biomedical engineering – clarification needed on what code it comes under and who is

publishing in this area

• Environmental Engineering areas within the University starting to make connections

FoE05

• More strategy needed in the balance across the FoRs – some fall below the threshold but could be

split across new FoRs

• Lower quality at a 4-digit level needs to not undermine at the 2-digit level

• FoR codes should be considered more closely prior to writing/publication of research

FoE06

• Rural Health likely to be the focus in this area

• Acknowledged that this is a long 10 or 20yr plan

• Need to focus on what can realistically be done in the five-year window available – ERA working

groups will be convened soon

014

8

• May lead to restrictions in relation to authors selecting FoE or FoR codes

• ADRFOAE noted they were already becoming more prescriptive with research needing to be aligned

with the Sturt Scheme

• Whilst it was agreed the introduction of a peer review process would help with code mapping, such a

process would be impeded by scope, expertise and time

FoE07

• More strategy needed in society and culture

Note was made of the general impact across schools and divisions in relation to certain research areas

no longer being prioritised or assisted. Discussion at Research Advisory Committee (RAC) considered

important.

ACTION URC23/8 Chair to distribute proposed changes to the Higher Education Provider Category Standards document to ADRFOSH and ADRBJBS to allow written comments and feedback. [ADVCR]

RESOLUTION URC23/8 The University Research Committee resolved to: 1. endorse the broad recommendations in the attached report; and 2. approve submission to Academic Senate for discussion and inclusion in research strategy

development work, subject to appropriate amendments.

13 Graduate Research Experience Survey

Hold over to the next meeting of URC.

14 Faculty of Science and Health Research Performance and Investment Report 2020

Hold over to the next meeting of URC.

15 Nomination of new member to the URC Standing Committee

Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman was nominated to this position and accepted.

RESOLUTION URC23/9 The University Research Committee resolved to endorse Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman ADRFOAE to the URC Standing Committee.

16 Research Supervisory Metrics Report

RESOLUTION URC23/10 The University Research Committee resolved to note the report on Research Supervisory Metrics.

17 Faculty of Arts and Education report to University Research Committee

RESOLUTION URC23/11 The University Research Committee resolved to note the report from the Faculty of Arts and Education.

18 Other business

18.1 Student Performance Reports

With undergraduate performance reports currently being considered by Faculty Boards, it was discussed

whether HDR reports could come into alignment with this so that only one report is submitted for

consideration next year. APVCRI confirmed that this should already be happening.

015

9

ACTION URC23/9 Chair to follow up with the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)[Chair]

18.2 Research Productivity Index (RPI) Sub Committee

It was noted that the length of membership of the RPI Sub Committee was not included in the Terms of

Reference. Suggested that the term be 2 years.

RESOLUTION URC23/12 The University Research Committee resolved to approve a term of two years as part of membership of the RPI Sub Committee.

19 Meeting Summation

Members were thanked for their robust discussion and the quality of the papers submitted.

20 Next Meeting

The next meeting of the University Research Committee is scheduled to be held from 9.30am to

12.30pm on Friday 5 November 2021 by videoconference. The agenda for this meeting closes on Friday

22 October 2021.

The Acting Director Governance and the Acting Executive Director, Library Services left the meeting at

12.30pm.

21 Director Research Services Report (closed session)

It was noted that a couple of supervisors were getting quite high in terms of ‘head count’ for supervision

and this will need to be looked at more closely to determine what, if any, policy needs to occur around

that.

In terms of approvals to graduate it should be noted that Examination Committees continue to be used

appropriately.

Course transfers were acknowledged as mostly being linked to transfer of staff to new faculties. Of

greater interest were the number of Leaves of Absence recorded which appear to have stabilised back to

pre-Covid levels. The relatively high number in FOBJBS was attributed to those in part time Doctorate

programs where work has again been impacted by Covid.

RESOLUTION URC23/13 The University Research Committee resolved to note the Director, Research Services Report

There being no further business, the meeting concluded at 12.33pm.

Signed as a true and accurate record:

________________________________ ____________________

Chair Date

016

Meeting Date and Minutes

Ref.

Action Number Action Responsible Officer Due Date Status Status Information

8.11.19 Item 3.3 Implementation of a Candidature Consumption Model within Research Masters - Implement recommendations.

Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Innovation)

01-Jan-20 In progress Apr 2020: due for implementation in 2021.Sep 2020: waiting on staff resources to commence, dependent on ORG review 1 but on trackNov 2020: resources have been confirmed; project should commence this month and is expected to be completed early in 2021.26.2.21: Confluence site set up for testing, facing staff constraints. Will provide update to next meeting. 16.4.21: No update recorded.25.6.21: Work has only just recommenced now that there is a full cohort in the Graduate Studies team - still in progress.3.9.21 More operational than governance in concern - still in progress.22.10.21 Update to be provided at Nov 21 meeting.

20-Nov-20Item 9

URC17/2 Discuss the recommendations provided in the Benchmarking of minimum resource requirements for Higher Degree by Research Candidates across selected Australian universities report, referring to the feedback provided by the University Research Committee at Item 9 of the minutes of the meeting held on 20 November 2020.

Acting Director Research Services and Dean, Graduate Studies

01-Feb-21 In progress 26.2.21: feedback considered by HDRC and Sub Deans agreed to modify document based on URC feedback. Will be considered by Research Advisory Committee then back to URC.16.4.21: RAC meetings are being scheduled.25.6.21: The Research Advisory Committee (RAC) met to discuss/debate. URC requested further modifications to benchmarking by the RAC and recommendations to be provided to the next meeting of URC. 3.9.21 RAC minutes to checked prior to consideration at November URC22.10.21 Update to be provided at Nov 21 meeting.

26-Feb-21 URC19/9 Investigate viva voce models of examinations and provide recommendations to URC.Ongoing actions (as discussed under Item 13, 25 June):1. ADR (FOS) to check with Sub-Dean Graduate Studies(FOS) as to the faculty's resonse to HDRC regarding pre-or-post-oral defence of a thesis.2. HDRC to discuss the HRC's feedback from 25 June 2021meeting and submit a re-worked paper to the next URC.

1. Associate Dean(Research) (FOS

2. Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research &Innovation /Director,Research Services andDean, Graduate Studies

03-Sep-21 In progress 16.4.21: (Action from 26 Feb 21 meeting). Update to be provided at the next meeting.25.6.21: Options paper submitted to URC and discussed under Item 13; further action required as noted.3.9.21 ADRFOSH confirmed oral defence as post- submission. Dot point 1 completed. HDRC had not meet since last URC so item to be held over to November URC.22.10.21 Update to be provided at Nov 21 meeting.

Item 5: Action Sheet

017

26-Feb-21 URC19/14 Provide recommendation to URC on HDR Supervisory Loads.

Ongoing actions (as discussed under Item 5, 25 June)1. Principles for a guideline of HDR supervisory load to be re-worked and submitted for consideration by URC.2. APVCRI to also raise the URC's concerns aboutgovernance/quality of research supervision with the Provost& DVCA.

Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research & Innovation) / Director Research Services and Dean, Graduate Studies

16-Apr-21 In progress 16.4.21: update to be provided at the next meeting. May need to be a guideline rather than a policy.25.6.21: Draft discussion paper circulated to faculties, not widely supported. To be reviewed and recommendation to be presented to next meeting.3.9.21 Dot point 2 completed after consideration at APLT. Dot point 1 still pending.22.10.21 Paper submitted to November URC meeting for consideration.

26-Feb-21 URC19/15 Raise issue of HDR Supervisory Loads at next Faculty Leadership Team meeting

Associate Dean, Research (Faculty of Arts and Education)

03-Sep-21 On hold

16-Apr-21 URC20/3 Investigate whether the Research Integrity Training Modules' completion rates include adjuncts and provide an update to the next meeting.

Manager, Ethics and Compliance Unit

03-Sep-21 In progress 25.6.21: to be carried over to next meeting as MEC not in attendance.3.9.21 to be carried over to November meeting as MEC not in attendance.22.10.21 Paper for consideration on agenda for Nov 21 meeting.

16-Apr-21 URC20/4 Make the most recent external reviews of Human Research Ethics and Animal Care and Ethics at the University public and advise the Committee, if appropriate.

Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) / Manager, Ethics and Compliance Unit

25-Jun-21 Completed

25-Jun-21Item 7.2

URC21/3 ADVCR to provide university-wide messaging regarding new FOR codes as a consequence of the ARC ERA Review, after September 2021. 1. Consideration of work already being undertaken at the Faculty level.

Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

1-Oct-21 On hold 3.9.21 APVCRI incorrectly refered to (update made). Dot point 1 added to item. Further action required after outputs are linked to the new codes.

25-Jun-21Item 8.2

URC21/5 URC to track progress of MOU with Avondale College in regard to joint HDR conferrals under Agenda Standing Item 8

Chair / GO / Prof. Stephen Currow

3-Sep-21 On hold 26.8.21 Revisit at expiry of MOU

25-Jun-21Item 11

URC21/6 Take on board suggestions made by URC members to revise indicators of research performance.

Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) and Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research & Innovation)

3-Sep-21 Completed 22.10.21 Further consideration will be through the KPIs developed as part of strategy.Action to be closed.

25-Jun-21Item 12

URC21/8 Research Advisory Committee (RAC) to form a Working Group (comprising ADR FOSH) to consider and build upon the recommendations presented in the Intellectual Climate for HDR Students paper, and report back to the next meeting. The report to include an investigation of opportunities for researchers to undertake engaement activities to improve intellectual climate.

Acting Director Research Services and Dean, Graduate Studies / Associate Dean (Research) FOSH

3-Sep-21 In progress Also see URC 12/6 for background (completed actions).3.9.21 Update to incorporate appropriate wording from URC21/7 in relation to intellectual climate and opportunity of researchers to undertake engagement initiatives.(update made)22.10.21 Continues in progress

3 Sept 21 Item 1

URC23/1 The Chair to discuss, in consultation with Governance, the ongoing need for representation from AUC on University Research Committee


5-Nov-21 Completed 22.10.21 A new version of the MOU with Avondale is in the process of being finalised, with joint awards to continue until the end of 2025. The Avondale representatives on our committees will also continue.Action to be closed.

3 Sept 21 Item 5

URC23/2 Prepare a paper on growing HDR student numbers, for consideration by the University Research Committee at the November meeting

Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research & Innovation / Associate Dean Research (BJBS)

5-Nov-21 In progress 22.10.21 Consideration be given to this item being delayed until Quarter 2 in 2022.

3 Sept 21 Item 7.7

URC23/4 Distribution to be made of the AWE and Campus One reports.


5-Nov-21 Completed 22.10.21 Completed. Action to be closed.

018

3 Sept 21 Item 9

URC23/5 The Chair to investigate gaining access to the Animal Care and Ethics Review.

Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) / Governance Officer

5-Nov-21 In progress 22.10.21 The Executive summary and Progress against recommendations will be presented to URC in early 2022, after consideration by Audit & Risk Committee.

3 Sept 21 Item 10

URC23/6 Research and Research Training - Academic Quality Policy. The APVCRI to consult with the Manager, Policy and Records to confirm process required for wording changes and whether resubmission to Academic Senate for approval was necessary.

Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research & Innovation


3 Sept 21 Item 11

URC23/7 HDR Examinations Committee Composition. The APVCRI to include additions and provide revised wording to Academic Senate.

Acting Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research & Innovation


3 Sept 21 Item 12

URC23/8 Chair to distribute proposed changes to the Higher Education Provider Category Standards document to ADRFOSH and ADRBJBS to allow written comments and feedback.



3 Sept 21 Item 18.1

URC23/9 Chair to confirm with Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) that undergraduate and HDR Student Performance Reports should be submiited as one document for consideration.



019

University Research Committee Annual Plan – Page 1 of 4 Updated 08/09/2021

University Research Committee – Annual Plan 2021

Item Report Owner / Responsible Officer

Alignment Suggested

Frequency

Meeting Date

MTOR HES Policy

26

Feb

16

Ap

r

25

Ju

n

3 S

ep

t

5 N

ov

Chair’s Report Chair Each meeting

x x x x x

Policy Reviews (relevant policies) Policy Owners 8.g 6.3.2 Policy Framework Policy

Delegation Schedule 1

As required

Quality and Compliance

Academic Risk (review of relevant risks) Chair 8.a

8.k iii

6.2.1 Risk Management Policy Each meeting

x x x x x

Higher Education Standards Framework Compliance Director, Risk

and Compliance

All As Required x

Annual Report of Committee Performance against Membership and Terms of Reference (MTOR)

Chair / Governance Officer

Annual x

Student Matters

HDR Student Performance Report* (including progression, attrition, completion, load, student feedback by cohort, national survey)

Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor

(Academic) / Associate Deans (Research) /

Office of Planning and Analytics / Director,

Research Services and Dean of Graduate

Studies

8.d 5.3.3 Course and Subject Policy Annual (final report due to AS/CNL in Q1 for the previous

year)

x

Student Academic Integrity and Misconduct Report (including HDR)*

Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and

Teaching) / Manager, Ethics and Compliance

8.j 5.2 Academic Integrity Policy

Student Misconduct Rule 2020

Annual x

Report on Research Training* (benchmarked every three years)

Director, Research Services and Dean of

Graduate Studies

8.a

8.g iii

8.l

9

4.2 Annual x

* Includes external benchmarking or scrutiny

020

https://policy.csu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=527

https://policy.csu.edu.au/download.php?associated=1&id=80&version=19







Alignment Suggested

Frequency

Meeting Date

MTOR HES Policy

26 F

eb

16 A

pr

25

Ju

n

3 S

ep

t

5 N

ov

Research Supervisory Metric Reports Director, Research Services and Dean of

Graduate Studies

8.c

8.g iii

Annual; as required

x

Courses

Comprehensive Course Reviews (Coursework and HDR) – Annual Review of Schedule and Progress

Manager, Course and Subject Accreditation /

Associate Deans (Research)

8.e 5.3.1 Course and Subject Policy Annual x

Comprehensive Course Reviews (HDR) – Review Report for individual courses

Higher Degree Research Committee

8.e 5.3.1 Course and Subject Policy As required

Annual Course Performance Health Check (Annual Summary Report)

Associate Deans (Academic) / Associate

Deans (Research) / Chair, Faculty Board

8.b

8.d

5.3 Course and Subject Policy

Course and Subject Life Cycle Procedure

Course and Subject Quality Assurance and Review Procedure

Annual x

Professional Accreditation Report (HDR courses) Associate Deans (Academic)

3.1.5 Course and Subject Policy Annual x

Business Case Summary Report (Delegation AS36) (new courses, new offerings of an existing course, suspension or phase out)

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research

and Engagement)

3.0

5.1

Course and Subject Policy


As required

Notice of Intent for a new course or major change to a course


and Engagement)

As required

Low Impact Course and Subject Changes (Minor Variations) (Delegation AS38)


and Engagement)



As required

Course Approvals (HDR) – Report from Higher Degree Research Committee (HDRC) (AS2)


8.f 1.4

1.5

3.1

5.1



As required


021

















Alignment Suggested

Frequency

Meeting Date

MTOR HES Policy

26 F

eb

16 A

pr

25 J

un

3 S

ep

t

5 N

ov

Reporting

Higher Degree by Research Committee Report Director, Research Services and Dean of

Graduate Studies

Higher Degree by Research Committee – Membership and Terms of Reference

Each meeting

x x x x x

Higher Degree Research Examinations Committee Report Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

Higher Degree by Research Examinations Committee – Membership and Terms of Reference

After each meeting

Higher Degree Research Scholarships Committee Report Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and

Innovation)

Higher Degree by Research Scholarships Committee – Membership and Terms of Reference

After each meeting

eResearch Coordination Committee Report Director, Research Services and Dean of

Graduate Studies

eResearch Coordination Committee – Membership and Terms ofReference

After each meeting

Report from the Director, Research Services and Dean of Graduate Studies to oversight HDR student matters:

• Admission (AS4)

• Cancellation of Enrolment (AS31)

• Leave of Absence (AS33)

• Examination

• Graduation


Graduate Studies

8.h 1.1

1.2

1.3

Admissions Policy

Enrolment Policy


Each meeting

x x x x x

Extracts from University Courses Committee Minutes regarding Honours and Masters Coursework courses with a research component

Governance Officer 8.i 5.1 Course and Subject Policy


After each UCC

meeting as relevant

Receipt of Reports / Minutes relevant to University Research Committee from Faculty Boards (FB), Faculty Research Committee (FRC) and other bodies, demonstrating:

- Policies and Procedures are being adhered to(especially in relation to the authority to approval finalgrades for subjects)

- Monitoring against Higher Education Standards for:

o Orientation and Progress continued over …

Associate Deans (Research) / Chair / Governance Officer

8.k 1.3

1.4

2.1

2.2

3.3

5.2

Admissions Policy


Academic Integrity Policy


After each FB or FRC meeting as

relevant

022


























Alignment Suggested

Frequency

Meeting Date

MTOR HES Policy

26 F

eb

16 A

pr

25 J

un

3 S

ep

t

5 N

ov

Report from FBs / FRCs continued …

o Learning Environment, Facilities, andInfrastructure

o Diversity and Equity

o Learning Resources and Educational Support

o Academic Integrity

Annual combined Faculty Research Report from Faculty Boards (research performance, gaps and issues, improvement plans)


and Engagement) / Director, Research

Services and Dean of Graduate Studies / Associate Deans

(Research)

8.a 5.2 Annual x

Staff Research Misconduct and Integrity Report Executive Director People and Culture

8.j 5.2 Academic Integrity Policy

Aust. Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research, 2018

Annual x

Abridged Report on Ethics and Compliance Breaches (de-identified)

Manager, Ethics and Compliance

Annual x

Items referred to and from Academic Senate, University Learning and Teaching Committee, University Courses Committee and other committees or officers

Chair 8.g

8.i

8.l

9

10

6.3 Membership and Terms of Reference (various)

As required

Review of Annual Plan* Manager, Governance / Chair

Annual x


023


https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/australian-code-responsible-conduct-research-2018

https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/australian-code-responsible-conduct-research-2018

Item 7: Chair’s Report

PURPOSE

To receive a verbal report from the Chair.

RECOMMENDATION

The University Research Committee resolves to note the verbal report from the Chair.

URC24 5 November 2021 DISCUSSION

024

Item 8: Academic Risk (review of relevant risks)

The Risk and Compliance Unit has advised that there will be no matters submitted for consideration at this meeting.

URC24 5 November 2021 N/A

025

Item 9 : Review of Admissions Policy

PURPOSE To endorse the Admissions Policy and recommend approval to the Academic Senate.

RECOMMENDATION The University Research Committee resolves to: 1. endorse the Admissions Policy and recommend approval to Academic Senate.2. endorse changes to the Admissions Procedure and International Student Fee Refund Procedure

and recommend approval to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).3. endorse consequential changes to the Enrolment Policy and recommend approval to Academic

Senate.

KEY ISSUES The Admissions Policy and supporting four procedures have undergone review to;

• comply with changes to Education Services for Overseas Student (ESOS), Higher EducationStandards Framework (HESF) and Higher Education Support Act (HESA);

• align with University structure (establishment of two Admission offices – International andDomestic);

• address gaps identified by Wells Advisory;• update processes with current practices across the University; and• improve readability and structure of the document for a student audience.

The Enrolment Policy will require minor consequential changes for alignment and consistency with the new Admissions Policy. These are: Replacing the term ‘Overseas student’ with ‘Non-resident student’ for consistency with the Admissions Policy; adding a reference to the Admissions Policy in the ‘Concurrent Study’ section; and removing the detailed ‘Cross-institutional study’ section for incoming students and referring to the Admissions Policy where this process is now addressed.

1. BackgroundThe current Admissions Policy was reviewed in 2019 and took effect from 1 January 2020. Inresponse to the Education Services for Overseas Student (ESOS) audit led by Office of Governanceand Corporate Affairs, a full review of the Admissions policy and supporting procedures was requiredto address a compliance issue regarding age of international students. During the review compliancewith HESF and HESA were also clarified.

During the review process, several stakeholders were engaged including International Admissions, Domestic Admissions, Enrolments Team, Research Office, Faculties and International Compliance. The Admissions policy and four supporting procedures have also been posted to the Policy Library bulletin board for two weeks with relevant feedback incorporated.

2. Key Changes

A. Admissions PolicyThe key changes include

i. change of terminology – introduction of ‘non-resident’ student category and change torelevant admission team (to address the two admissions teams in the University).

ii. Updating minimum age requirements – need for international applicants to be 18 years ofage at time of acceptance.

iii. Addition of International/overseas applicants heading to include GTE, TPS and agentinformation.

URC24 5 November 2021 DECISION

026

iv. Removal of procedural based sections (to Admissions Procedure).

B. Admissions ProcedureThe key changes include

i. Additions that were translated from Admissions Policy.ii. Requirements for information to be included in offer of admissions (under ESOS and

HESF).iii. Aligned process of admission for under 18 domestic applicants with current practices.

C. International Student Fee Refund ProcedureMinor changes made to the procedure including terminology and inclusion of ‘non-resident’ in Glossary and addition of tables to improve readability.

3. Next steps/Implementation

No implementation required, as the documents do not introduce changes to processes, all updates reflect current practice.

COMPLIANCE

Legislative Compliance This decision contributes to compliance with:

1. Standard 1.1, Domain 2, Standard 5.4.2 and Standard 7.2.2. ofthe Higher Education Standards Framework 2021

2. National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Trainingto Overseas Students 2018

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with Enrolment Policy and Policy Framework Policy.

RISK ASSESSMENT Risk appetite according to the Risk Appetite Statement.

Legislative and Regulatory Compliance - Charles Sturt University has a Very Low Appetite for any intentional behaviours which result in non-compliances with any of its relevant legislative requirements, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures.

Consequence of decision in relation to risk appetite

Decision sits within the risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

A. Admissions PolicyB. Admissions ProcedureC. International Student Fee Refund ProcedureD. Policy Library Bulletin Board Feedback - Admissions

Prepared by: Kady Whiteley, Acting Manager, Portfolio Strategy and Planning Cleared by: Jason White, Director, Research Services and Dean of Graduate Studies

027

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2021L00488






https://policy.csu.edu.au/document/associated-information.php?id=175


This document may be varied, withdrawn or replaced at any time. Printed copies, or part thereof, are regarded as uncontrolled and should not be reliedupon as the current version. It is the responsibility of the individual reading this document to always refer to the CSU Policy Library for the latest version.

Page 1 of 12

Admissions Policy

Section 1 - Purpose(1) This policy is designed to ensure that admission of students at Charles Sturt University (the University) and itspartner providers is conducted in a manner that:

is fair, consistent, equitable, and transparent, anda.complies with all legislative standards and regulatory frameworks, including the Higher Education Support Actb.(HESA), Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF), the Education Services for Overseas Students Act(ESOS Act) and the National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students.

Scope

(2) This policy applies to the admission of all students to programs, courses, and non-award study offered bythe University and its partner institutions. Its requirements apply to all staff across the University as well as externalstaff who represent the University through partnerships and third party arrangements including educationalagents and partner education providers.

References

(3) Where supporting documents are named in this policy, they will be listed in the associated information tab.

Section 2 - Glossary(4) For the purposes of this policy the following terms have the definitions stated:

Admission – the process by which applicants are assessed against specified criteria to determine whether or nota.they meet the entry requirements set for a specific program, course, or subject at this University.ATAR (Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank) – this is a number up to 99.95 that is calculated by each Australianb.state or territory in which a student completes their final year of high school or eligible equivalent study. Thisnumber does not indicate the actual result achieved by each student, but how they compare to others in theirage group for that year. The ATAR is different to the admissions selection rank that is assessed by theUniversity, as the selection rank is made up of each student’s ATAR score plus any allocated adjustment factorsthat have been applied as part of the University’s admissions equity and access schemes.Coursework course – as defined in the policy library glossary.c.Cross-institutional study (incoming) - where a student of another tertiary institution enrols in subjects at thed.University under an agreement with the other institution, for credit towards the student’s course at their homeinstitution.Domestic student – a student who is an Australian citizen or permanent resident, New Zealand citizen, or holdse.an Australian permanent humanitarian visa.Higher degree by research (HDR) course - as defined in the policy library glossary.f.Inherent requirements – the academic and other requirements of a course that all students must meet tog.achieve the course learning outcomes, and the knowledge, abilities, skills and qualities students will need to

028

https://policy.csu.edu.au/directory-summary.php?legislation=76


https://policy.csu.edu.au/directory-summary.php?standard=16



https://policy.csu.edu.au/directory-summary.php?code=1


Page 2 of 12

have in order to achieve them. More information about inherent requirements is available online.International/overseas student – a student who is not a domestic student at the time of the relevant study, whoh.will be studying in Australia on a temporary student visa.Non-award study – a short course or single subject in which a student is enrolled without having been admittedi.to a course that leads to an award of the University.Non-resident – all applicants/students who are not classified as ‘Domestic’ or ‘International/overseas’ as definedj.in this policy in relation to their visa/citizenship and location status. Non-residents include: any student enrolledin a non-domestic course (including Australian domestic students studying overseas in a course delivered by anoffshore partner institution); non-domestic students studying on campus within Australia while on anytemporary visa other than the student visa; and non-domestic students who are studying in a domestic coursethat is delivered entirely online, where they do not need a student visa for their enrolment.Partner provider – an education institution with an agreement with Charles Sturt to deliver programs andk.courses in collaboration with, or on behalf of the University, where the University remains responsible forquality assurance monitoring to ensure a high standard of academic and student outcomes.Quota – a limit on the number of student places a course can offer in an admission intake.l.Regional Australia - areas that are classified by the Commonwealth Government as regional or rural.m.Research component – one or more subjects for a higher degree by research course, a master by courseworkn.and dissertation, or a bachelor (honours) course, in which students undertake a substantial piece of researchinvolving a thesis, dissertation, portfolio or project.Selection rank – each applicant’s ATAR or equivalent score plus any allocated adjustment factors that haveo.been applied by the University on the basis of location, subjects, or equity. Other factors may be considered forentry in some courses, such as relevant professional experience, prior qualifications, and performance in aselection interview, entrance exam, written submission, assessment task, or creative folio, which may beassessed alongside of each applicant’s allocated selection rank.Single subject - a credit-bearing subject in which students enrol without admission to a course leading to ap.qualification.Study Link subject - a non–credit-bearing subject to enable students to bridge gaps in knowledge needed forq.their studies, typically completed as a single subject alongside the student’s enrolment in their course.Teaching period – each formal period of study during which a subject is delivered to students who are enrolledr.with the University. There are several different types of teaching periods at this University, including: sessions,terms, micro-sessions, year-long periods, and ADPP periods.

Section 3 - PolicyAdmissions responsibilities

Authority to admit

(5) The authority to admit applicants to study at Charles Sturt University in accordance with approved entryrequirements is specified in Delegation Schedule E - Academic and Research, under the Delegations andAuthorisations Policy.

Conflicts of interest

(6) Staff involved in the administration and assessment of admissions applications must declare any potential conflictof interest by notifying their immediate supervisor and taking action in accordance with the Conflict of InterestProcedure.

(7) This includes situations where a staff member’s partner, family member or close friend is applying for admission to

029

https://study.csu.edu.au/courses/inherent-requirements

https://policy.csu.edu.au/download.php?id=834&version=3&associated






Page 3 of 12

the University whether directly, through a tertiary admissions centre, or through a partner organisation, and the staffmember may be involved in processing the admission or have access to the person’s application.

Admission restrictions for academic staff

(8) A member of the University’s academic staff will be declined admission to a course, or declined enrolment in asubject, where this is a conflict of interest.

(9) The Admissions Procedure lists situations where admission or enrolment of academic staff would be a conflict ofinterest and states the process to ensure these admissions/enrolments do not occur.

Admissions information for applicants

(10) The University will ensure that:

prospective students are informed of the minimum University academic and English proficiency entrya.requirements for admission, as well as any additional course-specific requirements that may apply for entry tocertain courses so they can understand their likelihood of being admitted,prospective students are informed of course inherent requirements, methods of assessment, and any work-b.based training a student is required to undertake as part of a course, including any compulsory residentialschools for online students,prospective students have access to the Credit Policy and procedures, and are informed of any available creditc.arrangements and potential eligibility for credit and recognition of prior learning that apply to their course;prospective students are informed of indicative tuition and non-tuition fees, including advice on the potential ford.changes to fees over the duration of their study, and have access to the online schedule of fees and chargesand the University’s cancellation and refund policies,domestic students applying for admission into a Commonwealth Supported Place (CSP) and/or deferral of theire.fees via a Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) loan (either HECS-HELP or FEE-HELP) are informed of therequirements for maintaining eligibility throughout their studies as required under the Higher Education SupportAct (HESA) and related legislation.international students applying for study in Australia on a student visa are informed of all matters they need tof.be aware of regarding meeting their course and enrolment requirements to fulfil their visa obligations, and thestudent support and success services available to help make a successful transition to study in Australia,all publicly available written and online materials provided by the University for overseas students includes theg.registered CRICOS institution name and registration number, andprospective students are informed of their rights and obligations in writing, including details about internal andh.external complaints and appeals processes, policies on changes to or withdrawal of offers, as well as allacceptance of admission requirements and conditions of enrolment.

(11) The requirements for course information are stated in the Course and Subject Policy and its relevant procedures.

Admissions entry requirements

(12) Admissions entry requirements are approved by the relevant authority as defined in Delegation Schedule E -Academic and Research under the Delegations and Authorisations Policy. These entry requirements are establishedand approved as part of the development, review, and accreditation process for each course and subject offered bythe University. This ongoing course design, review, and approval process is outlined in the Course and Subject Policyand procedures.

(13) These admissions entry requirements are designed to ensure that admitted students are academically suitableand have the necessary preparation, proficiency in English, and educational skills required to successfully participate

030

https://study.csu.edu.au/apply/process

https://study.csu.edu.au/apply/process











Page 4 of 12

in and progress through their intended studies at this University.

(14) To be eligible for admission to all programs, courses, and subjects offered by the University (either directly orthrough one of its delivery partner providers), all applicants must meet the following minimum University entryrequirements for each level of study:

minimum age requirements,a.minimum academic and/or professional experience requirements, andb.minimum English proficiency requirements, plusc.any additional professional or higher course-specific admission requirements that may apply to the relevantd.course, where these are published within the online course brochure for the relevant intake.

(15) Further admission requirements and eligibility criteria apply to international/overseas applicants for study withinAustralia on a student visa under the ESOS Act and the National Code of Practice for Providers of Education andTraining to Overseas Students.

Minimum age requirements

(16) International applicants intending to study in Australia on a student visa must be at least 18 years old at the timeof accepting their offer of admission.

(17) Any other applicants who will be under 18 years of age at the time of accepting their offer will be considered foradmission subject to meeting the conditions outlined in the Admissions Procedure.

(18) Faculties may specify a higher minimum age requirement for courses to meet a legislative requirement oftraining for or admission to a profession.

Minimum academic requirements for each level of study

(19) All applicants seeking admission to courses or subjects offered by the University must meet at least the followingminimum academic and/or professional experience requirements for the relevant level of study:

Level of study Minimum entry requirement

Charles Sturt Pathway [non-awardcourse] New South Wales Year 10 Record of School Achievement, or equivalent

Diploma New South Wales Year 10 Record of School Achievement, or equivalent

Bachelor degree and four-yearintegrated bachelor (honours)degree

New South Wales Higher School Certificate with an ATAR, or equivalent

One-year bachelor (honours)degree

A bachelor degree completed in the same discipline or a closely related discipline, orequivalent

Graduate certificate and graduatediploma

A bachelor degree, or a diploma and work experience relevant to the course to whichadmission is sought, or equivalent

Master by coursework A bachelor degree or equivalent

Master by research A bachelor degree of at least four years full-time duration, completed in the samediscipline or a closely related discipline, with at least class 2(1) honours; or equivalent

Doctor of philosophy orprofessional doctorate

A bachelor degree of at least four years full-time duration, completed in the samediscipline or a closely related discipline, with at least class 2(1) honours; or equivalent

Higher doctorateA bachelor degree and at least ten years continuous work in the relevant field sincegraduation, at a standard surpassing the standard required for a doctor of philosophyaward

031





Page 5 of 12

(20) Details about these academic and professional requirements, including qualifications and experience that may beassessed or considered as equivalent to the minimum entry requirements listed above, are published in the followingdocuments:

Admissions - Entry Requirements (Coursework) Procedurea.Admissions - Entry Requirements (Higher Degrees by Research) Procedureb.

Minimum English proficiency requirements

(21) Applicants must meet the following minimum English proficiency requirements for entry to each level of study.

Level of study Minimum entry requirement

Coursework courses (includingundergraduate and postgraduatestudy)

Applicants must have:1. been born in an English-speaking country, have completed at least onequalification in an English-speaking country, and English must have been thelanguage in which they undertook the qualification,2. completed the equivalent of the New South Wales Higher School Certificate or atertiary course of at least one year’s duration, in English, or3. gained a recent score of 6.0 in the International English Language Test System(IELTS) academic test, with no less than 5.5 in any band, or equivalent.

Higher degree by research coursesApplicants must have:1. completed their prerequisite academic qualification in English; or2. gained a recent score at least 6.5 in the IELTS academic test, with no less than6.0 in any band, or equivalent.

(22) The Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) approves the English proficiency equivalents, which arepublished in the Admissions - Entry Requirements (Coursework) Procedure.

(23) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) approves the English proficiency equivalents, which are published in theAdmissions - Entry Requirements (Higher Degrees by Research) Procedure.

Additional course-specific entry requirements

(24) Through course approval and accreditation processes outlined in the Course and Subject Policy and procedures,additional or higher entry requirements may be approved for admission to specific courses to:

ensure that admitted students are academically suitable and will have a reasonable prospect of success, anda.meet professional accreditation or professional registration requirements.b.

(25) To be eligible for admission to such courses, applicants must meet the specific entry requirements which arepublished for each course in the online course brochure in addition to the minimum University requirements listedabove. These may include:

citizenship/visa requirements,a.higher age, academic, professional, and/or English proficiency requirements,b.specific professional training and/or industry experience requirements,c.requirements for security, health, police, or working with children checks, and/ord.additional/supplementary information, which may be required in the form of selection interviews, references,e.creative portfolios, thesis proposals, essays, or other entry tasks or submissions.

(26) Some courses such as professional doctorates may state additional entry requirements of a specified period ofrelevant professional experience and/or current professional employment. This will be identified in the online coursebrochure for each relevant course.

032


Page 6 of 12

Intake quotas and course viability

(27) The University may:

set a quota for each course intake,a.decline to admit applicants where there are too few applications for a course to be viable, and/orb.cancel an intake to a course and any offers of admission made if too few applicants accept an offer of a place inc.the course for it to be viable.

(28) An Executive Dean may approve the suspension of a course from a particular intake under the Delegations andAuthorisations Policy, and must ensure that any withdrawal of offers that result from this suspension are managed inaccordance with the University’s obligations under ESOS Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework.

(29) Where a course has an intake quota and more applicants apply, offers will be made to eligible applicants whoseapplications the University received earliest. Once the quota has been filled, other eligible applicants may be declinedadmission. The University may, however, choose to pool and rank applications for an eventual decision.

International/overseas applicants

(30) International applicants for study within Australia on a student visa must meet the following additionalrequirements:

Genuine temporary entrant (GTE) requirements and satisfy the University that they have taken adequate stepsa.to prepare themselves for study in Australia. Further information about the GTE assessment process is stated inthe Admissions Procedure.Applicants who are already studying in Australia on a student visa with another education provider and who areb.in the first six months of study in their principal course will only be considered for admission if they provide theUniversity with a letter of release from the other provider.

Australian Government sanctions

(31) The University will consider Australian Government sanctions when assessing admission applications from citizensof sanctioned countries and will refer applications to the relevant delegated authority to decide whether to approvethat an offer be made to such applicants.

Single subjects

(32) An applicant may be eligible to apply for admission to a single subject where they meet:

the minimum age requirements,a.the minimum academic, professional, and English language proficiency requirements for the relevant level ofb.study, as stated above,any specific prerequisites of the subject(s), andc.there are no indications they are unlikely to succeed, such as failures in similar recent study, or insufficientd.evidence of relevant knowledge and skills.

(33) Applicants cannot defer offers for single subject study, they must submit a new application instead.

(34) The Admissions Procedure states the application and decision process for single subject enrolments.

Cross-institutional study

(35) A student of another tertiary institution can apply to enrol in subjects at Charles Sturt University and may be able

033






Page 7 of 12

to have the subjects recognised as part of their course at that institution. Further information and instructions arepublished on the cross-institutional learning website.

(36) Students who are currently enrolled at another institution may apply for cross-institutional study in one or moresubjects at this University, where:

a place is available in the subject(s),a.the student’s home institution confirms that the subject(s) can be credited towards the student’s course at theb.home institution, andthe student meets the relevant subject prerequisites and minimum entry requirements.c.

(37) The relevant Admissions Office is responsible for managing incoming cross-institutional enrolment, and theprocess and conditions for incoming cross-institutional study are outlined in the Admissions Procedure.

Study Link subjects

(38) Study Link subjects are available to all current and prospective students and can be studied concurrently with anyenrolment without seeking concurrent study approval as these are preparatory subjects that cannot be used as credittowards the completion of an award course.

Admission to concurrent study

(39) If a current student wishes to study concurrently (at the same time) in a second course or single subject whilstcontinuing study in their current course, they may submit an application for admission which will be assessed by therelevant faculty for concurrent study approval before any offer will be made.

(40) The Admissions Procedure states the eligibility requirements and the application and assessment process forconcurrent enrolments.

Applications for admission

(41) Applicants apply for admission through one of the methods below, as specified in the online course brochureapplication instructions for their particular course:

the University Admission Centre (UAC),a.the Victorian Tertiary Admissions Centre (VTAC), orb.directly to the relevant University Admissions Office, as described in the Admissions Procedure.c.

Privacy and use of information

(42) Admission applications and the personal information they contain will be handled in accordance with theUniversity’s Privacy Management Plan.

(43) In submitting their application, applicants must consent to the following uses of their personal informationprovided in their application:

to assess their eligibility for admission to the University,a.if they are admitted, to create their student record in university systems that will support their enrolment andb.study, andin the University’s reporting to government departments in order to meet legislative requirements.c.

034




Page 8 of 12

Assessment of applications

(44) The relevant University admissions office assesses all admission applications, under the delegated authority asspecified in Delegation Schedule E - Academic and Research under the Delegations and Authorisations Policy, except:

applications submitted to authorised partner institutions which are assessed by the relevant partner’sa.admissions team, andapplications submitted to the University Admissions Centre (UAC), which UAC assesses on behalf of theb.University.

(45) To ensure the quality of admissions assessment by authorised partners, the Office of Global Engagement willensure that:

authorised partner providers are provided with detailed assessment instructions to ensure consistency, anda.regular audits are undertaken of partner assessment of samples of applications, to check that these areb.compliant with the University’s instructions, standards, and requirements.

Application outcomes

(46) Applicants will be notified of their application outcome in writing, and where they have been declined admissionthey will be:

informed of the reason(s), anda.where eligible, provided with the opportunity to receive an alternative offer to a related course for which theyb.meet entry requirements.

(47) Where successful, all applicants will receive written offers of admission that serve as the written agreementbetween the student and the University and will include all information that:

the applicant needs to understand the offer, any conditions they must meet, course requirements, and thea.costs of study, andis required by the relevant legislation, including the Higher Education Standards Framework, the ESOS Act, theb.National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students, and the HigherEducation Support Act.

Conditional offers

(48) An offer of admission may be made with a condition that the applicant must meet one or more entry requirement(for example where the applicant is currently undertaking a pathway course), and may be withdrawn if the applicantdoes not meet the condition(s) by the deadline stated in the offer.

Withdrawing offers

(49) The University may withdraw an offer of admission at any time if the applicant fails to:

meet any conditions of the offer before census date,a.accept the offer in the manner specified in the offer letter,b.pay their fees for the first teaching period by the date specified in the offer letter or fees invoice/statement, orc.where the course quota was filled before the offer was accepted.d.

035









Page 9 of 12

Applications with false, misleading, or withheld information

(50) Allegations of misconduct involving information provided by students in their admissions applications will beinvestigated in line with the Student Misconduct Rule.

(51) The Executive Director, Students may cancel an application for admission, or withdraw an offer of admission,where the applicant is found to have:

provided false or misleading information in their application, ora.withheld information relevant to their application.b.

(52) Where an applicant to study in Australia on a student visa is found to have provided false or misleadinginformation in their application, the University may report this to the Commonwealth Department of Home Affairs.

(53) Where misconduct is found to have occurred in these cases, the recommended penalty is exclusion from theUniversity.

Deferred admission

(54) International applicants to study in Australia on a student visa cannot defer their offer, but may reapply for a newoffer of admission with a later date.

(55) The Admissions Procedure states the process for applications for deferment and their approval.

Payment of fees

(56) All students must pay or arrange deferment of their tuition fees by the deadline provided on their offer letter orinvoice/fee statement for their first teaching period.

(57) All students, including international applicants for study in Australia on a student visa, must not pay their tuitionfees before they accept their offer, but must pay their fees by the specified due date stated on the offer letter as acondition of accepting their offer.

(58) See the Enrolment Policy and Enrolment Procedure for details about payment (or deferment via a HELP loan,including HECS-HELP or FEE-HELP) of the tuition fees required for enrolment in each teaching period, and thepenalties/ramifications of non-payment of these fees by the specified due date for each teaching period.

(59) The Enrolment Policy and Procedure also provide detailed information for domestic students aboutCommonwealth support and HELP loans in relation to fees, including definitions of CSP, HELP, HECS-HELP, FEE-HELP,CAF, and SA-HELP.

Refund of fees

(60) Prospective applicants, commencing students, and continuing students can find detailed information aboutrefunds, including application processes, conditions, and requirements in the Enrolment Policy and EnrolmentProcedure, as well as in the International Student Fee Refund Procedure.

Tuition Protection Service

(61) The Tuition Protection Service provides assistance to students who have paid their tuition fees upfront or via aHELP loan where the University is unable to fully deliver their course of study. This ensures that students are able toeither:

complete their studies in another course or with another education provider ora.

036













Page 10 of 12

receive a refund of their unused tuition fees and/or a re-credit of the unused remainder of their HELP loanb.(including HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP).

Course transfers

(62) Current students who wish to apply for transfer into another course must meet the same admissions entryrequirements for that course as any other applicant, and will only be admitted where a place is available.

(63) The Admissions Procedure states the process, eligibility requirements, and conditions under which a currentlyenrolled student may apply for admission into a new course via course transfer.

(64) Where a course does not permit admission via transfer, or where the specific eligibility requirements for a coursetransfer are not met, current students may apply for admission into a course by submitting a standard new applicationfor admission, which will be assessed against the same entry requirements as a course transfer.

Admissions equity and access schemes

(65) The University has a number of admission pathways, entry programs, and access schemes available for domesticundergraduate applicants from under-represented groups and individuals who have experienced disadvantage in theirpreparation for university study. These include:

selection rank adjustments on the basis of location, subjects, and equity to offset factors that have impacteda.high school education for those applying on the basis of ATAR; andalternative pathways to study that can result in guaranteed entry to a range of undergraduate courses for thoseb.who may not yet meet the minimum entry requirements based on their current ATAR or equivalent score oradjusted selection rank.

(66) These programs are designed to accommodate student diversity and provide opportunities for equal access toparticipate and succeed in University study regardless of disadvantage or background.

(67) Specific consideration is given to the recruitment, admission, participation, and successful completion ofAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, as well as for applicants of non-English speaking background, applicantswith disabilities, and applicants from geographically isolated areas or economically or socially disadvantagedbackgrounds.

(68) Specific provisions also exist for current and former defence force personnel and elite athletes and performerswho have been disadvantaged in their educational preparation through their commitments.

(69) The Admissions Procedure outlines the eligibility requirements and application process for the various accessschemes and entry programs offered by the University.

(70) Where a prospective student applies for admission via one of these equity entry programs and access schemes,the University will ensure that each applicant is academically suitable for their chosen study.

(71) The University also provides a number of guaranteed offer schemes that enable domestic applicants to receive anearly offer of admission into undergraduate study before their final ATAR result is known. These offers are conditionalon meeting the minimum entry requirements for their course through the successful completion of year 12 study, orequivalent, and are outlined in the Admissions Procedure.

Appeals and Complaints

(72) Where a student wishes to appeal an original decision made under this procedure, or has a complaint about theirtreatment, quality of service or the conduct of staff, the following policies apply:

037


Page 11 of 12

University Student Appeals Policy and University Student Appeals Procedurea.Complaints Management Policy and Complaints Management Procedureb.

Section 4 - Procedure(73) The following procedures support this policy and should be read alongside it:

Admissions Procedurea.Admissions - Entry Requirements (Coursework) Procedureb.Admissions - Entry Requirements (Higher Degrees by Research) Procedurec.International Student Fee Refund Procedure.d.

Section 5 - Guidelines(74) Nil.

038






Page 12 of 12

Status and Details

Status Current

Effective Date To Be Advised

Review Date To Be Advised

Approval Authority

Approval Date To Be Advised

Expiry Date Not Applicable

Unit Head Lorraine RyanExecutive Director, Students

AuthorDiana BaylyCompliance and Policy Officer+61 2 6933 4053

Enquiries Contact Admissions Office+61 2 69334334

Glossary Terms and Definitions

"Coursework course" - a course leading to an award/qualification recognized by the Australian QualificationsFramework that is not classified as a higher degree by research.

"Higher degree by research (HDR) course" - means a course leading to a qualification at Australian QualificationsFramework level 9 or level 10 in which a research component makes up 66% or more of the course volume oflearning. Higher degree by research courses lead to the award of a master by research, professional doctorate ordoctor of philosophy.

039


Page 1 of 19

Admissions Procedure

Section 1 - Purpose(1) This procedure supports the Admissions Policy by stating detailed requirements for admission processes.

Scope

(2) This procedure applies to the admission of all students to programs, courses, and non-award study offered byCharles Sturt University (the University) and its partner institutions. Its requirements apply to all staff acrossthe University, as well as external staff who represent the University through partnerships and third partyarrangements including educational agents, and partner education providers.

References

(3) Where supporting documents are referred to in this procedure, they will be listed in the associated information tab.

Section 2 - Glossary(4) Most terms used in this procedure are defined in the glossary section of the Admissions Policy. For the purposes ofthis procedure, the following additional terms have the definitions stated:

Articulated course - one course in an articulated set of courses.a.Articulated set of courses - a sequence of courses in which the subjects required for the earlier course(s) in theb.sequence are a subset of the subjects required for the later course(s). There are two types of articulated sets ofcourses:

Articulated sets with a single entry point - an articulated set of courses in which students are normallyi.admitted to the highest course in the sequence but may exit part-way though with a lower award in thesequence.Articulated sets with multiple entry points - an articulated set of courses where students are permitted toii.apply for admission into more than one course in the set if they meet the admission requirements of thatcourse.

Census date – for each subject, the date by which students must pay their fees or complete the process to deferc.their fees to a HELP loan, to remain enrolled in the subject.Genuine Temporary Entrant (GTE) – GTE processes are required to be considered as part of Simplified Studentd.Visa Framework (SSVF). Under SSVF, universities are held accountable by the Department of Home Affairs tominimise the immigration risk of their potential international students. As such, the University has developedSSVF Guidelines in accordance with Ministerial Direction 69 to manage and minimise SSVF risk.Course Director – includes both the title ‘Course Director’ and the title ‘Course Coordinator’ where this is stille.used.Elite athlete or performer – includes anyone who has been registered by the University as an elite athlete, pre-f.elite athlete, elite sports support person or elite performer, which are defined as follows:

Elite athlete – a person competing at the highest level of their sport, either as a national representativei.or as a professional sportsperson. To be considered an elite athlete, a person will normally have been

040


Page 2 of 19

recognised as such by a national sporting body or professional sports organisation.Pre-elite athlete – a person who has been recognised by a regional academy or state or national sportingii.organisation for their potential to attain high honours in their sport, and has been placed in theacademy’s or organisation’s program to develop this potential.Elite sports support person – a referee, coach, official or someone in another support role, working at theiii.national representative level of a sport or in a professional sports organisation, with travel and trainingcommitments similar to those of an elite athlete.Elite performer – someone who has performed in extensive or significant productions or performances ativ.a state, national or international level.

National sporting organisation – an organisation recognised by government and most participants in a sport asg.the national body to represent the sport.Student number – The Charles Sturt student number is an 8 digit number that is issued to each student by theh.University, and must be quoted by the student in all correspondence with the University from thecommencement of their enrolment onwards. This student number is different to the unique student identifier(USI).Turn-around times - times between receipt of an application or request for information or decision and thei.response, this includes applications/requests from applicants and requests for information between staff toenable a decision.Unique student identifier (USI) - The USI is a reference number made up of ten numbers and letters that isj.issued by the Australian Government and acts as a single unique identifier for all students studying withinAustralia. Each student must obtain a USI and provide this number to the University. The USI is different to theCharles Sturt student number.

Section 3 - Policy(5) This procedure supports the Admissions Policy and should be read alongside that policy.

Section 4 - ProcedureAdmissions entry requirements

(6) To be eligible for admission, applicants must meet all the following entry requirements:

the minimum age requirements stated in the Admissions Policy and outlined below,a.the academic and/or professional entry requirements stated for the type of course in the Admissions - Entryb.Requirements (Coursework) Procedure or Admissions - Entry Requirements (Higher Degrees by Research)Procedure as relevant, the English proficiency requirements for the type of course in the Admissions - Entry Requirementsc.(Coursework) Procedure or Admissions - Entry Requirements (Higher Degrees by Research) Procedure asrelevant, andany higher and/or additional entry requirements for the specific course, as published within the online coursed.brochure.

Applicants aged under 18 years

(7) International applicants intending to study in Australia on a student visa must be at least 18 years old at the timeof accepting their offer of admission.

041


Page 3 of 19

(8) Any other applicants who will be aged under 18 at their intended study start-date must declare that they have theconsent of their parent or guardian when accepting their offer of admission. Those aged under 17 years will berequired to provide written consent from their parent or guardian as a condition of their enrolment, using the formthat will be provided to them by the relevant Admissions Office. If this form is not completed and returned to theUniversity by the specified deadline, their enrolment will be cancelled.

(9) Applicants aged under 17 years must have their chosen study approved by the relevant Head of School before anoffer can be made by the relevant admissions office, and will only be considered for admission in the followingcircumstances:

they are not an international applicant intending to study in Australia on a student visa,a.the relevant Head of School is satisfied that the applicant’s welfare and safety will be ensured, b.the relevant course is to be delivered online or the student is enrolling in approved single subject study, c.the faculty permits the enrolment of under-aged students in the relevant course and/or subjects, andd.the applicant will provide written consent from their parent or guardian as a condition of their enrolment withe.the University.

(10) Where an under-aged applicant accepts an offer of admission, the Admissions Office will inform the Division ofStudent Success (DSS) and the Division of Security, Safety and Wellbeing (DSSW), who will coordinate arrangementsfor the student’s welfare and safety in consultation with the relevant Course Director.

Acceptable English language proficiency tests and providers

(11) Applicants can find specific information about meeting the University’s English language proficiency requirementsusing the online list of accepted evidence approved for publication by the International and Partnerships Committee(IPC), including:

the list of countries considered English speaking for assessment of applicants’ English proficiency, anda.the list of English language proficiency tests and providers that are acceptable for meeting English languageb.proficiency requirements for admission.

(12) Applicants who do not meet these published requirements may submit a written request for a waiver withevidence explaining how they have achieved the equivalence of these English language proficiency requirements foradmission. These requests will be reviewed and decided by the relevant authority below:

the Executive Dean of the teaching faculty for coursework applicants, ora.the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Innovation) for HDR applicants.b.

(13) Proposals to update the online list of acceptable English language proficiency tests or providers must be reviewedand approved by the IPC.

(14) The relevant admissions office will assess these proposals and recommend a decision to the IPC.

International/overseas applicants

(15) Applicants for study on an Australian student visa may apply via an international education agent contracted withthe University, who may submit a direct admission application on the applicant’s behalf. In these cases, theapplication must include evidence that the applicant has authorised the agent to act on their behalf. The InternationalEducation Agent Policy states the University’s requirements for international education agents.

042






Page 4 of 19

Genuine Temporary Entrant (GTE) process

(16) The genuine temporary entrant (GTE) process applies to all student visa applicants and is required by theAustralian Government to ensure the student visa program is used as intended and not as a way to maintain ongoingresidency in Australia.

(17) The GTE assessment process requires all international students applying for study within Australia on a studentvisa to demonstrate that they are coming to Australia temporarily to gain education and will return overseas oncecomplete.

(18) Students will be sent a GTE Information Form to complete as part of their admissions process after they havesubmitted their application for admission.

International students who are transferring from another provider

(19) Where an international applicant for study in Australia on a student visa is currently within the first six months ofenrolment in their principal course with another education provider, they must provide a letter of release from theother provider before Charles Sturt University can issue them with a confirmation of enrolment (COE) to transfer tothis University.

Refund of international applicants’ fees

(20) The International Student Fee Refund Procedure states the circumstances under which the University will providea full or partial refund of tuition fees to international applicants who are unable to commence or continue their course.

(21) The Tuition Protection Service also provides assistance to international students where the University is unable tofully deliver their course of study.

(22) The Enrolment Policy provides information on refunds of tuition fees for other types of applicants and forinternational students in exceptional circumstances.

Applications for admission

(23) Applicants can apply for admission to the University by one of the following methods, as instructed for theirspecific course on the online course brochure:

through the University Admission Centre (UAC),a.through the Victorian Tertiary Admissions Centre (VTAC), orb.directly, as described below.c.

Direct admission

(24) To have their application considered, prospective students applying for admission directly to the University orwith one of its partner institutions must:

complete the relevant admission application form, following all instructions on the form,a.attach any supporting documents that are required,b.confirm they have read and agree to the terms and conditions, as specified by Charles Sturt University, c.declare that their application is, to their knowledge, correct and complete, and that they meet the conditions ofd.study, andsubmit their application by the relevant application deadline published on the study web page.e.

(25) The relevant admissions office maintains the publication of these online forms, application closing dates, and

043




Page 5 of 19

submission instructions and details on the study web page.

(26) Applications for higher degree by research courses can be made at any time: there are no specific deadlines forthese.

Offers of admission

(27) The Executive Director, Students will ensure that all offers of admission for domestic applicants are made inwriting and include all information that:

the applicant needs to understand the offer, course details, credit arrangements, enrolment requirements,a.conditions that must be met, and tuition fees and other costs of study, andis required under the Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF), the Higher Education Support Act (HESA)b.and other relevant legislation.

(28) Under the delegation of the Chief Development Officer, Global, the Office of Global Engagement will ensure thatall offers of admission to international/overseas applicants for study in Australia on a student visa are made in writingand contain the required information for such written agreements under the Education Services for Overseas StudentsAct (ESOS Act), the HESA, and the National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to OverseasStudents, including:

an outline of the course or courses in which the student is to be enrolled, the expected course start date, anda.access to course details including the location(s) at which the course will be delivered, the offered modes ofstudy for the course, assessment arrangements, and any compulsory work-based training placements,details about any credit that has been applied,b.any conditions imposed on the student’s enrolment and any necessary prerequisite requirements that must bec.met to enter the course, including English language requirements,the tuition fees payable by the student for the course and information about any non-tuition fees the studentd.may incur, and the circumstances in which additional fees may apply,the circumstances in which personal information about the student may be disclosed by the registered provider,e.the Commonwealth including the TPS, or state or territory agencies, in accordance with the Privacy Act 1988,an outline of internal and external complaints and appeals processes, andf.a statement that the student is responsible for keeping a copy of the written agreement as supplied by theg.registered provider, and receipts of any payments of tuition fees or non-tuition fees.

Deferred admission

(29) Domestic applicants who are made an offer of admission may be eligible to apply for deferment, in courses wherethis is available, if they do so before the first census date in their course. The following exceptions apply:

the relevant Executive Dean or delegate has decided the course will not allow deferment,a.the course will not be available in the later intake, orb.the course admission requirements will have changed by the later intake, so that the applicant will no longer bec.eligible.

(30) Applicants can defer an offer of a place in one course for up to 12 months. If an applicant’s request to defer anoffer to a later teaching period is approved, they cannot apply to defer the offer for a second time.

(31) The Executive Director, Students or delegate approves all domestic applications for deferment, except those forhigher degree by research programs, which are approved by the Executive Dean on the advice of the principalsupervisor and Sub Dean (Graduate Studies).

044










Page 6 of 19

(32) Where the course does not permit deferment, commencing students who want to start the course later mustreapply for admission in that intake.

(33) International applicants who wish to study in Australia on a student visa cannot defer their offer, but may requestthat the University cancel their original offer and apply for a new offer of admission to be made in its place with a newstart date, subject to faculty requirements and the eligibility of a place in their chosen course being available as partof a later intake.

Accepting offers of admission

(34) To complete acceptance of an offer, the applicant must:

accept the offer and its terms online or sign and return the offer,a.agree to meet any conditions of the offer before the first subject census date of their enrolment,b.provide the University with their unique student identifier (USI) before their first census date (if they are ac.domestic student or an overseas/international student who will be studying within Australia), andpay or arrange deferment of their fees by the deadline provided on their offer letter or invoice/fee statement ford.their first teaching period.

(35) Students should refer to the Enrolment Policy and Enrolment Procedure for details about paying and/or deferringtuition fees to a HELP loan, and for information about providing their USI to the University.

(36) Offers of places in coursework courses will be issued with a default acceptance deadline of:

14 calendar days from the date the offer is issued, a.by the first day of the relevant teaching period (if less than 14 calendar days after the offer was issued), orb.two calendar days from the date the offer is issued (in exceptional circumstances where the offer was issuedc.during the first week of the teaching period in which the study will begin).

(37) Where, however, courses have enrolment limits or competitive entry requirements, the deadline may be:

seven calendar days, or a.the first day of the relevant teaching period if less than seven calendar days remain.b.

(38) Offers of places in higher degree by research courses will have a default acceptance deadline of the census dateof the relevant teaching period.

(39) Applicants must accept their offer of admission (and promptly follow its instructions) by the relevant deadline,otherwise, the University may lapse (cancel) the offer.

(40) The Executive Director, Students and Chief Development Officer, Global as relevant will ensure that the offeracceptance process:

requires applicants to accept all conditions of study at the University, anda.satisfies all relevant legislative requirements.b.

Internet access requirements

(41) To be eligible for admission, applicants must have access to an internet-connected computer capable ofcommunicating with the University’s online systems.

(42) Courses or subjects required for a course may require a higher minimum level of computer access: the relevant

045




Page 7 of 19

online course brochure on the University’s website will state such requirements.

Applicants who live outside Australia

(43) Applicants for admission who intend to complete all or part of a course while living outside Australia must declarethat they can meet all the course requirements including, where relevant, attending residential schools and practicalwork placements.

(44) The University may decline to admit such applicants (regardless of any declaration) if it believes it cannotadequately teach or assess the applicant at their intended overseas location.

(45) Applicants are not required to make a declaration if they are admitted to courses delivered by the University:

at an overseas location, or a.by online learning through an affiliated overseas institution.b.

(46) The University may require applicants for a fee-paying course to meet any extra costs caused by their livingoutside Australia.

Articulated sets of courses

(47) An articulated set of courses is a sequence of courses which are nested, meaning that all subjects (core orelective) comprising earlier courses in the articulated set are included in each successive course, which means thatearlier courses within the set comprise the first component of the next course in the set.

(48) Where an articulated set of courses has a single entry point, applicants may only be admitted to the last orhighest course in the sequence, and must therefore meet the entry requirements for that course’s level of study.Students may, however, apply to exit with a lower award in the sequence if they complete enough subjects to meetthe requirements to graduate with a lower award. See the Graduation Policy for more information.

Admission to articulated sets with multiple entry points

(49) Where an articulated set of courses has multiple entry points (that is where admission is available for lowercourses within the set as well as higher courses):

applicants may apply for admission to any course in the set for which they meet the entry requirements, anda.as they complete each course in the sequence, they must apply for admission to each next course of theb.articulated set by the same process as other applicants, unless they were made a nested set of offers whichincludes an offer of admission to the next course(s) within the articulated set (see below).

(50) Alternatively, applicants may be made a package of nested offers of admission to two or more courses in anarticulated set with multiple entry points. The offer(s) of admission to the higher course(s) in the set will be conditionalon the student completing the requirements of the lower award(s) in the set.

(51) Successful applicants will be issued with an offer letter in writing which will specify whether they have been madea single offer of admission to one course, or a nested set of conditional offers to one or more courses within anarticulated set.

Current students applying for honours strand

(52) Current students seeking admission to the honours strand of a four-year integrated bachelor (honours) coursemay be required to do so by applying for course transfer, as advised by their faculty.

(53) Eligibility is based on academic performance, and the relevant faculty decides whether students apply for

046


Page 8 of 19

honours in the second or third year of the bachelor course (based on full-time study, or the part-time equivalent).


(54) Current students may apply for concurrent study by submitting a direct application for admission into a secondcourse or single subject, and indicating that they want to continue their current enrolment in the relevant section ofthe application form. However, concurrent study approval cannot be granted for enrolment in more than twocourses (or one course and one set of single subjects) at the same time.

(55) When applying for concurrent study, students must meet the same entry requirements for their second course orsingle subjects as any other applicant applying for admission.

(56) Where applying for concurrent study in a second course, the two courses must be considered compatible by therelevant faculties to ensure they do not substantially overlap in structure and content, and that they do not alreadyexist as a combined course. Where the two courses have majors or specialisations in common, students may bepermitted to enrol in the courses concurrently but must complete a different major or specialisation in each course.

(57) Applications for concurrent study by first-year students are unlikely to be approved, as applicants must havedemonstrated they are capable of the additional demands of such study.

(58) International students studying on an Australian student visa will only be considered for concurrent enrolment ifthey can complete their studies within the same duration as stated on the confirmation of enrolment (COE) for theirprincipal course.

(59) Where a student is successful in their application for admission to concurrent study, they are still subject to theenrolment requirements and study load restrictions that apply to all students, as defined in the Enrolment Policy andProcedure.

(60) The Credit Policy states the requirements and limitations for credit between courses which apply for all students,including those with concurrent enrolments.

Applicants with failed results

(61) Applicants must wait 12 months from the end-date of the most recent failed subject before their application willbe considered if they have:

failed more than half of the subjects (measured by the credit points weighting of the subjects) that they havea.taken at another tertiary institution, orbeen excluded from another tertiary institution for unsatisfactory academic progress.b.

(62) To be eligible for admission, they must demonstrate they have addressed the reasons they failed subjectspreviously and now have a better prospect of success in their studies.

Applicants subject to exclusion for unsatisfactory progress or misconduct

(63) An applicant who has been excluded from a course at this University on the grounds of unsatisfactory academicprogress or misconduct will not be considered for admission into that course before the period of exclusion hasexpired. For further information about procedures relating to misconduct and academic progress, students shouldrefer to the Student Misconduct Rule and the Assessment - Academic Progress Procedure.

(64) Applicants who wish to return to study following a period of exclusion for academic progress or misconduct mustsubmit a new application for admission in the same way as any other applicant, however, they must also provideevidence that the circumstances that impaired their academic progress no longer apply and/or they have taken action

047







Page 9 of 19

during their exclusion to improve their performance.

(65) These applications will be referred to the relevant faculty for assessment before being processed by the relevantAdmissions Office. The delegated faculty decision-maker, such as the Course Director, may:

approve a guaranteed offer of a place in the course in the next intake,a.arrange for the application to be considered in competition with other applicants, by the normal process, b.deny the applicant admission if not satisfied by their evidence that they will perform better, orc.apply an intervention strategy to assist the student on their return to studies.d.

(66) A student excluded from a course in which they are undertaking a specialisation cannot apply to transfer toanother specialisation in the same course until the period of exclusion finishes.

(67) Domestic and non-resident students excluded from a course, but who have not been excluded entirely from studyat the University, may choose to submit an application for admission to another course in a discipline which they havenot been excluded from. These applicants must provide evidence that the circumstances that impaired their academicprogress will not affect their performance in the new course.

(68) Where the Department of Home Affairs cancels an international student’s Australian student visa forunsatisfactory academic progress or breach of course duration conditions, the student cannot be admitted to any oncampus study in a course within Australia for at least two years after the end of the last teaching period in which thestudent was enrolled.

(69) A student who is admitted back into a course after being excluded from it, who wishes to complete anyassessment task in a subject in which they were granted a grade pending (GP) before their exclusion, must enrol inthe subject again and pay any fees for this enrolment.

Readmission by reinstatement of enrolment

(70) A student may only apply for readmission to have their recent enrolment reinstated where withdrew from theircourse less than a maximum of 12 months before the start date of the teaching period in which they wish to resumestudy.

(71) Students may apply for readmission by reinstatement of their course enrolment by using the online readmissionform for such requests, which are processed by Student Administration in consultation with the Course Director afteran initial assessment by the relevant Admissions Office.

(72) For a course to be eligible for readmission by reinstatement of enrolment for students who have recentlywithdrawn from it within the past 12 months, it must not:

have any changes to its entry requirements since the withdrawal,a.have suspended or discontinued intakes,b.be full, orc.require competitive assessment of admission applications.d.

(73) Where the course entry requirements have changed, or the student was not making satisfactory academicprogress, the relevant Course Director will assess the application for readmission and decide whether or not toapprove the reinstatement of enrolment in the course.

Course transfers

(74) When transferring between courses, students must provide their unique student identifier (USI) to the University

048





Page 10 of 19

before the first census date of their new course enrolment.

(75) Some courses do not permit admission via course transfer, but students may still apply for entry into thesecourses by submitting a standard new application for admission. A list of courses that are not eligible for transfer isavailable for current students online.

(76) Students who apply for a course transfer are confirming that they do not wish to graduate from their currentcourse enrolment, if their transfer application is successful and they are approved for admission into the new course.

(77) International students studying in Australia on a student visa are not eligible to change their course via a coursetransfer. However, they may submit a standard new application for admission if they want to change to adifferent course, which will be assessed against the same admissions entry criteria as a course transfer. The onlyexception to this rule is where a current international student is applying for the honours stream of an integratedhonours course.

Transfer between coursework courses

(78) Where eligible, currently enrolled students may apply for a transfer:

between two undergraduate courses, ora.between two postgraduate courses.b.

(79) Course transfer applications (and any related credit transfer applications) are processed by StudentAdministration after being assessed by the Course Director, Associate Dean (Academic) or Executive Dean, inaccordance with the delegations and criteria approved under the authority of Academic Senate.

(80) To be eligible to apply for a course transfer, each student must:

be a domestic student or be a non-resident student (not studying in Australia on a student visa),a.have an active course enrolment status,b.not be in their first teaching period of study in the course,c.not be eligible to graduate from their current course,d.not be requesting a transfer between an undergraduate course and a postgraduate course (or vice versa), ande.not be seeking to transfer from a full fee place (FFP) to a Commonwealth-supported place (CSP). See thef.Enrolment Policy and Procedure for more information about FFP and CSP fee places.

(81) Currently enrolled students who wish to apply for a course transfer must submit their application the start ofthe first teaching period they want to transfer into. Applications for course transfer received after this date will beprocessed for the next available intake teaching period for that course. However, if the application is not approvedbefore the census date of the requested starting teaching period, the transfer will not commence until the followingteaching period, or when an intake is next available for that course.

(82) Where a student’s transfer is approved for a course in which they are seeking a Commonwealth supported place(CSP) and/or HECS-HELP/FEE-HELP assistance for their fees, they must complete and submit a new CommonwealthAssistance Form (CAF) before the first census date of enrolment in their new course. This CAF must include theirunique student identifier (USI) and tax file number (TFN). See the Enrolment Policy and Enrolment Procedure for moreinformation about the CAF, CSPs, HECS-HELP, and FEE-HELP.

(83) If a course transfer is conditionally approved by the faculty and the student needs to meet specificrequirements before they will be eligible for the new course, the transfer will not be processed until evidence isprovided that the student meets the required conditions. These conditions may include (but are not limited to) thefollowing:

049

https://www.csu.edu.au/current-students/your-course/get-organised/defer-withdraw-transfer-courses/course-changes-and-transfers






Page 11 of 19

successfully completing their enrolment in the current teaching period,a.successfully completing a specific subject,b.achieving a specific GPA (grade point average), orc.achieving a specific grade in a specific subject.d.

(84) Once the University has evidence that the required conditions have been met, the course transfer willbe approved and processed for the next available intake teaching period.

Transfer between higher degree by research (HDR) courses

(85) Candidates enrolled in a higher degree by research course may apply in writing to the Office of Research Servicesand Graduate Studies if they wish to transfer to another higher degree by research course.

(86) Candidates enrolled in a Doctor of Philosophy are not eligible for a course transfer if their candidature is by priorpublication.

(87) The Dean, Graduate Studies decides these applications on the recommendation of the relevant Sub Dean(Graduate Studies) . Transfer may be approved with or without remission of time.

(88) Applications for transfer from a Master by Research course to a Doctor of Philosophy course must be submittedand approved at least six months before the deadline for thesis submission.

(89) Other applications for transfer between HDR courses may be submitted at any time for assessment in accordancewith the Higher Degree by Research Policy.

HDR students transferring between full-time and part-time study

(90) The Higher Degree by Research Procedure states requirements for HDR students in relation to:

full-time and part-time candidature, and a.the process for transferring between these modes of candidature.b.

Equity and access schemes

(91) The Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) determines which courses are available for admission eachyear though the University’s entry programs, access schemes, and admission pathways, in consultation with theExecutive Deans.

(92) A list of eligible courses for each entry program and access scheme is provided online for prospective students,on the study web page.

(93) The University may place a cap or withdraw courses from admission through these access schemes for aparticular intake depending on current student numbers and the availability of places each year.

Guaranteed entry programs

Connections – First Nations Entry Program

(94) Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander applicants who may not yet met the necessary entry requirements foradmission to undergraduate study may apply for entry into the Connecctions – First Nations Entry Program throughthe online application process.

(95) Applicants must either be a mature age student, have completed high school, or be in their final year of highschool to be eligible apply for this program. Any offers made to high school students under this program will be

050






Page 12 of 19

conditional on completing Year 12 before commencing University study.

(96) Successful completion of this five-day entry program results in guaranteed entry to a broad range of eligibleundergraduate courses listed online, although some may require additional course-specific tasks and entryrequirements, such as an interview or portfolio submission.

Experience Matters Entry Program (Defence force personnel)

(97) This program is for applicants with Australian Defence Force (including Reserves) experience without an ATAR touse as the basis of admission to undergraduate study. The University recognises the military ranking, training,experience, and qualifications of current and former Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel and uses this tocalculate an equivalent ATAR selection rank.

(98) Applicants may apply for undergraduate study directly to the University under this program by using the standardonline application form where they:

are current or former members of the ADF, anda.are applying on the basis of extensive defence service experience and any training for their transition tob.employment provided by their defence force.

Early offer schemes

UAC School Recommendation Scheme (SRS)

(99) Domestic applicants who are high school students may be made an early offer of a place before their final HigherSchool Certificate (HSC) or equivalent results are known, on the basis of:

their senior high school academic record, anda.a satisfactory recommendation from their school.b.

(100) Applicants must apply for this scheme and for their intended course through the University Admission Centre(UAC) Schools Recommendation Scheme program.

(101) Many early offers under this scheme are conditional on applicants meeting:

the relevant entry requirements in Admissions - Entry Requirements (Coursework) Procedure, anda.any course-specific admission requirements.b.

(102) Courses may be excluded from participation in the School Recommendation Scheme where:

admission is based on factors other than a school-leaver’s performance in the HSC or Victorian Certificate ofa.Education, oras decided by the Executive Dean of the relevant faculty.b.

(103) Faculties will each year recommend courses to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for inclusionin this scheme for the following year’s intake. Some courses may have limited quota available for admission via theUAC Schools Recommendation Scheme.

Charles Sturt Advantage

(104) The Charles Sturt Advantage early offer scheme is intended to supplement applicants’ scores in previous studywith an assessment of their resilience, empathy, initiative and writing skills.

051


https://study.csu.edu.au/study-options/pathways


Page 13 of 19

(105) Applicants will apply online for the scheme by the deadline stated on the university website and will complete awriting task as part of the application.

(106) The admissions team will process the applications and calculate a predicted ATAR on the basis of their year 11results.

(107) Applicants are assessed on the basis of their predicted ATAR, against the published ATAR cut off for particularcourses. Course Directors may choose to take an applicant’s soft skills assessment result into account when decidingwhether or not to make an offer to an applicant.

(108) Faculties will each year recommend courses to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for inclusionin this scheme for the following year’s intake. Some courses may have limited quota available for admission via theCharles Sturt Advantage offer scheme.

Selection rank adjustments

(109) Domestic applicants applying for undergraduate study on the basis of ATAR or equivalent may be eligible foradjustments to their assessed admissions selection rank for one or more of the following factors:

regional location,a.subjects completed in pre-university study, where these are identified as eligible for specific courses, andb.equity, through special consideration for admission due to disadvantage to offset factors that have impactedc.high school education and preparation for university study.

(110) Faculties will each year recommend courses to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for inclusionin this scheme for the following year’s intake. Some courses may have limited quota available for admission viaselection rank adjustments.

Maximum adjustment

(111) The maximum total adjustment that can be applied to each applicant’s admissions selection rank is capped at12 equivalent ATAR points for any combination of factors including: special admissions consideration, regionallocation, and adjustments for eligible subjects completed in pre-tertiary study.

Location adjustment

(112) Applicants for internal undergraduate study will receive a location adjustment of 5 equivalent ATAR points totheir admission selection rank automatically (without needing to apply for it) if they:

are completing or recently completed Year 12 in a high school or TAFE college in a regional or remote area, ora.are a non-Year 12 applicant and live in a regional or remote area.b.

Subject adjustments

(113) An applicant for an undergraduate course will receive a subject adjustment of up to 10 equivalent ATAR pointsto their admissions selection rank automatically (without needing to apply for it) if they:

are applying through the University Admissions Centre (UAC),a.have completed, within the year of application or the previous year, Year 12 in a high school or TAFE college,b.andhave gained at least a specified minimum band in an HSC subject (or equivalent) that is specified as relevant toc.the course applied for.

052


Page 14 of 19

Equity adjustments

(114) The University provides the opportunity for domestic undergraduate applicants who have been disadvantaged intheir preparation for University study to apply for special consideration for admission in the form of adjustments totheir admissions selection rank on the basis of equity. Applicants with the below types of disadvantage can receive anadjustment to their selection rank of up to 7 equivalent ATAR points, where the faculty permits selection rankadjustments in the course.

Special consideration for admission factors

(115) Applicants to undergraduate courses may be considered for special admission consideration if one of thefollowing types of disadvantage has impaired their performance in previous study:

illness or disability, a.disrupted education or schooling,b.rural or regional school,c.financial hardship,d.difficult home environment and family responsibilities,e.non–English speaking background,f.refugee status.g.

(116) Applicants applying directly to the University, who believe they are educationally disadvantaged, shoulddownload and complete a special consideration for admission form, and submit this to the Admissions Office by thedue date to receive any special admission consideration.

(117) Applicants applying for admission through University Admissions Centre (UAC) or Victorian Tertiary AdmissionsCentre (VTAC) may apply for equity adjustments through the processes described below.

UAC Educational Access Scheme

(118) UAC applicants who believe they are educationally disadvantaged and are applying for full-time internal study inan undergraduate course can apply for special admission consideration using the UAC Educational Access Schemeform.

(119) Where these applicants are applying for special consideration after the UAC deadline, they should submit theUAC form directly to Charles Sturt University’s Admissions Office.

(120) These applications are assessed on the criteria approved by the UAC Educational Access Scheme Committee, byeither:

UAC, on behalf of the University, ora.the University's Admissions Office (if submitted directly to the University after the UAC application deadline hasb.closed).

VTAC Special Entry Access Scheme

(121) VTAC applicants who believe they are educationally disadvantaged and are applying for full-time internal studyundergraduate course can apply for special admission consideration using the VTAC Special Entry Access Schemeapplication on the VTAC website.

(122) Where these applicants are applying for special consideration after the VTAC deadline, they should submit theirform as instructed by VTAC on the VTAC website.

053


Page 15 of 19

(123) These applications are assessed by the University’s Admissions Office.

Elite athletes and performers

(124) An applicant applying directly to the University, who is an elite athlete, elite pre-athlete, elite sportsperson orelite performer as defined in the glossary of this procedure, should indicate this on their admission application.

(125) These applicants will be sent an application form for special consideration for elite athletes and performers.They must return the completed form and required supporting documents to the Admissions Office by the due date toreceive any special admission consideration.

(126) The Student Liaison Officer (Elite Athletes and Sport):

decides the requirements for supporting documents to establish that applicants for special admissiona.consideration are elite athletes, elite coaches, elite sports personnel or elite performers,assesses their applications for special admission consideration,b.decides any special admission consideration adjustment and provides this to the Admissions Office or facultyc.staff member assessing the application to be applied, andmaintains the University’s register of elite athletes, elite pre-athletes, elite coaches, elite performers, and elited.sports personnel.

(127) The Student Liaison Officer (Elite Athletes and Sport) may add a student to the register who does not meet thedefinitions of elite athlete, elite pre-athlete, elite sporting personnel or elite performer in the glossary section of thisprocedure, where the student:

is a national representative selected to participate in international sporting or cultural events, anda.is recognised by a national sporting body or association.b.

(128) Faculties will each year recommend courses to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for inclusionin this scheme for the following year’s intake. Some courses may have limited quota available for admission via theelite athletes and performers special consideration access scheme.

Higher degree by research admission decisions

Australian Government sanctions

(129) Applicants who are citizens of a country to which the Australian Government is applying sanctions on educationor research training will not be admitted to higher degree by research (HDR) candidature without the assessment andapproval of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) or delegate.

Resource and supervision requirements

(130) Before a faculty supports an application to admit a person to HDR candidature, there must have been adiscussion between the applicant and their proposed principal supervisor or the relevant Sub Dean (Graduate Studies)or delegate to:

advise the applicant on the relevance of the candidature to their career goals, anda.ensure their expectations of HDR candidature are realistic.b.

(131) To recommend an applicant for admission, the relevant Head of School or delegate must be satisfied that:

the proposed supervisors are sufficiently expert in the area of research and have the time and commitment toa.provide appropriate supervision, and

054


Page 16 of 19

the accommodation, facilities, and other resources necessary for the candidate’s research program areb.available.

(132) The nominated principal supervisor will confirm willingness to supervise by signing the admissionrecommendation.

(133) Resources needed for the research project will be agreed with the candidate at the time of admission to theprogram and confirmed when the research proposal is approved.

Approval of master by research and PhD program admissions

(134) The Dean, Graduate Studies will decide admission to candidature for a master’s by research or doctor ofphilosophy on evidence of the following:

The applicant:a.has met all entry requirements for the course stated in the Admissions - Entry Requirements (Higheri.Degrees by Research) Procedure, has met any additional or higher course-specific entry requirements, andii.has made a commitment to work regularly on the approved program of study and research and maintainiii.regular contact with the supervisor(s).

Supervision is available for the proposed period of candidature.b.The faculty has the resources necessary to support the candidature.c.

(135) Where the applicant is applying for admission to candidature for a doctor of philosophy on the basis of priorpublications, the Dean, Graduate Studies will also consider the following evidence in their admission decision:

the publications (which may include books and non-print materials) that will be included in the submissiona.presented for examination,information on the quality and citations of the publications to be included in the submission,b.a statement making clear the applicant's contribution to all jointly-authored publications,c.a statement from the co-authors of any jointly-authored publications confirming the extent of the applicant'sd.contribution to these,a statement of no more than five pages that:e.

indicates how the work has developed,i.demonstrates the contemporary relevance of each publication,ii.makes clear how the publications make an original scholarly contribution to knowledge,iii.provides a thematic overview that serves to link the individual publications into an integrated whole,iv.confirms the papers have not previously been submitted as part of a degree,v.

a statement indicating whether additional research activity may be required to convert the publications to anf.integrated whole and, if so, an outline of the necessary work,the names of two persons who can provide academic references relevant to the proposed candidature.g.

(136) In making their decision on an application for candidature on the basis of prior publications, the Dean, GraduateStudies will consider the report of an external assessor whom they have appointed, based on a nomination by therelevant Sub Dean (Graduate Studies). The external assessor will assess the full admission application provided to theDean, Graduate Studies.

Approval of professional doctorate program admissions

(137) The Dean, Graduate Studies will decide admission to a professional doctorate course on evidence of the

055


Page 17 of 19

following:

The applicant meets the academic, professional and English language entry requirements stated in thea.Admissions - Entry Requirements (Higher Degrees by Research) Procedure.The applicant meets any additional or higher course-specific entry requirements.b.Supervision is available for the proposed period of candidature.c.The faculty has the resources necessary to support the candidate.d.Where relevant, the applicant’s employer is prepared to support the candidate or the applicant will receive thee.necessary professional support in some other way.

Non-award enrolments

(138) Faculties must inform the relevant Admissions Office of:

the maximum number of non-award enrolments permitted in each subject, anda.subjects in which non-award enrolment is not available.b.

Single subject study

(139) The relevant Admissions Office is responsible for admission and enrolment of students into single subject study,in consultation with the relevant Subject Coordinator and Course Director, as required.

(140) Subjects available for single subject enrolment are listed on the study web page, and applicants must meet theminimum entry reqirements listed in the Admisions Policy for admission to each single subject, including any pre-requisite subjects.

(141) Applicants for single subject study must apply using the relevant online application form, which will beprocessed in date order of receipt.

(142) Where a student enrolled in a course applies to enrol concurrently in single subject study while continuing theircurrent course, the Course Director will decide whether the enrolment can occur.

Cross-institutional study (incoming)

(143) A student of another tertiary institution can apply to enrol in subjects at Charles Sturt University and may beable to have the subjects recognised as part of their course at that institution. Further information and instructions arepublished on the cross-institutional learning website.

(144) Students may apply for incoming cross-institutional enrolment in one or more subjects by submitting an onlineapplication by the closing date published on the University website for the teaching period in which they wish tocommence their study at this University, including:

written confirmation from their home institution that the subject(s) will be accepted for credit to their homea.institution course, and an academic transcript of results from their current or previous course, showing completion of any pre-requisiteb.subjects where the subject has pre-requisite requirements.

(145) The Subject Coordinator will assess applications for incoming cross-institutional study, including checking thestudent meets the prerequisite subject entry requirements.

(146) If incoming students wish to defer their fees via HECS-HELP or FEE-HELP, they must also provide the Universitywith their most recent Commonwealth Assistance Notice (CAN) from their home institution together with their

056


Page 18 of 19

application for cross-institutional study.

(147) If a cross-institutional student is eligible to enrol in a subject at this University, they will be asked to eithersubmit a CAF to defer their fees or pay their tuition fees upfront and in full.

(148) Cross-institutional students must also pay their student services and amenities fee unless they provide evidenceof having paid this for the same period at their home institution.

Admission restrictions on academic staff

(149) Academic staff who apply for admission to a course of the University, or to enrol in a subject of the University,must declare in their application that they are an academic staff member of the University or of one of its partner oraffiliate institutions.

(150) Such applications will be declined if the staff member is:

a Head of School seeking admission to a course or enrolment in a subject taught by their school or managed bya.their school but taught by a partner or affiliate institution,a Course Director seeking admission to a course they are leading,b.an academic staff member seeking enrolment in a subject in which they are teaching.c.

(151) To prevent admission or enrolment occurring in these cases, the Executive Dean will review:

all decisions to admit or enrol academic staff of the faculty into courses or subjects taught by the faculty, anda.all decisions to admit or enrol academic staff of partner or affiliate institutions, who teach subjects or coursesb.managed by the faculty, into courses or subjects taught by the faculty.


057


Page 19 of 19

Status and Details

Status Current



Approval Authority



Unit Head Lorraine RyanExecutive Director, Students


Enquiries Contact Admissions Office+61 2 69334334

058


Page 1 of 9

International Student Fee Refund Procedure

Section 1 - Purpose(1) This procedure supports the Admissions Policy and Enrolment Policy by stating:

the conditions under which an international applicant for admission to a course at Charles Sturt University (thea.University) who does not take up their course may receive a full refund of tuition fees, or a partial refund, or norefund,the conditions under which an international student enrolled in a course at the University who withdraws fromb.the course may receive a full refund of tuition fees paid in advance, or a partial refund, or no refund,the processes for applications for tuition fee refunds, andc.the avenue for students to appeal a decision to refund, partially refund or not refund students’ tuition fees.d.

(2) The procedure is intended to ensure that the University complies with the sections related to international studenttuition fees and refunds within the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 and its associated regulations,the Tuition Protection Service (TPS) and the National Code.

(3) The University will determine refunds of tuition fees for international students in accordance with this procedureand the student’s written agreement with the University. This procedure should be read alongside the writtenagreement, the Admissions Policy and the Enrolment policy.

Scope

(4) The scope of this procedure is limited to applications for a refund of tuition fees for international students whowere studying in Australia on a student visa at the time that the tuition fees were charged.

(5) The refund of tuition fees section of the Enrolment Policy states the conditions under which the University willrefund tuition fees for non-resident and domestic students.

References

(6) Where supporting documents are named in this procedure, they will be listed in the associated information tab.

Section 2 - Glossary(7) For the purposes of this procedure, the following terms have the definitions stated:

Beneficiary - the person or organisation responsible for payment of fees to the University. The student is thea.default beneficiary unless there is a third party sponsoring arrangement in place.Census date – the deadline by which all students must finalise their subject enrolments for each teachingb.period, after which they are financially and academically liable for each subject that remains on theirenrolment.Commencing student - a student who has accepted a place in a course, or who is in their first period of study inc.a course at this University.

059









Page 2 of 9

Confirmation of enrolment (COE) – an official document issued to international students to confirm they haved.accepted a place and are eligible to enrol in a course at this University. The COE provides information aboutstudent enrolment status, course details, tuition fees, registered course duration, and enrolment start and enddates. International students must submit a current COE when applying for or renewing their student visa tostudy within Australia.Continuing student – a student continuing their enrolment beyond the first teaching period of their course.e.Domestic course – a course delivered by an Australian education provider, including courses provided by thisf.University and by partner institutions located within Australia.Domestic student – a student who at the time of the relevant study is an Australian citizen or permanentg.resident, New Zealand citizen, or holds an Australian permanent humanitarian visa.Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 (ESOS) – establishes legislative requirements and standardsh.for the quality assurance of education and training institutions offering courses to international students whoare in Australia on a student visa.International/overseas student– a student who is not a domestic student at the time of the relevant study, whoi.is studying within Australia on a temporary student visa.In writing – means a legible hard copy letter or document written in English and signed by the relevant student,j.or an email sent by a student from their personal email account as nominated on their student record.Letter of offer (Offer Letter) – the written agreement outlining a student’s enrolment contract with thek.University.Letter of release – a letter issued by the University to an international student studying on an Australian studentl.visa, giving them permission to transfer their enrolment to another institution.National code – the ESOS National Code of Practice for Registration Authorities and Providers of Education andm.Training to Overseas Students.Non-resident student – all students who are not classified as ‘Domestic’ or 'International/overseas’ as defined inn.this glossary in relation to their visa/citizenship and location status. Non-resident students include: any studentenrolled in a non-domestic course (including Australian domestic students studying overseas in a coursedelivered by an offshore partner institution); non-domestic students studying on campus within Australia whileon any temporary visa other than the student visa; and non-domestic students who are studying in a domesticcourse that is delivered entirely online, where they do not need a student visa for their enrolment.Non-tuition fees - any fees required for items not directly related to tuition fees. Examples include Overseaso.Student Health Cover (OSHC), student services and amenities fees (SSAF), library fines, accommodation fees,and other fees and charges related to additional administrative costs incurred by the University, such as latepayment and late enrolment fees.Teaching period – each formal period of study during which a subject is delivered to students who are enrolledp.with the University. There are several different types of teaching periods at this University, including sessions,terms, micro-sessions, year-long periods, and ADPP periods.Tuition fees - fees charged for each unit of study (subject) that a student is enrolled in.q.Written agreement – this is the University’s letter of offer to the student, containing the enrolment contactr.between the student and the University, which is agreed to by the student when they accept their offer.

Section 3 - Policy(8) This procedure supports the Admissions Policy and Enrolment Policy but is designed so that it can be readindependently and provides a full statement of the University’s rules regarding refunds of tuition fees for internationalstudents.

(9) The Enrolment Policy states the requirements and processes for all enrolment matters related to internationalstudents aside from tuition fee refunds.

060







Page 3 of 9

Section 4 - ProcedureResponsibilities

(10) Student Administration is responsible for monitoring international student enrolments in accordance with ESOSrequirements, including conducting a preliminary assessment of international student refund applications beforereferring them to the Division of Finance for processing.

(11) Where an international student claims exceptional circumstances as a factor in their refund request, StudentAdministration will refer the application to the Executive Director, Division of Students or delegate for assessmentbefore it can be processed by the Division of Finance.

(12) The Division of Finance processes all international student refund applications once they have been approved andreferred to them by Student Administration or International Admissions, as relevant.

Course withdrawal

(13) International students are strongly encouraged to discuss any decision to withdraw from their course with theUniversity before doing so, as this will result in the cancellation of their confirmation of enrolment (COE) which maylead to the cancellation of their student visa.

(14) Students seeking to transfer courses within this University are advised to submit their application for admission tostudy in their new course before submitting any request for course withdrawal. See the Admissions Policy andProcedure for information about applying for a new course or transfer.

(15) Students seeking to transfer their enrolment to another provider must follow the process outlined in theInternational On-Shore Students - Provider Transfer Policy.

(16) In order to withdraw from their course, international students must submit a request in writing to StudentAdministration, after which the University will cancel their confirmation of enrolment and report this change in currentenrolment status to the government. Students must directly contact the Department of Home Affairs to discuss theimpact this will have on their student visa.

Refund applications

(17) Depending on the timing of a student’s request to withdraw from their course and/or subjects, internationalstudents may be eligible for a full or partial refund of the tuition fees they have paid to the University.

(18) Students seeking a refund must follow the instructions outlined on the relevant refund application form andattach the required supporting documentation before submitting their request.

(19) Applications for a refund of tuition fees will only be considered if they are submitted within 12 months from theend date of the teaching period for which the tuition fees were charged.

(20) Applications for a refund are based on the tuition fees that have been paid for each subject, and students mustidentify each subject they are requesting a refund for on their application form.

Refunds of OSHC payments

(21) Applications for a refund of Overseas Student Health Cover (OSHC) payments should be made directly to theinsurance provider once a student has commenced their enrolment in a course.

(22) However, international students may submit a request for a refund of OSCH payments directly to the University

061




Page 4 of 9

where they were prevented from taking up their place of study in the event of:

their student visa being refused, ora.due to exceptional or unforeseen circumstances (such as those listed below and outlined on the relevant refundb.forms).

(23) In such instances, the International Admissions team will immediately cancel the OSHC insurance on the student’sbehalf and notify the Division of Finance that the OSHC has been cancelled, as well as cancel the student’s enrolmentin the course and their confirmation of enrolment, which may result in the student’s visa being cancelled by theDepartment of Home Affairs.

(24) The University will then provide the student with the relevant refund form and request it to be completed andreturned with the relevant supporting documents.

(25) Once the student completes and returns the form with supporting documents, these will be assessed by theInternational Admissions team and where such refunds of OSCH payments are eligible, these will be processed by theDivision of Finance.

Refund schedule for commencing students

(26) The following table states the University’s refund rules for commencing students (who are in their first teachingperiod of enrolment in their course).

(27) Throughout the table, the date of the student’s withdrawal is the date on which the University receives thestudent’s request to withdraw from their course or subject.

Commencing student situation Time period to which ruleapplies Refund

The University withdraws the offer of admissionbecause the student provided incorrect,incomplete or fraudulent information in theirapplication for admission.

Before the first day of theteaching period in which thestudent is to begin study inthe course.

No refund of tuition fees for the firstteaching period. Full refund of tuitionfees paid for any future teachingperiods.

The University withdraws their offer of admissionfor any reason other than because the studentprovided incorrect, incomplete or fraudulentinformation in their application for admission.


Full refund of all tuition fees paid.

The student’s application for an Australianstudent visa is declined, so they are unable totake up the offer of a place in the course.


Full refund of all tuition fees paid.

The student withdraws from the course becauseof exceptional circumstances outside their control,being either:1. serious illness or death which prevents themfrom undertaking studies in Australia,2. death or serious illness of an immediate familymember (parent, sibling, spouse or child), or3. political, civil or natural event which preventsthem from leaving their home country or payingcourse fees in full.

Up to and including thecensus date of the firstteaching period in thecourse*

Full refund of all tuition fees paid forthe first and future teaching periods.

062


Page 5 of 9


The student withdraws from the course prior tocommencement of study in the first teachingperiod for any reason other than exceptionalcircumstances outside their control.

At least four weeks beforethe first day of the teachingperiod in which the student isto begin study in the course.

The University will retain anadministration fee of 10% of thetuition fees for the teaching period inwhich the student would havecommenced study, up to a maximumof $1000, and will refund the rest ofthe fees the student has paid.Full refund of tuition fees paid for anyfuture teaching periods.

The student withdraws from the course prior tocommencement of study in the first teachingperiod for any reason other than exceptionalcircumstances outside their control.

Less than four weeks beforethe first day of teachingperiod in which the student isto begin study in the course.

The University will retain anadministration fee of 25% of thetuition fees for the teaching period inwhich the student would havecommenced study, up to a maximumof $2500, and will refund the rest ofthe fees the student has paid.

Full refund of tuition fees paid for anyfuture teaching periods.

The student withdraws from the course duringtheir first teaching period to take up a place atanother education provider without a letter ofrelease from the University.

(See the next table for information about refundsfor continuing students who are issued with aletter of release to transfer providers aftercompleting their first teaching period at CharlesSturt University.)

From the first day of theteaching period in which thestudent begins study in theircourse, up to six months afterthe date they commencedstudy in their course atCharles Sturt University.

No refund of tuition fees for the firstteaching period.No refund of tuition fees for futureteaching periods within the first sixmonths of the date on which thestudent commenced study in theircourse at Charles Sturt University(without a letter of release).Full refund of tuition fees paid forfuture teaching periods more than sixmonths after the date the studentcommenced study in their course atCharles Sturt University.

The student withdraws from the course aftercommencing study in the first teaching period forany reason other than to take up a place atanother provider without a letter of release fromthe University.

From the first day of theteaching period in which thestudent begins study in thecourse, up to the census datefor that period.

50% refund of tuition fees paid forthe first teaching period of study.Full refund of tuition fees paid for anyfuture teaching periods.

The student withdraws from the course aftercommencing study in the first teaching period forany reason other than to take up a place atanother provider without a letter of release fromthe University. *(*See the section below these tables forinformation about applying for refunds aftercensus date due to exceptional circumstances.)

After the census date in thefirst teaching period ofenrolment in the course.

No refund of tuition fees for the firstteaching period*Full refund of tuition fees paid for anyfuture teaching periods.

The student changes their subjects or their courseand the tuition fees for their new enrolment areless than what they have paid for their originalenrolment.

Up to and including thecensus date for the firstteaching period.

Full refund of the difference in tuitionfees paid for the current teachingperiod (or this amount can be appliedas credit towards future tuition fees).

Cancellation of visa, visa extension is not granted,or the Commonwealth Government instructs thestudent to leave Australia for breach of their visaconditions.

At any time.No refund of tuition fees for thecurrent teaching period*Full refund of tuition fees paid for anyfuture teaching periods.

The student is excluded from the University, or isexcluded from their course and not admitted toanother course at the University, for a breach ofany of the University’s rules or policies, includingmisconduct, lack of progress or attendance, orhas their enrolment cancelled for non-payment offees.

At any time.

No refund of tuition fees for the firstteaching period of study. Rules onrefunds for subsequent teachingperiods are the same as forcontinuing students in the tablebelow.

063


Page 6 of 9


The University is unable to deliver the course andeither:1. cannot offer the student a place in analternative course, or2. offers the student a place in an alternativecourse, but the student prefers a refund of theirfees.

After the student hascommenced study in thecourse.

Full refund of tuition fees paid for thecurrent teaching period and anyfuture teaching periods.No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

* Unless the student applies for and is granted a refund due to exceptional circumstances. See the refunds inexceptional circumstances section below these tables for more information about applying for refunds outside of theserefund limits.

Refund schedule for continuing students

(28) The following table states the University’s refund rules for continuing students.

(29) Throughout the table, the date of the student’s withdrawal is the date on which the University receives thestudent’s request to withdraw from their course or subject.

Continuing student situation Time period to which ruleapplies Refund

The student withdraws from the course because ofexceptional circumstances outside their control, beingeither:1. serious illness or death which prevents them fromundertaking studies in Australia,2. death or serious illness of an immediate familymember (parent, sibling, spouse or child), or3. political, civil or natural event which prevents themfrom leaving their home country or paying course feesin full.

Up to and including thecensus date for thecurrent teaching period*

Full refund of tuition fees paid forthe current teaching period.Full refund of tuition fees paid forfuture teaching periods.No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

The student withdraws from their course and/orsubject(s) for any reason once the census date haspassed.*See the section below this table for information aboutapplying for refunds after census date due toexceptional circumstances.

After the census date forthe current teachingperiod.

No refund of tuition fees for thecurrent teaching period*If the student withdraws from thecourse as a whole, full refund oftuition fees paid for future periods.No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

The student withdraws from their course within the firstsix months of study to take up a place at anothereducation provider without a letter of release from theUniversity.

Within the first six monthsof study in their course atCharles Sturt University.

No refund of tuition fees for thecurrent teaching period.No refund of tuition fees for futureperiods less than six months afterthe date the student commencedstudy in their course at CharlesSturt University.Full refund of tuition fees paid forfuture periods more than sixmonths after the date the studentcommenced study in their courseat Charles Sturt University.No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

The student is issued a letter of release by theUniversity to transfer providers and withdraws fromtheir course before census date to take up a place atanother education provider, after completing at leastone teaching period of study in their course at CharlesSturt University.

Up to and including thecensus date for thecurrent teaching period.

The University will retain 50% oftuition fees for the currentteaching period. No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

064


Page 7 of 9

Continuing student situation Time period to which ruleapplies Refund

The student withdraws from the course for any reasonother than to transfer providers during the first sixmonths of study without a letter of release from theUniversity.


The University will retain 50% oftuition fees for the currentteaching period. No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

The student changes their subjects or their course andthe tuition fees for their new enrolment are less thanwhat they have paid for their original enrolment.


Full refund of the difference intuition fees paid for the currentteaching period (or this amountcan be applied as credit towardsfuture tuition fees).

The Commonwealth Government instructs the studentto leave Australia for breach of their visa conditions. At any time.

No refund of tuition fees for thecurrent teaching period.Full refund of tuition fees paid forfuture teaching periods.No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

The student is excluded from the University (or isexcluded from their course and not admitted to anothercourse at the University) for a breach of any of theUniversity’s rules or policies, including misconduct, lackof progress or attendance, or has their enrolmentcancelled for non-payment of fees.

At any time.

No refund of tuition fees for thecurrent teaching period.Full refund of tuition fees paid forfuture teaching periods.No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

The University is unable to deliver the course andeither:1. cannot offer the student a place in an alternativecourse, or2. offers the student a place in an alternative course,but the student prefers a refund of their fees.

After the student hascommenced study in thecourse.

Full refund of tuition fees paid forthe current teaching period andany future teaching periods.No refund of tuition fees for pastteaching periods.

* Unless the student applies for and is granted a refund due to exceptional circumstances. See the refunds inexceptional circumstances section below these tables for more information about applying for refunds outside of theserefund limits.

Refunds after census date in exceptional circumstances

(30) A student may apply for a refund of tuition fees beyond the limits stated in the refund tables above where theyhave been prevented from continuing or successfully completing their studies in particular subject due to:

exceptional circumstances outside their control, whicha.did not make their full impact on the student until after the census date for the relevant teaching period.b.

(31) A student must apply in writing and clearly identify each subject they are requesting a refund for due toexceptional circumstances, and they must attach supporting independent (third party) evidence of thesecircumstances.

(32) Applications for a refund of tuition fees due to exceptional circumstances must be submitted within 12 monthsfrom the end-date of the teaching period for which the tuition fees were charged.

(33) The Executive Director, Division of Students or delegate will assess international student applications for a refundof tuition fees due to exceptional circumstances and will notify the student of the decision outcome within 10 workingdays of receiving the completed application with supporting evidence.

065


Page 8 of 9

Payment of refunds

(34) The University will normally pay approved refunds within four weeks of:

receiving the refund request from the student, if no exceptional circumstances are claimed, ora.an approved refund decision, if the student is claiming exceptional circumstances that need to be assessedb.before their refund payment can be processed.

(35) Approved refunds will be paid in Australian dollars to the credit card or bank account of the authorised beneficiaryor to a third party bank account nominated by the beneficiary.

(36) The University will not compensate the payer of the fees for any exchange rate changes or funds transfer costs.

Appeals and complaints

(37) Where a student wishes to appeal an original decision made under this procedure, or has a complaint about thequality of service or the conduct of staff, the following policies apply:

University Student Appeals Policy and University Student Appeals Procedure a.Complaints Management Policy and Complaints Management Procedureb.

(38) A student will remain enrolled in their course of study at the University while any appeals process is ongoing,unless one of the reasons stated in the University Student Appeals Policy applies and/or if the student’s health orwellbeing, or the wellbeing of others, is likely to be at risk.


066







Page 9 of 9

Status and Details

Status Current



Approval Authority



Unit Head Julie ClearyDirector, Student Administration


Enquiries Contact Student Administration

067

Bulletin Board Feedback – Admissions Policy Page 1 of 8

Admissions Policy – Bulletin Board Feedback (Sep-Oct 2021)

CL HEADING DRAFT TEXT Comment Staff RESPONSE NEW TEXT

1 Purpose

(1) This policy is designed to ensure that admission of students at Charles Sturt University (the University) and its partner providers is conducted in a manner that:

Isn't part of the purpose to admit students who are likely to succeed in their studies and complete their qualifications? If we are student focused our policies have to reflect that position and so the word 'student/intending student' needs to appear in the purpose. There are some useful ideas expressed in Standard 1.1.1 in the Threshold Standards that can be generalised to all people seeking admission to all education courses/subjects/micros/short-long courses offered by Charles Sturt. There might also be some consideration given to the idea that admission is the first step in the student journey.

J Kirk

The HESF (and ESOS/HESA) reqs of admitting students who are likely to succeed was considered for this section but then we decided to specify that as the purpose of the entry reqs, as this policy document overall is designed to ensure that admissions complies with HESF and legislative reqs, of which that is one, but not the only purpose of this policy.

N/A

2 Scope

(2) This policy applies to the admission of all students to programs, courses, and non-award study offered by the University and its partner institutions. Its requirements apply to all academic and non-academic University staff involved in admissions activities, as well as decision-making bodies of the University and external staff who represent the University through partnerships and third party arrangements including educational agents and partner education providers.

Please can we define a group of people by what they are rather than what they are not? What is the accepted term for 'non-academic' staff at Charles Sturt? Is it professional and technical staff? Suggest consulting with P&C/HR on this one. If we don't have such a term can we please have one asap?

J Kirk

There are several possible labels that can be used to refer to groups of staff who are not classified as academic, so it could be problematic to try listing them all in case some staff are unintentionally left out. A possible solution would be to remove the terms 'academic and non-academic' from this clause and just refer to ' all University staff' instead, which I have done.

(2) This policy applies to the admission of all students to programs, courses, and non-award study offered by the University and its partner institutions. Its requirements apply to all staff across the University as well as external staff who represent the University through partnerships and third party arrangements including educational agents and partner education providers.

4 Glossary (4) For the purposes of this policy the following terms have the definitions stated:

Why do we use 'admission' and 'entry'? Do we have admission to the University and entry to courses? Are we clear about when we use which term? There is no entry for 'entry' in the Glossary which is not helpful.

J Kirk

Admission' and 'entry' have the same meaning in these documents, they are synonyms. We use these terms in different places of the writing to prevent repetition; similar to the use of pronouns when referring to something for the second time in a sentence, which improves readability and prevents repetition.

N/A

4 Glossary (4) For the purposes of this policy the following terms have the definitions stated:

The glossary is only used to define terms. Some of these are going beyond definitions and trying to set provisions or explain different processes. e.g. inherent requirements, ATAR, partner provider, selection rank. If this information is important for the purpose of the policy, it needs to be moved into the body of the policy and removed from the glossary.

V Salway

TEQSA requires us to provide a definition of 'ATAR' and 'Selection Rank' that explains how they are different to each other. These two definitions are based on TEQSA example definitions of this term, combined with content from the original definitions in the current policy glossary online.

N/A

4 Glossary

h. Inherent requirements – the academic and other requirements of a course that all students must meet to achieve the course learning outcomes, and the knowledge, abilities, skills and qualities students will need to have in order to achieve them. Reasonable adjustments for a student with a disability cannot remove the need to meet these requirements.


V Salway

This definition is unchanged from the current version of the policy online. However, given that the second sentence describes a process not included in these Admissions documents, I have removed this part as it is not really a definition. I will also include a link to the webpage about this topic online.

h. Inherent requirements – the academic and other requirements of a course that all students must meet to achieve the course learning outcomes, and the knowledge, abilities, skills and qualities students will need to have in order to achieve them. More information about inherent requirements is available online.

068



4 Glossary

l. Partner provider – Charles Sturt University delivers a range of programs and courses in collaboration with quality education providers located both in Australia and overseas. Students may apply for admission to study a Charles Sturt course either directly with the University or through one of its partner providers. Where a Charles Sturt course or program is delivered by a third party institution through a partnership arrangement with the University, Charles Sturt remains accountable for the course as the registered provider and conducts continuous monitoring and reviews to verify that the partner institution provides quality educational outcomes, supporting services, and learning experiences that comply with the standards required under the legislative frameworks that govern higher education in Australia.


V Salway

This definition was based on CSU descriptions of partners online, but I can see that it is too detailed and descriptive, so this definition has been updated and reduced.

l. Partner provider – a third-party education institution that delivers programs and courses for, or in collaboration with, the University and where the University remains responsible for quality assurance of academic and student outcomes.

5 Admissions responsibilities

(5) The authority to admit applicants to study at Charles Sturt University in accordance with approved entry requirements is specified in the relevant schedule under the Delegations and Authorisations Policy.

One of the responsibilities is to admit people who are appropriately prepared for university study. There is no reference to this minimum standard for admission. This is a responsibility of the University that needs to be articulated.

J Kirk

Details about the responsibilities related to admissions are located in the delegations schedule, and due to the changing nature of this schedule, I was instructed to only refer readers to the schedule document itself instead of listing a duplicate of all of the responsibilities in this policy, to prevent contradictions in the future.

N/A

8

Admission or enrolment of academic staff

(8) A member of the University’s academic staff will be declined admission to a course, or declined enrolment in a subject, where this is a conflict of interest.

Doesn't this provision apply to all staff? Why should academic staff be privileged in this context? Are we really an inclusive university?

J Kirk

Unsure what is meant by privilege and inclusive in this context as this provision singles out academic staff in a restrictive way? There are rules that prevent some academic staff from being admitted to the University, which are listed in the procedure. No such restrictions apply to anyone else, so in that sense it is inclusive… To clarify this, I have changed the heading for this section to clearly identify these as restrictions..


10

Admissions information for applicants

(10) The University will ensure that: Need to inform prospective applicants about the new HESA reqs for maintaining CSP/HELP eligibility over their entire course enrolment.

J Cleary Will add a point stating this to the list in this clause of info for applicants.

(10) e. domestic students applying for admission into a Commonwealth Supported Place (CSP) and/or deferral of their fees via a Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) loan (either HECS-HELP or FEE-HELP) are informed of the requirements for maintaining eligibility throughout their studies as required under the Higher Education Support Act (HESA) and related legislation.

069



12


Admissions entry requirements Why is this section titled Admission Entry Requiremenets? Surely Admission Requirements is sufficient?

J Kirk

This topic has a correlating section in the procedure, but the current versions of the policy and procedure use different headings for this topic, as the current policy uses "Admissions requirements" while the current procedure uses "Entry requirements", so to ensure that we use the same headings for the same topic in both of these documents I merged them together as "Admissions entry requirements". But yes, 'admissions requirements' are the same as 'entry requirements' and 'admissions entry requirements', which means that using these words together in this way may help to relate them with each other for readers, and help them interpret 'admission' and 'entry' as meaning the same thing.

N/A

12


(12) Admissions entry requirements are approved by the relevant authority as defined in Delegation Schedule E - Academic and Research under the Delegations and Authorisations Policy. These entry requirements are established and approved as part of the development, review, and accreditation process for each course and subject offered by the University. This ongoing course design, review, and approval process is outlined in the Course and Subject Policy and Procedures.

What is the difference between 'admission' and 'entry'? Surely the entry requirements are those that need to be met ignorer to be admitted to a course of study? And they represent the minimum requirements with a selection process based on clear criteria used to determine which applicants will be admitted should there be more applicants than places available.

J Kirk

There is no difference between the meaning of admission and entry. Yes, correct to the second question of this comment. The admissions/entry reqs and the selection process (for competitive courses and/or where quotas are exceeded) are different things, as just because an applicant meets the minimum admission/entry reqs for a course this does not mean they will be admitted (due to limited places, more qualified applicants, withdrawal of a course from an intake, or not meeting offer acceptance conditions, enrolment conditions, or government checks)

N/A

13


(13) These admissions entry requirements are designed to ensure that admitted students have the necessary academic skills and preparation that will allow them to undertake the relevant course with a reasonable prospect of success, as well as the proficiency in English that is required to successfully participate in their intended study.

Need to include reqs about 'academic suitability' as required under new HESA legislation

H Guilliffe

Add key words 'academically suitable' to this clause/section to align with recently updated HESA reqs.

(13) These admissions entry requirements are designed to ensure that admitted students are academically suitable and have the necessary preparation, proficiency in English, and educational skills required to successfully participate in and progress through their intended studies at this University.

070



13


(13) These admissions entry requirements are designed to ensure that admitted students have the necessary academic skills and preparation that will allow them to undertake the relevant course with a reasonable prospect of success, as well as the proficiency in English that is required to successfully participate in their intended study.

This is a point of principle which should be reflected in the policy's purpose.

J Kirk

This clause specifically refers to the purpose of this section's topic: the minimum admissions entry reqs set by the University. While stating these entry reqs is one of the important reqs of the policy overall, it's one of many purposes of this policy, and to list all of these purposes at the top would be problematic as it would be too long or would miss some out. However, as the policy's purpose specifies compliance with HESF and ESOS, and this standard is stated in HESF and ESOS, then the policy purpose does include this point, just indirectly. The particular topic of this section, however, is all about this standard, and therefore this purpose is stated both indirectly at the top of this policy, as well as being directly referred to here, which is where it belongs either way (even if listed at the top as well), as the topic of this section is the minimum entry requirements for admission to the University, and this is their purpose.

N/A

14


(14) To be eligible for admission to all programs, courses, and subjects offered by the University (either directly or through one of its delivery partner providers), all applicants must meet the following minimum University entry requirements for each level of study: a. minimum age requirements, b. minimum academic and/or professional experience requirements, and c. minimum English proficiency requirements, plus d. any additional professional or higher course-specific admission requirements that may apply to the relevant course, where these are published within the online course brochure for the relevant intake.

Why is d. necessary given what is outlined in a.-c.? Does this apply to selection rather than to admission?

J Kirk

A to C are the minimum University-wide reqs for entry/admission to each level of study, while D refers to the fact that some courses have additional higher entry/admission reqs above this University minimum for the relevant level of study being applied for. Eg: the minimum university reqs for entry to any bachelor level course may be one thing, but additional extra/higher course-specific entry reqs are required for entry to certain specific courses, such as a Bachelor of Nursing for example. Therefore, A-C are the minimum requirements for entry to that level of study, and D are the additional reqs that apply to some courses at that level, which may be higher than the minimum.

N/A

17

Minimum age requirements

(17) Any other applicants who will be under 18 years of age at the time of accepting their offer will be considered for admission subject to meeting the conditions outlined in the Admissions Procedure.

Why does this apply only to students who are not international student visa holders? Why are some categories of student exempt from an age requirement and others not? After all the ESOS Act and the National Code make provision for students under 18 years of age.

J Kirk

Senior decision-making bodies of the University have made a deliberate decision not to admit U18 International students for study in Australia, even though ESOS legislation has provisions that allow providers to do so. I believe this is because of the extra compliance requirements, processes, roles, and responsibilities of providers who accept U18 internationals, including detailed welfare arrangements that the University would need additional staff and resources to implement, manage, and monitor for every U18 student admitted and enrolled in study at this institution and its partners within Australia.

N/A

071



19

Minimum academic requirements

(19) All applicants seeking admission to courses or subjects offered by the University must meet at least the following minimum academic and/or professional experience requirements for the relevant level of study:

I don't understand why all HDR courses (leaving aside Higher Doc) have the same admission requirement. In my view this should be split into master by research and doctorate. The AQF makes this distinction for good reason and it should be reflected in the admission requirements for each level of study. After all its done for Honours in this table.

J Kirk

This is because the minimum entry reqs for all HDR courses listed in that row are the same, so they don't necessarily need a new row. Although the reqs for CSU Pathway and Diploma are also the same and they have different rows, but this is because I added the top row to remove a single-clause section about the pathway course from the current policy. Therefore, I will split this row into 2 with the same entry reqs.

[Split row for HDR courses into two: Masters by research and Doctoral courses, which have the same minimum entry requirements (as listed in the HDR Entry Requirements Procedure).]

21

Minimum English proficiency requirements

(21) Applicants must meet the following minimum English proficiency requirements for entry to each level of study.

Minimum IELTS scores should be a list of things to review in the next few years. They need to be considered in the context of the rising levels of English language fluency in developing countries, knowledge of English language learning in overseas countries and the University's striving for excellence.

J Kirk The procedure outlines a process by which the acceptable ELP reqs can be updated by proposing changes to the IPC

N/A

25


(25) To be eligible for admission to such courses, applicants must meet the specific entry requirements which are published for each course in the online course brochure in addition to the minimum University requirements listed above. These may include: a. citizenship/visa requirements, b. higher age, academic, professional, and/or English proficiency requirements, c. specific professional training and/or industry experience requirements, d. requirements for security, health, police, or working with children checks, and/or e. additional/supplementary information, which may be required in the form of selection interviews, references, creative portfolios, thesis proposals, essays, or other entry tasks or submissions.

Do we need 25 and 26 in a policy? These are matters of procedure?

J Kirk

Clause 25 lists different types of course-specific entry reqs that may apply to certain courses above and beyond to the minimum university-wide reqs listed in the table above, which is a key topic that we are required to inform applicants about under TEQSA and HESF etc.

N/A

26


(26) Some courses such as professional doctorates may state additional entry requirements of a specified period of relevant professional experience and/or current professional employment. This will be identified in the online course brochure for each relevant course.

Do we need 25 and 26 in a policy? These are matters of procedure?

J Kirk

Clause 26 is a revised version of clause 25 from the current version of this policy online "Professional experience requirements: (25) A professional doctorate may state additional entry requirements of a specified period of relevant professional experience and/or current professional employment", but am happy to remove this revised clause altogether as it was always unnecessary (even in the current policy). Will leave it for now and remove on request.

N/A

27


(27) The University may:

Understand whether inclusion of an item is required to ensure that the institution has the ability to prioritise the allocation of places in alignment with strategic priorities including the implementation of 'sub-quotas' for particular cohorts within a course or course offering.

C Burke

Unsure if I have misunderstood or not, but is this is referring to the allocation of places for "particular cohorts" as in 'disadvantaged groups'? If so, then the 'Equity and access schemes' are available for the prioritisation of "particular cohorts" as per HESF. Either way, CASIMS deals with quotas in detail, so perhaps that is where this is managed.

N/A

072



28


(28) An Executive Dean must seek the approval of the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) to withdraw a course from participation in an intake, and ensure that any withdrawal of offers that result are managed in accordance with the University’s obligations under ESOS Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework.

Recent delegation change by where Executive Dean can now approve temporary suspensions. Update cluase accordingly.

C Burke Updated in accordance with E3 actions and terminology.

(28) An Executive Dean may approve the suspension of a course from participation in an intake under the Delegations and Authorities Policy, and must ensure that any withdrawal of offers that result from this suspension are managed in accordance with the University’s obligations under ESOS Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework.

28


(28) An Executive Dean must seek the approval of the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) to withdraw a course from participation in an intake, and ensure that any withdrawal of offers that result are managed in accordance with the University’s obligations under ESOS Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework.

28 and 29 are procedural. If 28 is retained it needs to be reworded. Courses do not participate in an intake: they have no agency.

J Kirk Replaced 'from participation in an intake' with 'from a particular intake' in response to this request.

(28) An Executive Dean may approve the suspension of a course from a particular intake under the Delegations and Authorities Policy, and must ensure that any withdrawal of offers that result from this suspension are managed in accordance with the University’s obligations under ESOS Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework.

44 Assessment of applications

(44) The relevant University admissions office assesses all admission applications, except: a. applications submitted to authorised partner institutions which are assessed by the relevant partner’s admissions team; and b. applications submitted to the University Admissions Centre (UAC), which UAC assesses on behalf of the University.

For the Doctor of Medicine program which is a Joint Program in Medicine, staff of the School of Rural Medicine (CSU) and School of Medicine (WSU) assess applications for interview and for entry into the Medicine program. The list of applicants from UAC is downloaded from UAC by WSU admissions

J Brindle

This would fall under the category of applications being assessed by authorised partner institutions in part A of this clause.

N/A

44 Assessment of applications

(44) The relevant University admissions office assesses all admission applications, except: a. applications submitted to authorised partner institutions which are assessed by the relevant partner’s admissions team; and b. applications submitted to the University Admissions Centre (UAC), which UAC assesses on behalf of the University.

Review to understand if item b. is still applicable following UAC Connect WL service being dissolved.

C Burke UAC still assess applications on CSU's behalf. N/A

46 Application outcomes

(46) Applicants will be notified of their application outcome in writing, and where they have been declined admission they will be:

Applicants to Medicine are assessed on their UCAT (25%) and interview results (75%) and we do not give feedback to applicants (more than 900 this year for 37 places) on why they did not receive an offer

J Brindle

The decline notice must be in writing and must have a reason. This does not have to be detailed 'feedback', just a reason as to why they were declined, such as not meeting the entry reqs, or not having enough places. I believe the system requires a reason to be entered/provided for every single application outcome, as this would fall under our gov compliance reporting reqs for admissions transparency.

N/A

073



49 Withdrawing offers

(49) The University may withdraw an offer of admission at any time if the applicant fails to: a. meet any conditions of the offer before census date; b. accept the offer in the manner specified in the offer letter; c. pay their fees for the first teaching period by the date specified in the offer letter or fees invoice/statement; or d. where the course quota was filled before the offer was accepted

Understand/clarify intent of d. - is this just to cover exceptional circumstances, rather than common practice? How does this relate to 37 (of the procedure) lapsing offers? Implementation of offer quota is the means in which enrolments levels are managed.

C Burke

This list is unchanged from the current approved version of these Admissions docs, and appears to cover a situation in which the University makes more offers than there are places available (which I believe is current practice) and then receives far more acceptances than were expected, to the point where places run out for a course before the offer acceptance deadline passes. As you say, this is probably unlikely and covers exceptional circumstances.

N/A

59 Refund of fees

(59) Commencing students who have enrolled in subjects will not incur fees if they withdraw from such subjects by midnight of the census date in their first teaching period, unless they are an international student studying in Australia on a student visa. The Enrolment Policy states detailed requirements and processes for fee refunds to domestic and non-resident students.

Replace duplicate content about refunds with ref to the Enrolment and Fees docs to avoid contradiction

J Cleary Delete all detailed clauses under this section and replace with a ref to the ENR and INT Refund docs

(60) Prospective applicants, commencing students, and continuing students can find detailed information about refunds, including application processes, conditions, and requirements in the Enrolment Policy and Enrolment Procedure, as well as in the International Student Fee Refund Procedure.

64 Course transfers

(64) The following requirements apply to students applying for transfer:

A lot of the details in the clauses from here to the end are procedural...

J Kirk Agree, much of the content about Course Transfers has been moved out of the policy and into the procedure.

MOVED TO PROCEDURE.

64 Course transfers


Within CSU J

Brindle

All transfers are within CSU, the online Course Transfer form can only be accessed by current CSU students, and will allow the input of available courses into its fields, so this addition is not needed, and may cause confusion if added here if it is not always stated every time course transfers are referred to.

N/A

64 Course transfers


Some course do not permit transfers (e.g. Doctor of Medicine), or have an "exceptional circumstances" process. Could we have a statement to reflect this?

Y Guisard

A clause stating that not all courses permit transfers has been added to this section.

(64) Where a course does not permit admission via transfer, or where the specific eligibility requirements for a course transfer are not met, current students may apply for admission into a course by submitting a standard new application for admission, which will be assessed against the same entry requirements as a course transfer.

65 Course transfers

(65) Students enrolled in one course who apply to transfer to another course must meet the same admission requirements as any other applicant, and will only be admitted to the new course if a place is available.

Infers that quota restrictions may be imposed, does this need to be more explicit and/or reference back to Intake Quotas and Course Viability.

C Burke

This is unchanged from the current version, and is based on cautioning students that transfers may not always be available when they apply, or for the course they want, the fee place they want or the intake period they want.

N/A

074



67 Course transfers

(67) International students studying in Australia on a student visa are not eligible for course transfer: they must apply for admission to the other course. The only exception to this rule is where the student is applying for the honours stream of an integrated honours course.

This is a rather bald statement and might need a little more clarity/explanation about why internat. students are not eligible for course transfer and must reapply. Seems odd to me that the same 'rule' does not apply to domestic students who should surely apply for admission to another course so there can be a determination of whether entry/admission requirements are met. I understand CoEs are involved but there is a point of principle involved here too.

J Kirk

It might be a good idea to look at banning transfers and requiring all students to apply for admission to each course they want to enrol into, but this would require a major project to investigate all factors before it can be considered. In the meantime, transfers do not result in a new offer, and international students need a written offer for every course they enrol, and an offer is required as evidence for a COE, which must be recorded in PRISMS etc. Furthermore, course transfer is a risk factor in relation to GTE assessment, and we must follow the government reqs.

Moved to the procedure, without change.

73 Equity and access schemes

Equity and access schemes Need to ensure that all admitted students are academically suitable even those who go through these equity and access schemes.

E Miskelly

Add key words 'academically suitable' to this clause/section.

(70) Where a prospective student applies for admission via one of these equity entry programs and access schemes, the University will ensure that each applicant is academically suitable for their chosen study.


(73) The University has a number of admission pathways, entry programs, and access schemes available for domestic undergraduate applicants from underrepresented groups and individuals who have experienced disadvantage in their preparation for university study. These include: selection rank adjustments on the basis of location, subjects, and equity to offset factors that have impacted high school education for those applying on the basis of ATAR, and alternative pathways to study that can result in guaranteed entry to a range of undergraduate courses for those who may not yet meet the minimum entry requirements based on their current ATAR or equivalent score or adjusted selection rank.

Terminology review required to ensure alignment with Admissions Transparency common terminology, eg selection rank adjustments -> adjustment factors; adjusted selection rank -> selection rank etc

C Burke

These docs were written in reference to the TEQSA Admissions Transparency reqs and terminology, which is why they use the terms 'selection rank', 'selection rank adjustments', and 'adjustment factors'

N/A


(75) Specific consideration is given to the recruitment, admission, participation, and successful completion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, as well as for applicants of non-English speaking background, applicants with disabilities and applicants from geographically isolated areas or economically or socially disadvantaged backgrounds.

First Nations J

Brindle

HESF requires specific consideration be given to the admission of 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander' peoples, which is why this terminology is used here in the policy. CSU's terminology of 'First Nations' is used in the procedure, in reference to the First Nations entry program etc.

N/A

075

Bulletin Board Feedback – Admissions Procedure Page 1 of 10

Admissions Procedure – Bulletin Board Feedback (Sep-Oct 2021)


7 Applicants aged under 18 years

(7) International applicants intending to study in Australia on a student visa must be at least 18 years old at the time of accepting their offer of admission.

it would make more sense for the age to be considered at time of commencement of the course rather than at the time of application or acceptance of the offer

C Barril

This change of timing by which they must be 18yo has been a specific decision made to comply with ESOS and is one of the main reasons for the review and update of content within these Admissions Policy documents

N/A


(9) Applicants aged under 17 years must have their chosen study approved by the relevant Head of School before an offer can be made by the relevant Admissions Office, and will only be considered for admission in the following circumstances: a. they are not an international applicant intending to study in Australia on a student visa; b. the relevant Head of School is satisfied that the applicant’s welfare and safety will be ensured; c. the relevant course is to be delivered online or the student is enrolling in approved single subject study; d. the faculty permits the enrolment of under-aged students in the relevant course and/or subjects; and e. the applicant will provide written consent from their parent or guardian as a condition of their enrolment with the University.

must have their chosen study approved by the relevant Head of School should this Course Director instead? clause c - is this correct a student under the age of 17 cannot study a course on-campus?

C Barril

Yes, this is not a rule change, as it is stated in the current version of this policy published online which was approved by Senate in 2019. This rule means that we can better ensure the safety of students who are 16 years and younger by not having them on campus where there are bars that serve alcohol and where they are surrounded by adults who do not have WWCs

N/A


(10) Where an under-aged applicant is made an offer of admission, the Admissions Office will inform the Division of Student Success (DSS) and the Office of Student Safety and Wellbeing (OSSW), who will coordinate arrangements for the student’s welfare and safety.

rather than when the offer is made, should this when the offer is accepted as a student may not accept their offer in which there is no need to inform other divisions. Also, if the Course Director is not part of the Admission process, then they need to be made aware once the offer is made or accepted.

C Barril Updated as requested

(10) Where an under-aged applicant accepts an offer of admission, the Admissions Office will inform the Division of Student Success (DSS) and the Division of Security, Safety and Wellbeing (DSSW), who will coordinate arrangements for the student’s welfare and safety in consultation with the relevant Course Director.

12

Acceptable English language proficiency tests and providers

(12) Applicants who do not meet these published requirements may submit a written request for a waiver with evidence explaining how they have achieved the equivalence of these English language proficiency requirements for admission. These requests will be reviewed and decided by the relevant authority below:

I question the need for this provision. If it must be included for reasons that escape me there needs to be oversight of the process by the PDVCA and/or Academic Senate given that exceptions to approved admission requirements are allowed. This is a matter of academic quality/academic risk and consistency in decision making is essential. This practice seems to me to be out of kilter with the stated purpose in the Policy related to fair, transparent etc decision making.

J Kirk

This was added on request of the Domestic admissions team, as it is an existing process that happens on request, known as the 'ELP Waivers' application process, that was not referred to in these documents before now. For transparency purposes, it was requested that we add this information to the procedure.

N/A

076



29 Deferred admission

(29) Domestic applicants who are made an offer of admission may be eligible to apply for deferment, in courses where this is available, if they do so before the first census date in their course. The following exceptions apply: a. the relevant Executive Dean or delegate has decided the course will not allow deferment; b. the course will not be available in the later intake; or c. the course admission requirements will have changed by the later intake, so that the applicant will no longer be eligible.

clause c - this may not be known at the time the student applies for deferment

C Barril

In cases where Part C is known at the time though, this clause allows deferrals to be declined for that reason. This is unchanged from the current version of the Admissions docs, so it is not new content or anything.

N/A


(30) Applicants can defer an offer of a place in one course for up to 12 months. If an applicant’s request to defer an offer to a later teaching period is approved, they cannot apply to defer the offer for a second time.

does this mean that although a student can defer for 12 months, if another student decides to only defer for 6 months, they then cannot defer a second time to make it a 12 month deferment? this does not seem equitable.

C Barril

Yes, this clause, which is unchanged from the current version, means that each student is only able to defer their offer of admission once for each course, and they may choose for how long they want to defer. If they want to commence study in a course and they are unable to resume a deferred offer as their deferral has lapsed, they can always just submit a new application for admission for that course later on, when they are ready to study (which one would assume is likely to be successful if it was successful not too long ago). If their future application for admission to that course isn't successful for any reason due to the passage of time, then that reason would have prevented the deferral as well.

N/A


(31) The Executive Director, Students or delegate approves all domestic applications for deferment, except those for higher degree by research programs, which are approved by the Executive Dean on the advice of the principal supervisor and Sub Dean (Graduate Studies).

Note there will not be a Sub Dean (Graduate Studies) by July 2022 as this position is unfortunately being disestablished as part of Sustainable Futures.

C Barril

We are aware of this, as we were advised to remove all refs to Sub Deans and replace them with Associate Deans, but then this advice was reversed and they requested that we put the Sub Deans back in, as decisions about which role(s) will take over each Sub Dean task have not been finalised. Therefore, these Sub Dean clauses will be managed via the standard process for all policy documents when positions change, which is a placeholder mechanism in the system that can be used to find and replace each reference to this position and replace with a new position, once the central policy team are advised of what to change them to.

N/A

077



49

Admission to articulated sets with multiple entry points

(49) Where an articulated set of courses has multiple entry points (that is where admission is available for lower courses within the set as well as higher courses): a. applicants may apply for admission to any course in the set for which they meet the entry requirements; and b. as they complete each course in the sequence, they must apply for admission to each next course of the articulated set by the same process as other applicants, unless they were made a nested set of offers which includes an offer of admission to the next course(s) within the articulated set (see below).

clause b. they must apply for admission to each next course of the articulated set by the same process as other applicants - does this include course transfer as if the curse is not competitive entry, this is how students apply to enter the higher course in the sequence, not the same as a firsttime admission.

C Barril

If they want to transfer between any two eligible courses, then they may apply for a transfer anytime (whether they are in articulated set or not), unless they are in their first period of enrolment or they have completed all of the subjects required for completion of their current course. In such cases, they must apply for admission to another course instead (whether they are in an articulated set or not). If they want to complete each course before enrolling in the next one, then they are not eligible for a course transfer, but they can submit a new application for admission to the next course instead. Applying for admission via the same process as other applicants is the same each time a student does it, so it does not matter if it is a firsttime admission or not, its still a new application for admission to a course. Perhaps there is confusion here with nested offers to each course in a set, where enrolment in each course is done on the student's behalf as they complete the previous course, without their having to submit an application for admission, as they already have an offer for each course in the set as an outcome of original application for admission.

N/A

55


(55) The two courses must be considered compatible by the relevant faculties: that is, they do not overlap substantially or already exist as a combined course.

how do you define "they do not overlap substantially"? this is subjective. students can complete 2 courses concurrently as long as it fits within the credit policy, i.e., complete a minimum of 8 subjects in a course (so up to 2/3 of the course can be credited, and that is substantial overlap to me).

C Barril

If a student wants to undertake concurrent study in two courses, they must complete both courses in full, if they want to graduate from them both. Credit cannot be applied between two courses differently because they are concurrent enrolments, the same rules apply either way. The same credit cannot be used to graduate from two different courses (outside of an articulated set), so any subjects completed as part of one course cannot be used as credit towards another course, unless the student withdraws from the first course before completing it. In such a case the credit from the first course and the study from their second course would combine to allow the student to graduate from the second course alone, with one award. But concurrent enrolments are supposed to be separate, so any credit form one course should not be eligible for the second course anyway, as they are meant to be in different disciplines.

N/A

56


(56) Where the two courses have majors or specialisations in common, students may be permitted to enrol in the courses concurrently but must complete a distinct major or specialisation in each course.

would different be better/clearer than distinct C Barril Agree, changed as suggested

(56) Where the two courses have majors or specialisations in common, students may be permitted to enrol in the courses concurrently but must complete a different major or specialisation in each course.

078



59


(59) Once they have approval to enrol concurrently in a second course, current students must apply for admission directly to the University, and their application will be assessed using the same entry criteria as all other applicants for that course.

this is different to current practice. Students apply for concurrent study, and it at this time assessed.

C Barril Yes, this has been removed. N/A

61 Applicants with failed results

(61) Applicants must normally wait 12 months from the end-date of the most recent failed subject before their application will be considered if they have:

this looks new. normally - so when does this not apply? C Barril

This is taken from the current policy, and has been moved into the procedure. I have discussed this with Head of Admissions, and we have removed 'normally' and refined the criteria to failing more than 50% instead of 50% or more.

(61) Applicants must wait 12 months from the end-date of the most recent failed subject before their application will be considered if they have:

61 Applicants with failed results

(61) Applicants must normally wait 12 months from the end-date of the most recent failed subject before their application will be considered if they have:

How does Admissions or the Schools involved in selection know if a student has done a. or b.?

J Brindle

They assess each applicant's submitted transcripts, and will decline admission if the student failed more than half of their subjects within the past 12 months.

N/A

67

Applicants subject to exclusion for unsatisfactory progress or misconduct

(67) Domestic students excluded from a course, who have not been excluded entirely from study at the University, may apply for admission to another course. These applicants must provide evidence that the circumstances that impaired their academic progress will not affect their performance in the new course.

should it be mentioned here, as is in the academic progress policy/procedure, that students cannot apply to another course that is in the same discipline? or with... substantial overlap ;)

C Barril Unfortunately I can find no reference to this in the current Academic Progress Procedure, or would add a link and reference here to that document.

N/A

70


(70) A student may apply for readmission to have their course enrolment reinstated where the following conditions are met: a. They withdrew from their course enrolment within 12 months before the start date of the teaching period in which they wish to resume study. b. The course: i. has not changed its entry requirements since they withdrew; ii. has not suspended intakes; iii. is not full; and iv. does not require competitive assessment of admission applications. c. If the student was not making satisfactory academic progress, or the course requirements have changed, the relevant Course Director has approved the reinstatement.

clause c. the relevant Course Director has approved the reinstatement should this be the CD has to approve the reinstatement? is this clause actually needed as it is covered by clause 72?

C Barril This was a duplication based on moving some of the content across from the policy, thank you, part c has now been removed and the clause refined and clarified.

(72) For a course to be eligible to accept readmission by reinstatement of enrolment from students who have recently withdrawn from it within the past 12 months or less, it must not: a. have any changes to its entry requirements since the student was admitted into it, b. have suspended or discontinued intakes, c. be full, or d. require competitive assessment of admission applications.

079



72


(72) Where the course requirements have changed, or the student has an academic progress at-risk status, the relevant Course Director will assess the application for readmission and decide whether the enrolment can be reinstated.

How do admissions determine whether the course requirements have changed or if the student has an academic at risk status? do they contact the CD to check the first point and the academic progress unit to check the second? Also is at risk the correct term as we have moved from at risk/exclusion status to stage 1/2/3 status?

C Barril

The Admissions Office forward these applications to the Enrolment team for processing, who are able to see the academic progress status of each student as part of their assessment, and whether the course is flagged as needing a CD decision due to competitive entry or for any other reason, such as entry reqs being changed, which may only be relevant if the student does not meet them anymore.

(73) Where the course requirements have changed, or the student was not making satisfactory academic progress, the relevant Course Director will assess the application for readmission and decide whether or not to approve the reinstatement of enrolment in the course.

73 Course transfers

(73) Course transfer applications (and any related credit transfer applications) are processed by the relevant Admissions Office after being assessed by the Course Director, Associate Dean (Academic) or Executive Dean, by criteria and under delegations approved under the authority of Academic Senate.

CTs are processed by the Enrolment team now instead of by the Admisions Office.

E Miskell

y

Replace ref to the Admissions Office with ref to Student Administration

(78) Course transfer applications (and any related credit transfer applications) are processed by Student Administration after being assessed by the Course Director, Associate Dean (Academic) or Executive Dean, in accordance with the delegations and criteria approved under the authority of Academic Senate.

73 Course transfers

(73) Course transfer applications (and any related credit transfer applications) are processed by the relevant Admissions Office after being assessed by the Course Director, Associate Dean (Academic) or Executive Dean, by criteria and under delegations approved under the authority of Academic Senate.

is Associate Dean (Academic) or Executive Dean correct? they don't process course transfers, only the CDs do.

C Barril

This clause indicates that transfers can be assessed by any of those roles, so it could be the CD, or the ADA, or the ED. This is unchanged from the current version approved by Senate, so it may be there for cases where the CD is unavailable.

N/A

74 Course transfers

(74) To be eligible for course transfer, a student must: a. be a domestic student or be a non-resident student (not studying in Australia on a student visa), b. have an active course enrolment status, c. not be in their first teaching period of study in the course, d. not be eligible to graduate from their current course, and e. not be seeking to transfer from a full fee place (FFP) to a Commonwealth-supported place (CSP) See the Enrolment Policy and Procedure for more information about FFP and CSP fee places.

Need to state that transfers cannot be made between ugrad and pgrad coyurses

E Miskell

y Add new sub clause as 74 part F, as requested by Erin M

(79) To be eligible to apply for course transfer, a student must: a. be a domestic student or be a non-resident student (not studying in Australia on a student visa), b. have an active course enrolment status, c. not be in their first teaching period of study in the course, d. not be eligible to graduate from their current course, e. not be requesting a transfer between an undergraduate course and a postgraduate course (or vice versa), and f. not be seeking to transfer from a full fee place (FFP) to a Commonwealth-supported place (CSP). See the Enrolment Policy and Procedure for more information about FFP and CSP fee places.

080



74 Course transfers

(74) To be eligible for course transfer, a student must: a. be a domestic student or be a non-resident student (not studying in Australia on a student visa), b. have an active course enrolment status, c. not be in their first teaching period of study in the course, d. not be eligible to graduate from their current course, and e. not be seeking to transfer from a full fee place (FFP) to a Commonwealth-supported place (CSP) See the Enrolment Policy and Procedure for more information about FFP and CSP fee places.

What is the definition of not being eligible to graduate from their current course? For example if a medical student from UNSW wants to transfer to the Doctor of Medicine program what would make them not eligible to graduate?

J Brindle

Transfers are not permitted into the Doctor of Medicine (perhaps you are thinking of articulated sets, or a course that must be completed to meet the admission reqs for entry to DocMed? These are different to a transfer though). The definition of being eligible to graduate from their current course is if they have completed the subjects required for completion of that course. In such cases, students may apply for entry to the Doctor of Medicine by submitting an application for admission, which is assessed against the same criteria as a transfer, so there is no disadvantage either way. Also, if a UNSW student wants to transfer within UNSW then that may be permitted by UNSW, and would be handled by UNSW, outside the scope of these documents.

N/A

75 Course transfers

(75) Currently enrolled students who wish to apply for a course transfer must submit their application before the start of the first teaching period they want to transfer into. Applications for course transfer received after this date will be processed for the next available intake period for that course.

If the application is not approved before the census date of the teaching period recorded on the approval, the student will be enrolled into the next available teaching period for the course.

E Miskell

y I have added the requested additional info to this clause

(81) Currently enrolled students who wish to apply for a course transfer must submit their application the start of the first teaching period they want to transfer into. Applications for course transfer received after this date will be processed for the next available intake teaching period for that course. However, if the application is not approved before the census date of the requested starting teaching period, the transfer will not commence until the following teaching period, or when an intake is next available for that course.

75 Course transfers

(75) Currently enrolled students who wish to apply for a course transfer must submit their application before the start of the first teaching period they want to transfer into. Applications for course transfer received after this date will be processed for the next available intake period for that course.

there should be flexibility for articulated sets and when the student is already enrolled in the subjects that are required for the course they want to transfer into. this is especially important for students wanting to graduate with a lower award as their circumstances may change after the start of session and it is not in the student's best interests/experience to have to wait for the next available session, when this could mean they cannot graduate at the end of the year and need to wait 6 months to do so (at times without having to complete any more studies to qualify to the lower award).

C Barril

Students must not enrol in subjects outside of the structure of their current course enrolment (this is specifically banned, see the Enrolment Policy/Procedure), but assuming the subjects apply both to their current course and the transferred course, then there is no issue waiting til the next teaching period then if a transfer is not approved in time (if they are already enrolled in the right subjects anyway), depending on the credit limits etc. GradLA is not the same as a course transfer, so this section does not apply to GradLA applications. Students moving up in articulated sets do so by submitting a new application admission once they complete their current course. They may choose to transfer if they want to change before they complete, but is not the standard method of moving up an articulated set.

N/A

081



86

First Nations/Indigenous Entry Program

(86) Applicants must be either: What constitute "mature age"? Would it be anyone who is not a school leaver?

Y Guisard

Unable to clarify a strict definition of this term, but this is the term used in the online description of this program. I added a third option of 'having completed high school' in case mature age does not begin until a certain of years have passed since they completed Yr 12, and the reqs clearly state they must complete Yr 12 or be a mature age student, so this should clarify the reqs without changing them.

(95) Applicants must either be a mature age student, have completed high school, or be in their final year of high school to be eligible to apply for this program. Any offers made to high school students under this program will be conditional on completing Year 12 before commencing University study.

87

First Nations/Indigenous Entry Program

(87) Successful completion of this five-day entry program results in guaranteed entry to a broad range of eligible undergraduate courses listed online, although some may require additional course-specific tasks and entry requirements, such as an interview or portfolio submission.

Would applicants in the Doctor of Medicine need to satisfy this requirement?

Y Guisard

Only if the Doctor of Medicine is listed as one of the courses that this entry program is eligible for (which it isn't).

N/A

90

UAC School Recommendation Scheme

(90) Domestic applicants who are high school students may be made an early offer of a place before their final Higher School Certificate (HSC) or equivalent results are known, on the basis of: a. their senior high school academic record; and b. a satisfactory recommendation from their school.

Potential inclusion for consistency with CSA - Some courses may have limited quota avialable for admission via the SRS progam.

C Burke I have added a clause stating this now, as requested.

(103) Faculties will each year recommend courses to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for inclusion in the scheme for the following year’s intake. Some courses may have limited quota available for admission via the UAC Schools Recommendation Scheme.

94 Charles Sturt Advantage

(94) The Charles Sturt Advantage early offer scheme is intended to supplement applicants’ scores in previous study with an assessment of their resilience, empathy, initiative and writing skills.

How about mature-age applicants? CSA was supposed to include those students, but it seems it is now just School Leavers.

C Barril Charles Sturt Advantage is based on an assessment of Yr 11 results and is only open to Yr 12 students.

N/A

97 Charles Sturt Advantage

(97) Applicants are assessed on the basis of their predicted ATAR, against the published ATAR cut off for particular courses. Course Directors may choose to take an applicant’s soft skills assessment result into account when deciding whether or not to make an offer to an applicant.

it is interesting that CDs be mentioned here as in practice CDs are not involved in the CSA admission process, unless a student is borderline on the predicted ATAR and we are contacted by the CSA team.

C Barril Head of Admissions has advised that CDs are involved in the CSA admission process.

N/A

99


(99) Domestic applicants applying for undergraduate study on the basis of ATAR or equivalent may be eligible for adjustments to their assessed admissions selection rank for one or more of the following factors: a. regional location; b. subjects completed in pre-university study, where these are identified as eligible for specific courses; and c. equity, through special consideration for admission due to disadvantage to offset factors that have impacted high school education and preparation for university study.

could we specify that selection ranking may not always apply to competitive courses

Y Guisard

I have added a clause advising some courses may not be included or may have limited quota through this scheme to this section now, as requested.

(110) Faculties will each year recommend courses to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for inclusion in this scheme for the following year’s intake. Some courses may have limited quota available for admission via selection rank adjustments.

082



99


(99) Domestic applicants applying for undergraduate study on the basis of ATAR or equivalent may be eligible for adjustments to their assessed admissions selection rank for one or more of the following factors: a. regional location; b. subjects completed in pre-university study, where these are identified as eligible for specific courses; and c. equity, through special consideration for admission due to disadvantage to offset factors that have impacted high school education and preparation for university study.

b assumes that the work that has been done to make this possible actually eventuated in having subject adjustment factors, however it didn't. I am talking with the Admissions Manager to see whether we can pick this up again.

C Barril Subject adjustment factors do exist, but only for UAC applicants.

N/A

101 Location adjustment

(101) Applicants for internal undergraduate study will receive a location adjustment of 5 equivalent ATAR points to their admission selection rank automatically (without needing to apply for it) if they: a. are completing or recently completed Year 12 in a high school or TAFE college in a regional or remote area; or b. are a non-Year 12 applicant and live in a regional or remote area.

recently should be defined, e.g. 2 years. location adjustment should only apply to clause a. e.g. it does not make sense to apply adjustment to a nonschool leaver living in the region who would have completed their studies in a metropolitan high school.

C Barril Location adjustments apply based on the location of study for school leavers or residence for mature age students.

N/A

102 Subject adjustments

(102) An applicant for an undergraduate course will receive a subject adjustment of up to 10 equivalent ATAR points to their admissions selection rank automatically (without needing to apply for it) if they: a. are applying through the University Admissions Centre (UAC); b. have completed, within the year of application or the previous year, Year 12 in a high school or TAFE college; and c. have gained at least a specified minimum band in an HSC subject (or equivalent) that is specified as relevant to the course applied for.

see comment to clause 99. this is not currently in place. C Barril Actually, subject adjustment factors do exist, but only for UAC applicants, which may be why it seems like they don’t exist anymore.

N/A

103 Equity adjustments

(103) The University provides the opportunity for domestic undergraduate applicants who have been disadvantaged in their preparation for University study to apply for special consideration for admission in the form of adjustments to their admissions selection rank on the basis of equity. Applicants with the below types of disadvantage can receive an adjustment to their selection rank of up to 7 equivalent ATAR points, where the faculty permits selection rank adjustments in the course.

i had to assess one of those, but I only got the form, there were no adjustment factors. Admissions needs to add the adjustment factors before sending those applications.

C Barril

The disadvantage factors are listed on the form, the SCA form, perhaps they sent the wrong form? Either way, the factors are also listed online as part of the access schemes info, and in this very procedure document.

N/A

083



115 (115) The Student Liaison Officer (Elite Athletes and Sport):

Is this considered for all courses at CSU? J

Brindle No, only for courses decided by each faculty, as with all access schemes. I have added a clause to this effect.

(128) Faculties will each year recommend courses to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for inclusion in this scheme for the following year’s intake. Some courses may have limited quota available for admission via the elite athletes and performers special consideration access scheme.

118

(118) Before a faculty supports an application to admit a person to higher degree by research (HDR) candidature, there must have been a discussion between the applicant and their proposed principal supervisor or the relevant Sub Dean (Graduate Studies) or delegate to:

Sub Dean (Graduate Studies) will no longer exist come July 2022 C Barril

Sub Dean references will be updated once it is determined which tasks will be transferred to which positions, via the standard placeholder replacement process in the policy management system, undertaken by the central policy team when there is a restructure like this.

N/A

126

(126) Faculties must inform the relevant Admissions Office of: a. the maximum number of non-award enrolments permitted in each subject; and b. subjects in which non-award enrolment is not available.

we do clause b, but never heard of clause a - is this new? C Barril This is unchanged from the current version of this procedure, approved by Senate.

N/A

128 Single subject study

(128) Subjects available for single subject enrolment are listed on the study web page.

can you add a clause explaining that when a SSS has pre-requisite(s), the applicant will need to provide evidence in their application for SSS that they meet the pre-requisite(s), and this will be assessed by the relevant SC or CD?

C Barril Requested information has been added to this section of the procedure (and is already included in the policy)

(139) The relevant Admissions Office is responsible for admission and enrolment of students into single subject study, in consultation with the relevant Subject Coordinator and Course Director, as required. (140) Subjects available for single subject enrolment are listed on the study web page, and applicants must meet the minimum entry requirements listed in the Admissions Policy for admission to each single subject, including any pre-requisite subjects.

137


(137) Academic staff who apply for admission to a course of the University, or to enrol in a subject of the University, must declare in their application that they are an academic staff member of the University or of one of its partner or affiliate institutions.

Should this apply to all staff? Why only to academic staff? There could very well be professional and technical staff keen to upgrade their quals and there is no reason why these provisions should not apply to them also especially if they are supervised by academic staff or academic staff participate in their management, need workload adjustments etc.

J Kirk

Unsure if I understand this feedback exactly, but this section only describes restrictions on the admission of certain academic staff into their own schools/courses/subjects, due to conflicts of interest if they assessed themselves etc (ie: they are not being privileged for admissions and enrolment or anything like that - in fact its the opposite, as they are being restricted). Therefore this section does not impede any other types of staff from admission and updating their quals etc at all. Any workload adjustments that staff may be granted under certain circumstances are outside the scope of this policy, as they are a matter for HR etc.


084



138


(138) Such applications will be declined if the staff member is: a. a Head of School seeking admission to a course or enrolment in a subject taught by their school or managed by their school but taught by a partner or affiliate institution; b. a Course Director seeking admission to a course they are leading; c. an academic staff member seeking enrolment in a subject in which they are teaching.

can you add other cases, such as an AHoS or Head of Discipline? C Barril

Not on the basis of this comment, no. However, if you feel this should be implemented as a new rule restricting such staff from enrolment at CSU, it would need to be raised formally and put to Academic Senate.

N/A

085

Item 10: Draft 2020 – 2021 University Student Performance Report

PURPOSE

To provide the University Research Committee with the Draft 2020 - 2021 University Student Performance Report for consultation and feedback prior to final submission to Academic Senate.

RECOMMENDATION

The University Research Committee resolves to:

Review the Draft 2020 – 2021 University Student Performance Report and provide feedback and guidance, with particular reference to the Higher Degree by Research section of the report.

KEY ISSUES

1. Background

The Draft 2020 - 2021 University Student Performance Report is an annual institution-wide report that includes Faculty and institution level actions. The Faculty Reports included in the report have been approved by the respective relevant Faculty Boards. The feedback from the Faculty Boards has been included in this version of the report.

This report provides guidance on key achievements and focus areas for improvements. Whilst the full breadth of the performance outcomes were comprehensively analysed, this report focuses on four key areas for attention, which were chosen by aligning the TEQSA Provider Risk Assessment results, University Strategy, University Top 8 KPIs, and Aspirational Sector Benchmarks against the overall student performance metrics. This resulted in the following focus areas aligned to the key University KPIs:

1. Student Progress: Commencing Progress (and attrition)

2. Student Advocacy: Student Experience, Teaching Quality and Overall Satisfaction

3. Financial Stability: Course Profile Quality

4. Research Quality (Q1/Q2 Journal Articles): Increase enrolments of Higher Degree byResearch students.

Under Standard 5.3 (Monitoring, Review and Improvement) of the Higher Education Standards Framework, universities are required to regularly analyse progress rates, attrition rates and completion times/rates; and Delivery with Other Parties (Standard 5.4.2), which covers compliance by partners with the Higher Education Standards Framework.

On 3 April 2019, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) advised Charles Sturt of conditional registration. Condition 2 requires Academic Senate to provide Council with a report on the outcomes of the comprehensive diagnostic analysis of rates and trends in student performance reporting including attrition, progression, minimum course completion times, and variations in the attainment of course learning outcomes and grade distributions. Academic Senate must also ensure the development of comprehensive action plans and undertake periodic monitoring of the effectiveness of any interventions.


086

2. Current Status

This report is also being considered by the University Learning and Teaching Committee and University Courses Committee prior to final submission to Academic Senate. Feedback from these committees will be incorporated within the final report. The cycle of reporting for 2019 - 2020 for actions is currently progressing through management and governance approval and will be incorporated in Appendix 1, following approvals of the 2019 - 2020 actions by the Executive Leadership Team (previously VCLT) and Academic Senate in November.


After examination and feedback from the Academic Senate subcommittees – University Learning and Teaching Committee, University Courses Committee, and University Research Committee – the report will be subject to an Executive Review before being finalised and submitted to Academic Senate for consideration. COMPLIANCE

Legislative Compliance This decision contributes to compliance with Standard 5.3 of the Higher Standards Framework 2021

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with the Academic Quality Policy

RISK ASSESSMENT

Risk appetite according to the Risk Appetite Statement.

Charles Sturt University has a Low Appetite and willingness to take risks with the potential to compromise the University course delivery, accreditation of courses, academic integrity and educational standards. Charles Sturt University considers risks related to course delivery and quality from third party providers to be captured within its low willingness to take risks in the teaching and learning category.


This decision sits within the current risk appetite as the annual student performance report mitigates the risk for Charles Sturt University.

ATTACHMENTS A. Draft 2020 - 2021 University Student Performance Report

Prepared by: Alice Roberts, Associate Director, Portfolio Engagement and Deborah Munns, Manager, Portfolio & Projects, Office of the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)

Cleared by: Professor John Germov, Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)

.

087





DRAFT

University Student Performance Report

Annual Report 2020 - 2021 Provost & Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) Charles Sturt University

088

Provost & Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) | University Student Performance Report Page 2 of 205

Executive Summary

Purpose

This report addresses the Higher Education Standards Framework – Monitoring, Review and Improvement Standard 5; and Delivery with Other Parties Standard 5.4 and has been prepared by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) in conjunction with the Office of Planning and Analytics, three Faculties and Research Office.

This report will provide guidance to Academic Senate on key achievements and focus on areas for improvements having identified causes and actions to address. Where identification has not been achieved clear recommendations are made towards identification and subsequent actions. Whilst the full breadth of the metrics was comprehensively analysed, the attention of this report is made on the attrition (and progress) rates, graduate satisfaction indicators and teaching quality given the regulators assessment in these areas and the strategic focus for improvement on ‘Our Students’.

COVID-19 Impact

Student performance metrics have been impacted to varying degrees by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Charles Sturt adapted learning and teaching arrangements in response to government mandated restrictions and students who were enrolled to study On-Campus were required to study online for the majority of the year. Note that that officially reported attendance modes that form the basis of this report were not changed to reflect this temporary modification. The retention of original study modes has enabled analysis of the impacts of COVID on the On-Campus cohort that was ‘forced’ online, a summary over the overall effects is group to key metric focus areas:

Commencing Progress (and Attrition)

• Attrition increased for the On-Campus Undergraduate cohort, particularly for International students,however, Online attrition improved. Similarly, completions decreased for the On-Campus cohort withInternational students impacted to a greater degree.

• Attrition increased for the international cohort with onshore students impacted to a greater degree

than students enrolled offshore. Onshore undergraduate students experienced the highest rate of

attrition.

Student Experience Survey: Overall Satisfaction and Teaching Quality

• The commencing On-Campus Undergraduate cohort reported a serious decline in overallsatisfaction compared to both the previous year’s cohort and their Online counterparts. In contrast,satisfaction with teaching quality during 2020 declined only marginally with two notable exceptions:the On-Campus cohort from the Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences and the FirstNations cohort.

• The commencing onshore cohort studying at the undergraduate level reported an improvement inboth overall satisfaction and satisfaction with teaching quality compared to both the previous year’scohort and their postgraduate counterparts

Graduate Outcomes

• Graduate full-time employment decreased across the sector for Undergraduate students, butCharles Sturt rates appear to have been severely impacted in particular Fields of Education, mostnotably, Creative Arts.

• Graduate full-time employment decreased across the sector, but undergraduate students enrolled at

CSU Study Centres appear to have been severely impacted.

Due to the wide-ranging impact of COVID-19 on student performance metrics in 2020, this report will limit commentary on the effect of the pandemic to cohorts that have been particularly impacted and are out of step with university results, the RUN benchmark, and where relevant, sector results.

089



TEQSA Provider Risk Rating

Risk to Students

Actions were effective overall from previous years efforts as we have successfully changed the ‘Risk to Students’ from ‘moderate’ to ‘low’ in the past year. Despite this the attrition rate remains ‘moderate’ and a as a result remains a priority focus area for improvement.

Risk to Financial Position

Unfortunately, but expectedly the ‘Risk to Financial Position’ changed from ‘low’ to ‘moderate’. Whilst viability is mainly attributable to operational effectiveness (and COVID-19), the Sustainable Futures Program demonstrated the linkage and circular nature between quality, it’s impact to satisfaction and thus growth and we enacted a number of actions associated to the course profile to improve quality. The course profile remains a priority focus area for improvement and as a result, course profile has been included as a new section in this report.

The 2020 Provider Risk Assessment is provided in Appendix 9.

Study Group Australia

Due to the recent decision by Charles Sturt University to not extend the agreement with Study Group Australia beyond December 2022, and the subsequent decision by Study Group Australia to cease intakes at the Study Centres after September 2021, actions aimed at improving enrolment decisions have not been considered in this report. Teaching quality, and improving outcomes for currently enrolled students, will be monitored in action AS/77 in the Faculty Plan as a standing work plan item at the Study Centre Academic Management Committee meetings, reporting to the Faculty Board.

Teaching quality in particular will be regularly monitored during 2022 via action FOBJBS -1 in the 2020 - 2021 plan which includes staff induction and peer reviews, by Charles Sturt academic and Division of Learning and Teaching staff, of teaching quality.

Attrition rate continues to be a concern for Undergraduate and Postgraduate students and concern has increased as the rate has doubled. This has been a compounding impact of COVID-19 Pandemic and the regulatory issues.

The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences and Study Group Australia have been successful in the last year by:

• Completing the evaluation and benchmarking of English Proficiency requirements for admissions.

• Lifting both the Student satisfaction and teaching quality metrics for the undergraduate cohort to beabove their respective RUN benchmarks

• Postgraduate commencing progress rates are now above RUN benchmark

• The disparity seen between campuses in 2019 has largely been resolved for Postgraduate students

2021-2022 Priority Focus Areas for Improvement

The priority focus areas for improvement have been selected by aligning the TEQSA Provider Risk Assessment results, University Strategy, University Operational Metrics, Aspirational Sector Benchmarking results against the overall results and themes from the Student Performance metrics. As a result, the following metrics are a focus of this report (aligned to Top 8 Key Performance Indicators):

1. Student Progress: Commencing progress rate (and attrition)

Overall progress rates need to lift marginally to achieve the aspirational target of the third quartile of progress rates and with the trajectory already positive with an overall increase in progress rates in the last year in Undergraduate and Postgraduate students.

Attrition rates need to decrease in the On-Campus Postgraduate cohorts (including Third Party Providers).

090


2. Student Advocacy: Student Experience Survey: Teaching Quality (and Overall Satisfaction)

Overall teaching quality rates need a concentrated effort to achieve the aspirational target of the fourth quartile. This is a challenge given the impact COVID-19 is having particularly on the overall student satisfaction rates (and comprehensively). Undergraduate on-campus students in the main are reflective of this impact and requiring attention. Whilst teaching quality for online students is at a good rate, concern is held by management that the combined impact of a more competitive market, may be driving a lift in student expectations and impact these good results in the immediate future.

3. Financial Stability: Course Profile Quality

All eligible courses had a health assessment of performance for 2021, with overall results and Annual Course Health Reports presented to the August Faculty Board meetings.

The Course and Subject Optimisation Project was a significant body of work undertaken throughout 2020

and into 2021 that examined the course profile using the four quadrants of the Optimisation Evaluation

Framework (strategic fit, profitability, quality, and market orientation). This resulted in a range of decisions

related to the course profile made in 2020 and 2021 which are likely to impact student performance

positively, however we expect the courses in phase-out/teach-out to experience issues over the coming

year. The impacts are yet to be realised in the data given the timing of availability and will be reported in next

years’ report (when data is available).

4. Research Quality: Increase Higher Degree by Research Enrolments (Q1/Q2 Journal Articles)

The 2030 University Strategy, Research pillar has identified the need to increase the pipeline of Higher Degree by Research students to meeting research targets. In 2020, just over 430 students were enrolled in a Higher Degree by Research, with 95 of these students commencing in their course. Commencing enrolments have fallen by approximately 20% over the five-year period and continuing enrolments are down by more than 30% over the five-year period.

The Research Office identified that this issue is largely driven by the availability of scholarships. A review of scholarship funding and availability of scholarships has been undertaken during 2021. At the time of writing, a new scholarship strategy was being considered by the University leadership. In addition, a marketing strategy for HDR candidates is under development and an EOI process has been built into CRM to track student engagement and provide data to be analysed to assist with future directions in marketing.

In 2021, the faculties have added the Higher Degree by Research cohort to their reports for the first time. Analysis at the faculty level is conducted in the Faculty Student Performance Reports which form part of this overall University Student Performance Report.

Priority Student Cohorts

FIRST NATIONS

With First Nations student progress, attrition, completions, and student experience overall satisfaction have had improvements in some areas and declines in others, there is an overall trend whereby the disparity with non-First Nations students is widening, a university-wide focus is to remain for these students which is also in alignment with Charles Sturt 2030 University Strategy Plan.

The Key Operational Initiatives provides an overview of the significant changes and improvements that the Division of Student Success, First Nations Student Connect Team have achieved in the past year as well as the planning for implementation of further improvements such as the employment coaching program in 2022.

The three Faculties approached their comprehensive analysis with a specific focus on First Nations students and have identified a wide range of actions and initiatives aimed at supporting First Nations. The Dubbo campus was a particular focus for Faculties where two Faculties participated in the three-day timetable initiative in 2019, School of Policing and TAFE NSW collaboration to deliver improvements to the Indigenous Police Recruitment Our Way Delivered Program and a wide range of course level actions such as reviewing larger subjects for improvements.

Dubbo Campus caters to a significant cohort of First Nations students and whilst attrition substantially improved, along with completion rates, last year, student satisfaction and graduate satisfaction results remain a concern and are to remain a focus via the Student Experience Committee and Division of Student Success, Retention Team.

091


BASIS OF ADMISSION: VET (TAFE)

This is the largest admission cohort to online undergraduate courses, with nearly 2,000 commencing students each year and enrolments rising (~3% of load) and completions a clear decline trend for some time. This trend is followed by the On-Campus cohort and progress rates for the On-Campus cohort remain the lowest amongst all basis of admission. Whilst the majority of metrics are exceeding the RUN benchmarks for both study modes and they have demonstrated improvements in progress over the one- and five-years periods, there is a need to continue with a university- wide focus given the 2030 University Strategic imperatives and related equity targets and are to remain a focus via the Student Experience Committee, Faculties and Division of Student Success.

The three Faculties approached their comprehensive analysis with a specific focus on VET (TAFE) students and have identified a wide range of actions such as changing the order of subjects to ensure students are not overloaded with challenging assessments in their first year, negotiating with TAFE NSW to ensure combined assessments from TAFE and university integrated courses are not overwhelming to students, evaluation of crediting of Certificate 4 and 5, transfer of credit analysis and the Division of Student Success have been revising the TAFE transitional support material.

Refer to the 2021 – 2022 University-wide Actions Recommendations section of this report for initiative.

092


Contents

Purpose .......................................................................................................................................................... 2

COVID-19 Impact ........................................................................................................................................... 2

TEQSA Provider Risk Rating ......................................................................................................................... 3

Study Group Australia .................................................................................................................................... 3

2021-2022 Priority Focus Areas for Improvement ......................................................................................... 3

2021-2022 Focus Areas for Improvement ..................................................................................................... 8

Priority 1: Student Progress - Commencing Progress (and Attrition) ............................................................ 8

Priority 2: Student Advocacy - Student Experience Survey: Teaching Quality ............................................ 11

Priority 3: Financial Stability - Course Profile Quality .................................................................................. 13

Priority 4: Research Quality - Increase Higher Degree by Research Enrolments (Q1/A2 Journal Articles) 14

Actions and Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 15

2020 – 2021 Actions Summary .................................................................................................................... 15

2021 – 2022 University-wide Action Recommendations ............................................................................. 16

2030 University Strategy .............................................................................................................................. 17

Key Operational Initiatives and Focus Areas ............................................................................................... 18

1. Undergraduate Pathways ......................................................................................................................... 24

Diploma of General Studies ......................................................................................................................... 24

Charles Sturt University Pathways ............................................................................................................... 27

University Certificate in Workforce Essentials ............................................................................................. 28

2. Undergraduate ........................................................................................................................................... 29

Key Benchmarks .......................................................................................................................................... 29

Key Achievements and Highlights ............................................................................................................... 30

Focus Areas for Improvement ...................................................................................................................... 30

3. Postgraduate by Coursework ................................................................................................................... 36

Key Benchmarks .......................................................................................................................................... 36


Focus Areas of Improvement ....................................................................................................................... 38

4. Higher Degree by Research ...................................................................................................................... 44

Background .................................................................................................................................................. 44



5. Onshore Third Party Providers ................................................................................................................ 48

Overall Key Benchmarks.............................................................................................................................. 48

Charles Sturt Study Centres ........................................................................................................................ 50

Holmesglen TAFE ........................................................................................................................................ 52

6. Offshore Third Party Providers ................................................................................................................ 54

093


Key Benchmarks .......................................................................................................................................... 54

China Partners (Joint Cooperative Program) ............................................................................................... 55

Economic and Finance Institute (Cambodia) ............................................................................................... 56

Ming Hua ...................................................................................................................................................... 57

SPACE, University of Hong Kong ................................................................................................................ 57

Appendix 1. 2019-2020 Evaluated Actions ............................................................................................... 58

2019 Strategy Transition and 2020 Sustainable Futures Transformation Program .................................... 58

Action Summary Table ................................................................................................................................. 59

Action Plan ................................................................................................................................................... 60

Appendix 2. Faculty Student Performance Reports ................................................................................ 85

Appendix 3. Annual Course Reports ......................................................................................................... 188

Summary Report/Focus Areas ..................................................................................................................... 188

Recommended 2020 - 2021 Actions ............................................................................................................ 188

Appendix 4. Agents ..................................................................................................................................... 189



Appendix 5. Grade Distributions ............................................................................................................... 192

2019 Assurances ......................................................................................................................................... 192

Key Achievements ........................................................................................................................................192Focus Areas for Improvement ...................................................................................................................... 192

Appendix 6. Scope of the Student Performance Reporting .................................................................... 193

Scope of Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 91

Segmentations Examined ............................................................................................................................ 91

Key Reports and Data Referenced .............................................................................................................. 93

Appendix 7. Background Information ....................................................................................................... 196

Purpose and Focus of the Report ................................................................................................................ 94

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency ...................................................................................... 94

Organisational Assurance Framework ......................................................................................................... 96

Appendix 8. Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 201

Benchmarks ................................................................................................................................................. 201

Aspirational Sector Targets Approach ....................................................................................................... 201

Depth and Focus of Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 202

Assumptions and Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 203Issues and Emerging Risks ....................................................................................................................... 204

Appendix 9. TEQSA Provider Risk Assessment .................................................................................... 205

094


2021-2022 Focus Areas for Improvement

Priority 1: Student Progress - Commencing Progress (and Attrition)

Note: lower rates / decreases in progress are not a positive result for Charles Sturt.

Aspirational benchmark 87.7% being in the third quartile (2.5pp lift required).

Notes:

• The fourth quartile are almost exclusively Go8, with low percentages of online, low SES and students admittedbased on prior TAFE students).

• Attrition comparison has been included given the TEQSA Provider Risk Assessment rating remaining asmoderate and the correlation between the two metrics.

Progress On-Campus Online

RUN Benchmark 79.7% 73.1%

Charles Sturt 90.6% 79.8%

Cohort Breakdown

Progress On-Campus Online

Undergraduate (excl TPP) 87.5% 79.2%

Undergraduate (incl TPP) 88.8% 79.2%

Postgraduate (excl TPP) 95.2% 89.9%

Postgraduate (incl TPP) 91.6% 89.9%

UG PG

Third Party Providers 91.1% 91.5%

PT FT

HDR - -

Attrition On-Campus Online



Cohort Breakdown

Attrition On-Campus Online





UG PG


PT FT

HDR 6.5% 13.0%

RUN Benchmark and Charles Sturt today includes all course levels including non-award.

Refer to the Higher Degree by Research and Pathways sections of this report for benchmarking approach as this varies from the above.

Results

• Overall progress rates need to lift marginally to 87.7% to achieve the aspirational target of the thirdquartile of progress rates (approximately 6-7 pp) and there has been an overall increase in progressrates in the last year in Undergraduate and Postgraduate students. Attrition rates need to decrease inthe On-Campus Postgraduate (including Third Party Provider) cohorts.

• Undergraduate: for the On-Campus cohort progress rates has increased in 2020 with a 1.3pp rise,however the attrition rate increased 2.5pp to 18.6% (remains below RUN Benchmark). Online progresshas also improved considerably since 2015 (up 6.6pp), along with attrition rates declining to 31.5%(lowering 2.5pp), and below RUN Benchmark. However, the gap in progress between commencing On-Campus and Online students has increased to almost 10pp, compared to 6pp in 2019.Charles Sturt performs well when compared to the RUN benchmark group, however, On-Campusprogress for RUN group has been declining against overall sector results for the five-year period, to thepoint where the rate now sits approximately 7pp below the overall sector rate.

Refer to the Undergraduate section 2 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focusareas.

095


• Postgraduate: On-Campus cohort has increased progress rates dramatically in 2020 with a 24.5pp rise to 95.2% after fluctuating results in previous years. Attrition is of concern for On-Campus experiencing a slight improvement last year (2.8pp), however, overall decline trend (19.4pp over 5-years, is still present. Online progress has also improved, but to a lesser degree (+2.5pp), and 2020 is the first year in recent history that the On-Campus rate has overtaken the Online rate (95.2% and 89.9% respectively, (noting this is a small cohort). Charles Sturt performs well when compared to the RUN benchmark group, however, On-Campus progress can fluctuate (5 years range between 98.6% to 66.5%) and the RUN benchmark has dropped in the last year and sits ~10pp below the overall sector result.

Overall, this cohort has seen a decrease in attrition rates, with Online decreasing 2.6pp, however some attention could be paid to the On-campus remaining above the RUN benchmark, despite decreasing last year to 32.6% as some small cohorts in Information Technology and Society and Culture impacting considerably.

Refer to the Postgraduate section 3 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focus areas.

• Third Party Providers (onshore): On-campus Undergraduate progress for the cohort has risen sharply in the last year with a 9.1pp increase to 71.8%. Improvement in the progress rate came after three years of continual decline and the rate remains 3.6pp down over the five-year period and is well below the benchmark.

Holmesglen TAFE progress rates increased 12.8pp last year and are now above the RUN Benchmark (86.3%).

Postgraduate on-campus courses are only offered at Charles Sturt Study Centres.

Commencing progress rates are high at 91.6%, rising sharply in the last year (increased by 13pp) and now above the RUN benchmark (90.3%). The disparity seen between campuses has been resolved across the three SGA campuses.

Attrition increased by 29.1pp in the last 5-year period Charles Sturt Study Centre undergraduate students, with a very sharp increase experienced in 2018, it is similar in the postgraduate courses. This is reflective of the accreditation issues at Charles Sturt Study Centres and compounded by the effect of COVID-19 pandemic.

Refer to the Onshore Third Party Providers section 5 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focus areas.

• Third Party Providers (offshore): 99% of this cohort is China Partners and the undergraduate progress rate increased 8.3pp last year to 94.1%, now above the RUN Benchmark 86.1%.

Jilin University of Finance and Economics (JUFE) attrition rate has risen from zero in 2018 to 31.2% last year and requires a focus for improvement.

Postgraduate progress rates increased 21pp, to 84.2%, however remain below the RUN Benchmark of 90.3%. Note: only 7% of offshore cohort, 65-70 students.

Economic and Finance Institute, (only 35 enrols), progress rates are up from 58.6% to 84.2%. Whilst attrition increased over 3 years, 40.7%.

SPACE, University of Hong Kong, (only 44 enrols), remains above the RUN Benchmarks in both undergraduate and postgraduate progress rates, (attrition extremely low).

Refer to the Offshore Third Party Providers section 6 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focus areas.

• Agents: All agents have increasing attrition and declining completion rates for the undergraduate cohort of students. Refer to Appendix 4 Agents.

096


Key Achievements and Highlights

UNDERGRADUATE

• All three faculties improved online progress rates in the past year and are above the RUN benchmark.

• Students with high, medium, and low socio-economic status had improved progress rates for both On-campus and Online modes.

• First Nations students has improved progress rates for both On-Campus and Online modes.

POSTGRADUATE

• All three faculties improved On-campus and Online progress rates in the past year and are above the

RUN benchmark and all Fields of Education for online improved or stable.

• Students with high, medium, and low socio-economic status had improved progress rates for both On-

campus and Online modes.

THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS

• Onshore Undergraduate commencing progress improved to after three years of continual decline.

• Holmesglen TAFE progress rates are now above the RUN Benchmark (onshore undergraduate).

• Charles Sturt Study Centre postgraduate courses are now above the RUN Benchmark (onshore on-

campus) and the disparity seen between campuses has been resolved across the three campuses.

• Offshore undergraduate progress rate now above the RUN Benchmark.

097


Priority 2: Student Advocacy - Student Experience Survey: Teaching Quality

Note: lower rates / decreases in teaching quality are not a positive result for Charles Sturt.

Aspirational benchmark 82.6% being in the 4th quartile (1.3pp lift required).

Notes:

• The fourth quartile are almost exclusively Go8, with low percentages of online, low SES and students admitted based on prior TAFE students).

• Student Experience Survey: Overall Satisfaction has been included given the impact from COVID-19 and potential focus areas that may align with teaching quality focus for improvements.

Teaching Quality On-Campus Online



Cohort Breakdown

Teaching Quality On-Campus Online





UG PG


PT FT

HDR - -

Overall Student Satisfaction On-Campus Online



Cohort Breakdown

Overall Student Satisfaction On-Campus Online





UG PG


PT FT

HDR - -

RUN Benchmark and Charles Sturt today includes all course levels including non-award.

Refer to the Higher Degree by Research and Pathways sections of this report for benchmarking approach as this varies from the above.

Results

• Overall: teaching quality rates need a concentrated effort to achieve the aspirational target of the fourth quartile. This is a challenge given the impact COVID-19 is having particularly on the overall student satisfaction rates (and comprehensively). Undergraduate on-campus students in the main are reflective of this impact and requiring attention. Whilst teaching quality for online students is at a good rate, concern is held by management that the combined impact of a more competitive market, combined with a lift in student expectations may impact these good results in the immediate future.

The below commentary focusses on teaching quality in the main, overall satisfaction rates of concern are addressed in the cohort section of the report.

Refer to the Action and Recommendations section of this report for university-wide improvement focus on Student Experience Overall Satisfaction action.

• Undergraduate: teaching quality on-campus decreased 1.5pp last year, continuing the 5-year trend of decline (-4.1pp). Online teaching quality declined 1.9pp last year and remains relatively stable -0.7pp over 5 years. Both cohorts are below their respective RUN benchmarks 82.8% and 85.6% respectively.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences on-campus students experienced considerable declines in teaching quality (8.1%), requiring a focus for attention for improvements in courses within the Information Technology and Management and Commerce Fields of Education.

098


Faculty of Arts and Education on-campus and online broadly held steady, however Society and Culture on-campus teaching quality dropped 13pp last year.

Faculty of Science and Health on-campus students held steady as well, however their online cohort has the lowest teaching quality rates of the three with the Natural and Physical Sciences Field of Education significantly declining last year.

Refer to the Undergraduate section 2 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focus areas.

• Postgraduate both online and on-campus cohorts are above the RUN benchmarks and teaching quality for the Online cohort increased 2.7pp to 86.7%, whilst On-campus declined 1.4pp (noting the On-campus can be variable given low enrols 196 versus Online 9026).

All three Faculties improved their teaching quality in the past year with the Online cohort and above RUN benchmarks and only the Education Field of Education slightly below and the Faculty of Science, Agriculture, environmental and related studies area declining significant, but remained above the RUN benchmark.

Given the composition of the On-campus cohort, the Postgraduate section of this report addresses results, considerate of the variable nature of these results.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences on-campus students experienced large declines in teaching quality and requires a focus for attention for improvements in courses within the Information Technology and Management and Commerce Fields of Education. Noting that the online student cohorts in these Fields of Education are both above the RUN benchmarks.

Refer to the Postgraduate section 3 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focus areas.

• Third Party Providers (onshore): On-campus Undergraduate Charles Sturt Study Centre teaching quality improved by 6.7pp to 83.3% (along with overall satisfaction has increasing, 19.8pp to 81.8%). Both teaching quality and overall satisfaction now above the RUN benchmark (75.4% and 62.2% respectively).

Holmesglen TAFE teaching quality improved 11pp to 75%, however remains below the RUN benchmark of 80.9%.

Postgraduate on-campus course is only offered at Charles Sturt Study Centres. Both teaching quality (79.5%) and overall student satisfaction (69.4%) rates decreased against the previous year, but both remain above the RUN benchmarks (60.5% and 74.1% respectively). The decrease is mainly attributable to the Information Technology suite of courses and whilst remaining above the RUN benchmark have seen a gradual decline.

Refer to the Onshore Third Party Providers section 5 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focus areas.


UNDERGRADUATE

• Whilst the strong negative impact of COVID-19 on on-campus student satisfaction, all three faculties teaching quality only dropped marginally last year. Quite an achievement given the extra concerned effort by staff to move content and delivering online.

POSTGRADUATE

• Both online and on-campus cohorts are above the RUN benchmarks.

• All three Faculties improved their teaching quality in the past year with the Online cohort.

THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS

• Onshore On-campus Undergraduate Charles Sturt Study Centre teaching quality and overall

satisfaction improved last year with both now above the RUN benchmarks.

099


Priority 3: Financial Stability - Course Profile Quality

Annual Course Reports

All courses had an overall assessment of performance for 2021 were identified to undergo a deeper analysis using the optimisation framework. Course Health Reports were presented to the August Faculty Board meetings.

A total of 33 course health checks were completed:

Faculty

Faculty of Arts and Education 4

Faculty of Business, Justice & Behavioural Sciences 22

Faculty of Science and Health 7

Each health check typically reported performance for a single course however more than one course may be included where it was part of an articulated set or combined degree.

LARGEST COURSES

(Over 300 EFTSL)

The following courses have been identified as the largest in each Faculty. These courses need to ensure category 1 status is achieved and maintained within the Annual Course Report results.

Faculty of Arts and Education

• Bachelor of Education (Birth to 5 Years) (Category 1)

• Bachelor of Education (K – 12) (Category 2)

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) (Category 2)

• Bachelor of Social Work (Category 2)

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Science

• Associate Degree in Policing Practice (Category 1)

• Bachelor of Business Studies (Category 2)

• Bachelor of Information Technology (Category 3)

• Bachelor of Accounting (Category 3)

• Master of Professional Accounting (Category 2)

• Master of Information Technology (Category 1)

Faculty of Science and Health

• Bachelor of Medical Radiation Science (with specs) (Category 1)

• Bachelor of Physiotherapy (Category 1)

• Bachelor of Paramedicine (Category 1)

• Bachelor of Veterinary Biology/Bachelor of Veterinary Science (Category 1)

• Bachelor of Nursing (Category 2)

100


Course and Subject Optimisation

The Course and Subject Optimisation Project was a significant body of work undertaken throughout 2020

that examined the course profile using the four quadrants of the Optimisation Evaluation Framework

(strategic fit, profitability, quality, and market orientation). This resulted in a range of decisions related to the

course profile made in 2020 and 2021 which are likely to impact student performance, ideally to improve.

AS/77 Academic Senate set a specific action to include a monitoring report for 2021. This is to include

international students in order to assure students in phase-out/teach-out are supported given the increase in

this activity.

The majority of impact will be felt in next years’ report and a separate section for courses in phase-out/teach-

out will be included in the 2021 - 2022 University Student Performance Report. In the meantime, faculties

have identified the volume of courses, with each course and individual student being monitored to ensure

their path to graduation is monitored.

Faculty

Faculty of Arts and Education 13

Faculty of Business, Justice & Behavioural Sciences 40

Faculty of Science and Health 21

Priority 4: Research Quality - Increase Higher Degree by Research Enrolments (Q1/A2 Journal Articles)

The 2030 University Strategy, Research pillar has identified increasing Charles Sturt needs to increase the pipeline of Higher Degree by Research students as a key initiative to meeting research targets. In 2020, just over 430 students were enrolled in a Higher Degree by Research, with 95 of these students commencing in their course. Commencing enrolments have fallen by approximately 20% over the five-year period and continuing enrolments are down by more than 30% over the five-year period.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences was the only faculty to increase full time load and enrolments, however, experienced significant decline in part time students.

Faculty of Arts and Education experienced significant decline in full time load and enrolments, however part time remained relatively stable. Faculty of Science and Health follow a similar trend for full time students, however had significant increases in part time load and enrolments.

In 2021, the faculties have added the Higher Degree by Research cohort to their reports for the first time. Analysis at the faculty level is conducted in the Faculty Student Performance (see Appendix 2). Refer to the Higher Degree by Research section 4 of this report for identification of causes and improvement focus areas identified by the Research Office.

101


Actions and Recommendations

2020 – 2021 Actions Summary

A full summary of 2019-2020 actions is included in Appendix 1 2019 - 2020 Evaluated Actions. Academic Senate have governing oversight to assure the management committees are effective in monitoring and addressing areas of concern.

Responsible Management

2020 Number of Actions

Evaluated (New 2021 Action)

Remain Open (Action In Progress)

Evaluated (Recommend Closure)

EL^ 33 6 13 14

APLT# 23 1 12 10

PVO* 3 0 3 0

QUASAR`

Important:

* Provost Office became responsible for the Project Q actions and are all associated with improvements to the production of the report and associated practices. Since the introduction of the RUN benchmarks a number of actions were identified as being better than the relevant benchmark and the relevant action was closed (if there was no concern over 2019 results). Actions that were previously assigned to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Students) were transferred to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and managed by APLT.

^Executive Leadership Team actions are followed up by the Provost Office and tracked as part of the #Academic Portfolio Leadership Team (APLT) ensure the actions from various areas within the portfolio are completing actions including the Faculties and reporting improvements.

`At the Foresighting Committee meeting on 24 May 2021, the Acting Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) was requested to integrate QUASAR metrics with the key performance indicators in the Education Strategy. As a result, we have updated this years’ report to include summary indicators on QUASAR actions as part of the Faculty Student Performance Report.

REPORTING IMPROVEMENTS

Several reporting improvements were identified from last year and the following have been completed:

• Aspirational targets against the sector were approved and an introductory approach has been taken to these has been incorporated into this years’ report.

• Stronger alignment with University strategic and operational key performance indicators and measures.

• Stronger integration of QUASAR metrics.

The reporting actions are remaining open as only partial completion of each action item was achieved.

102


2021 – 2022 University-wide Action Recommendations

Academic Senate have governing oversight to assure the management committees are effective in monitoring and addressing areas of concern the following recommended actions are presented in this report for Academic Senate approval.

1. Office of Global Engagement and Partnerships to include a strategy or plan to address the four agents with Undergraduate student progress rates below the RUN benchmark as part of the 2030 University Strategy, International Pillar.

2. Student Experience Committee to develop a strategy, plan, or action to improve:

a. Dubbo Undergraduate On-Campus Student Experience Overall Satisfaction and Graduate Outcomes Full-Time Employment Rate decline

b. Undergraduate On-Campus Student Experience Overall Satisfaction with support services decline

c. Student admitted on the basis of VET (TAFE) qualification for Online and On-Campus support services

d. Report to be provided in the first quarter of 2022 reflective of the above, including identification of the cause and link to the respective support area responsible for improvement.

3. With the expansion of the reliance of the three Faculties on the Higher Education Pathways and Partnerships Program - Retention Project, an annual report is to be included as an annexure to the University Student Performance Annual Report. Refer to the Key Operational Initiatives and Focus Areas section below for 2020 – 2021 background and update.

2021 - 2022 Action Summary


New 2021 - 2022 Evaluated (New 2021 Action)

Remain Open (Action In Progress)

Total 2021 - 2022

ET 1 6 13 1

APLT 19 1 12 19

PVO 0 0 3 3

103


2030 University Strategy

Throughout 2021, the Strategy Office has led the Executive Leadership through the strategy planning process. This has results in the 2030 University Strategy (10-year vision).

In developing the strategy:

• Staff were engaged in the development of this with over 40 workshops held and approximately 350 staff involved

• Cross-functional deep dive teams were engaged on each of the strategy pillars, Research, Education/Students, Engagement, First Nations and International

• The Strategy Team engaged the enabling areas of the University in developing associated visions and plans and completed external stakeholder engagement

The strategic planning process involves three horizons:

1. 10 Year Plan: sets the long-term vision for the University 2. 3 Year Roadmap Plan: the roadmap to deliver an integrated approach with projects and change

management 3. 1 Year Operational Plan: execution of operational plans aligned to long-term vision and 3-year

roadmap

We are currently at horizon 2 and expect to complete this by the end of the year.

104


Key Operational Initiatives and Focus Areas

The following key operational initiatives and focus areas have been included as they are targeting areas of improvement that align to focus areas for improvement across the University. Reporting on these initiatives and focus areas is to the Executive Leadership Team or Academic Portfolio Leadership Team.

COVID-19 Impact and Response

The commencing On-Campus Undergraduate cohort reported a serious decline in Student Experience Overall Satisfaction compared to both the previous year’s cohort and their Online counterparts. In contrast, satisfaction with teaching quality during 2020 declined only marginally.

Multiple areas of the University continue to support activities in response to the COVID-19 Pandemic associated to learning and teaching, research, and students. It is noteworthy that these activities have been completed alongside and in addition to standard business as usual tasks, strategic projects, and all in the context of significant re-structures that took effect throughout 2020 and into 2021. Key activities include:

• Collaboration with Communications Team in the Office of the Vice Chancellor to ensure consistency of messaging to students

• First Nations Engagement and Leadership (i.e., Gulaay prioritised communication and inclusivity with Elders and increased virtual presence)

• Minimum standards and quality assurance of subject transitioning to online delivery

• Adjustments to a number of programs (i.e., HEPPP Retention Team, DLT Professional Learning YouTube)

• Extensive video production support

• Concerned student cohort support

• Online residentials schools

• Workplace changes

STUDENT EXPERIENCE COMMITTEE

Given that eight of the nine Field of Education in both Online and On-Campus experienced declines in Student Experience Overall Satisfaction, last year, and the correlation to Teaching Quality not prevalent, there is a University recommendation (page 17) aimed at bringing a closer focus from the Divisional and Enabling areas of the University on improving overall satisfaction in alignment to student performance reporting results.

Background

The Student Experience Committee was established in 2020 by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor Students as a management committee to ensure a single point of governance for all student experience activities, and specifically those which are covered by the Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF) and Education Services for Overseas Student (ESOS) legislation. Rationale for the establishment of the committee was that some of these activities fell outside the existing academic governance processes within the University.

In 2021, with the disestablishment of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor Students Portfolio, the committee responsibility transitioned to the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor Academic Portfolio. In June-July 2021 Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor Academic, Professor Janelle Wheat consulted key stakeholders (committee members) to determine the future need and purpose of the committee and a review of the Membership and Terms of Reference occurred given the important role the committee played in communicating student experience initiatives and issues and reviewing reports and action plans, in particular those related to the Student Voice Survey and the Net Promotor Score. The functions of the committee are to:

• Ensure the student experience is positive and contributes to the overall student success

• Ensure the student experience is positive and contributes to overall student success.

• Within the framework of relevant standards and policies, monitor and review reports and action plans from student experience operational areas, committees, sub-committees, working parties and projects so that issues are appropriately resolved.

• Inform the Student Communication team of potential emerging issues.

• Make recommendations to the Executive Leadership Team to facilitate an improved student experience.

105






Online Learning and Teaching

Whilst teaching quality for online students is at a good rate, concern is held by management that the combined impact of a more competitive market, may be driving a lift in student expectations and impact these good results in the immediate future.

Our commitment to the transformation of learning environments appears to be successful, particularly, for online, including transition of the transform online strategic program to ‘business-as-usual operations’ in Division of Learning Teaching in 2021. There is still a risk to be monitored as pressure remains on budget saving and achieving targets and there a transition issues with the retention of key staff in this team as all areas of the Division balance usual operations and support to existing and emerging strategic priorities.

Whilst this work is commendable with solid improvements in progress and attrition notable in a few cohorts, increased competition in the domestic market has resulted from COVID-19, with sandstone universities turning their attention to the domestic online market. This is anticipated to represent a future challenge for Charles Sturt.

Scholarly Environmental Model

The Scholarly Environmental Model action plan associated to improve teaching quality and with efforts being recognised and realised over the next 2 to 3 years.

Improving retention, completion, and success in higher education

The Higher Education Standards Panel Report identifies attrition as an issue of concern for the government and the sector currently and historically. The report was released in 2018 and since this time Charles Sturt has been committed to adopting the 18 recommendations which focus on supporting students to make the right choices and improve the completion of students their studies, as well as enhancing transparency, accountability, regulation, and best practice.

In 2019, Charles Sturt provided an update on our progress towards implementing these recommendations.

Recommendation 5 required Academic Senate’s particular attention as it centres on a ‘Student Retention Strategy’.

Every university should have its own comprehensive student-centred retention strategy, which is regularly evaluated. These strategies could include university retention benchmarks and, as appropriate, processes for entry and exit interviews, the integration of data-based risk analytics and targeted support interventions, a suite of support services and a means to reengage with students who have withdrawn.

In September 2019, the Vice-Chancellor's Leadership Team provided support for the direction of this plan and acknowledged that it would be appropriate to adjust the 2030 University Strategy to make retention activities more explicit. The University Executive recommended that wider consultation and formal approval of the retention plan to be sought through the University's academic governance processes.

CHARLES STURT RETENTION FRAMEWORK

Following consultation in early 2020, a draft framework has been created; the Charles Sturt Retention Framework. This framework prioritises retention activities around the following eight focus areas:

1. Preparation and admission

2. Orientation and transition

3. Clear enrolment process

4. Curriculum design

5. Early identification of disengaged students

6. Learning and wellbeing support

7. Student connectedness

8. Students from different backgrounds

This has been endorsed by the Academic Portfolio Leadership Team in September and is progressing to the Executive Leadership Team to request approval. The Executive Director, Division of Student Success is engaging with the Strategy Team to ensure that the retention framework and strategy are incorporated to the 2030 University Strategy as part of the key enabler plans. It is important to note that following the approval of

106

https://www.education.gov.au/news/release-final-report-improving-retention-completion-and-success-higher-education

https://cdn.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/3354392/Improving-Retention,-Completion-and-Success-In-Higher-Education.pdf


the Framework, one of the first steps is to ensure that relevant data, influencing factors and model need to be developed to guide subsequent actions.

Whilst the Framework is progressing through the approval processes, current services and initiatives continuing as follows:

• Charles Sturt Advantage Early Entry Program

• First Nations Access Program

• HSC Students pre-entry study support

• Undergraduate Pathways (Diploma of General Studies and Charles Sturt University Pathway)

• Orientation 2022 Improvements (dynamic onboarding, personalisation)

• Enrolment automation and personalisation

• Early assessment initiative, at risk of exclusion and support improvements

• Embedding of academic, digital literacy and employability skills within subjects

• Student Retention (see HEPPP section below)

• 7 days per week interactive support access

• Wellbeing support (Subject Zero Campaign, Student Advocates Team, Student Voice)

• Learning support (eBooks, Academic English for Aust Tertiary Studies)

• Career support (Careers and Skills Hub personalised development plans)

• Mentoring program

• Elite Athletes Program

• Future Moves

• International students support

First Nations

With First Nations student progress, attrition, completions, and student experience overall satisfaction increasing in disparity with non-First Nations students, a university-wide focus is to remain for this cohort.

The Executive Director, Division of Student Success is engaging with the Strategy Team to ensure that the First Nations support is aligned to the 2030 University Strategy as part of the key enabler plans to the First Nations pillar.

Academic Support to First Nations students were a focus for the 2019 – 2020 report and this focus is continuing as following:

First Nations Student Connect

This program was launched in 2021 with the key goal of creating a unified service that would have one point of entry for students (centralised contact) and personalised, culturally safe support.

Previously the teams supporting First Nations students often operated in silos, creating confusion for students, and were often moved between team to address an area of concern. Enquiry management was decentralised and there was a higher risk of disclosing personal and culturally sensitive information.

Throughout 2020 and 2021, the First Nations Student Connect Team were able to:

• Segregate and secure enquiry management in CRM, Dynamics

• Implement personalised plans designed from critical barrier identification

• Implement a three-tier framework to supporting students:

1. Self-serve material: relatable digital resources that students can access at times suitable to their needs.

2. Advice and advocacy: a team of Advisers, First Nations Students, handles enquiries, personal plans and conducts connect sessions. Where appropriate, Advisers, refer to appropriate internal and external services.

3. Specialist services: internal specialist services include scholarships, tutors, libraries, academic skills, disabilities, and counselling etc. The relationship between the First Nations Student Success team and these other teams is a strong focus with the goal to improve service delivery to First Nations students and the referral process.

107


• Launch First Nations Connect Sessions (at seven centres across the campuses) focussed on:

o Academic support including content-specific tutoring o Access to other support services o Encouraging cultural identity connection (creating a community of First Nations students) o Socialising and networking

• Launched the First Nations Student App (access to information on services, make contact and offer feedback)

• Conduct two campaigns, contacting all First Nations students at Charles Sturt:

1. Support awareness (rapport building and support needs identified)

2. Academic Progress Procedure

• Conducted a series of focus groups which gather information from previous First Nations graduates, new and existing students to gain feedback on future improvement opportunities which will inform future activities.

Graduate Outcomes: Full-Time Employment

First Nation full-time employment rate continues to be at a low rate and the First Nations Student Success Team have an initiative underway in partnership with Yilabara Solutions (the employment arm of NSW Aboriginal Land Council (NSWALC).

This initiative involves the development of a relatable set of digital resources (videos and support materials) delivering employment coaching encouraging students to consider and pursue employment outcomes.

This program will be available in 2022.

Bachelor of Nursing

All registered First Nations students are allocated to an Adviser, First Nations Students. The allocation principles are determined by course for the top 12 populated cohorts for First Nations students, while beyond that point, they are allocated by workload requirements.

The assigned adviser that works directly with all online nursing students has been highly proactive through 2021. All First Nations nursing students were communicated with at least once per session. Additionally, the First Nations team has collaborated with the Retention Team to contact students who failed subjects. At this point, further support was put in place or at least offered. Stats for nursing students indicated that 86% of students who failed a subject in session one was not registered to First Nations Student Connect.

Further to this, work is progressing with the School to explore a more in depth and targeted approach to supporting nursing students, through a new First Nations Pathways in Nursing initiative. With an expected rollout during 2022, this collaboration will include a joint approach to attraction and entry strategies, customisation of support based on retention data and recent trends, customisation of various aspects of First Nations Student Connect, and ongoing avenues to receive and respond to student feedback.

108


Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program (HEPPP) – Retention Team

Note: HEPPP-funded programs provide support targeted towards regional students and students from low socio-economic backgrounds to support them to be successful in their studies. The Retention Team is one of the specific programs that receive this funding.

The Retention Team have been working across the three Faculties and Division of Student Success to

increase domestic undergraduate student retention and engagement since 2019. The team works closely with

subject coordinators and the Student Outreach Team to identify and contact disengaged students in the pre

census period of each main session. The process of identifying and contacting disengaged students has been

refined over the last 3 years and is summarised in Figure 1. The main ‘triggers’ used for identification of

disengagement is non submission of an early assessment item (EAI) due 3-10 days before the census date.

When a subject does not have an EAI, a combination of low LMS activity and past performance (if available)

is used, however this generally yields fewer students and is less precise (details in section 3.2). It is important

that the subject coordinator checks the list of disengaged students, which is then sent to the Student Outreach

Team for phone and SMS support.

Figure 1: Synergistic overlay of the curriculum and support.

The team works across approximately 200 subjects each year in the pre census period, however in 2020 in response to COVID-19, the project expanded and identified students who did not submit EASTS assessment in weeks 8-14 of the main sessions (Figure 2).

In 2021, the process for subject selection has been refined and based on projections from 2020 data, approximately 70-80% of all domestic undergraduate students will be enrolled in a 'HEPPP' subject in their commencing session. The 2021 HEPPP subjects also include approximately 45% of all domestic undergraduate students each session. Most subjects selected are large, level 1 subjects with low progress rates and or low SuES scores in 2020.

.

Figure 2: Outreach contact in 2019 and 2020.

109


A total of 83 of the 2020 ‘HEPPP’ subjects were flagged as having progress rates below 80% in 2019. In 2020 a significant increase in subject progress rates of 6% (to 77.9%) was observed (Figure 3A). Most of the increase was due to improvements seen in subjects offered in session 1 (12%; n=41, Figure 3B). This trend for increased subject progress rates is reflected in the official faculty level progress rates (Figure 4).

Figure 3: A Significant increase in the average progress rate in 2020 following targeted student contact pre census, n=83 subjects and B) in session 1 only, n=41 subjects *p<0.0001.

Figure 4: Official undergraduate progress rates for On-campus and Online students.

110


1. Undergraduate Pathways

Benchmarking to sector or Regional Universities Network RUN metrics are not able to be completed for this cohort. This is because of the diversity of sub-degree courses on offer across the sector and the difficulty to restrict this set to pathway courses akin to those being examined in the analysis.

Small cohorts amplify the variance in results over time therefore reporting will not address very small cohorts unless deemed to be of strategic importance.

Three Charles Sturt Pathway courses have been selected for examination in this report:

• The Diploma of General Studies (DGS) - completion of this course provides a pathway into a range of Bachelor courses at Charles Sturt

• The Charles Sturt University Pathways course - completion of this course provides a pathway into a range of Bachelor courses at Charles Sturt

• The University Certificate in Workforce Essentials (UCWE) - this course is only available to those wishing to pursue a career with the NSW Police Force. It is a mandatory requirement for Police Force applicants and upon successful completion, graduates may enrol in the Associate Degree in Policing Practice

Diploma of General Studies

The Diploma of General Studies (DGS) is an admission pathway into undergraduate education, creative industries, computer science and information technology courses.

Students are admitted to the Diploma of General Studies via three main Bases of Admission:

• Secondary Ed: 57% of enrolments in 2020

• Other: 38% of enrolments in 2020

• VET (TAFE): 5% of enrolments in 2020

The DGS is a one-year full time course and in its current iteration, students must complete six core subjects and two compulsory subjects from either the humanities or science streams. The course is administered by the Division of Student Services (DSS).

While the course was first introduced in 2012, it underwent major changes in 2020:

• The course is now delivered in-house as opposed to externally by TAFE

• Redeveloped to include a new set of subjects

• An online offering was introduced for the first time in 2020, with 47 students

Key Metrics

Metric 2015 2019 2020 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

Total Enrols 105 120 182 +51.7% +73.3%

Total Load 76.5 89.9 155.4 +72.9% +103.1%

Commencing Progress 77.2% 77.0% 68.5% -8.5 -8.7

First Year Attrition 35.3% 25.7% 35.6% +9.9 +0.3

Conversion Rate 49.0% 56.0% 50.0% -6.0 +1.0

StES Overall Satisfaction 89.5% 66.7% 74.6% +7.9 -14.9

StES Teaching Quality 83.8% 72.9% 83.9% +11.0 +0.1

*Metrics prior to 2020 refer to the TAFE delivered course. Therefore, only the 1 year change data will be referenced.

111



Several key achievements were identified across multiple:

• Enrolments increased by more than 50% in the last year from 120 to 182

• Load grew over 70% in last year

• Overall Satisfaction improved last year by 7.9pp to 74.6%

• Teaching Quality improved by 11.0pp in the last year to 83.9%

• New Online cohort reported 70% Overall Satisfaction rate and 90% Teaching Quality

• Basis of Admission for the Secondary Education cohort increased significantly from 21 to 103

Focus Areas for Improvement

Several focus areas for improvement were identified:

• Progress rates fell 8.5pp to 68.5% last year continuing the decline trend since peaking in 2018

• Attrition increased approximately 10pp on previous year

• Conversion from the DGS into a Charles Sturt degree decreased by 6pp, with only half of all students now converting into an Undergraduate course in 2020

PROGRESS

Figure 5: Progress Rates by Campus

• Progress rates were down at all campuses, except for Bathurst (increased 9.5pp).

• Stream 1 subjects are the lower rates (POL112 subject has the lowest rate of 55.2% and EED173 68.3%)

• Initial results for the Online cohort were low with a 55.1% progress rate (47 students)

• Low and Medium SES groups have decreased approximately 20pp last year

• Small cohort size is noted for:

• Dubbo (declined 32.4pp last year, 7 students) – note: this offering is not running in 2021 or 2022

• First Nations (declined 32.1pp last year, 14 students) and now the lowest since the DGS commenced

ATTRITION

• Bathurst and Port Macquarie campuses experienced sharp increases in attrition in 2020. There was a more than 20pp rise at Bathurst to 52.6% and a more than 10pp rise at Port Macquarie to 36% (progress also decreased at this campus by 13.0pp last year).

• Attrition has increased sharply students admitted by VET (TAFE), with more than 20pp increase last year to 30.8% (n=13) and students admitted by ‘Other’ has been deteriorating since 2018 with the trend continuing (increasing 10.7pp last year)

112


• First Nations attrition rate increased 7.5pp last year and 17.5% over 5-years

• Medium SES cohort experienced a sharp increase in attrition in 2020 to 37%

CONVERSION

• Port Macquarie rates dropped in the last year and remain below average

• Bathurst students are currently at the lowest rate since the inception of the course with just 38% of students pursuing an Undergraduate degree in 2020. Teaching Quality is lowest at Bathurst with no change in the last year and may be contributing to the lower conversion rate

• Low SES cohort (28% of students) have dropped by 7.5pp in the last year

• Medium SES cohort rate fell by 3.8pp (largest cohort). This is the lowest rate for the Medium SES cohort since the course was established

ACTIONS

It is noted by DSS that in 2020 a greater than normal number of students applied to exit the Diploma. The students cited COVID-19 and the only option to study being online as the main factors.

The new course is much shorter and free to students, and with the introduction of the online versions, the progress and attrition results were expected. Work is continuing on subject design with future improvements planned to improve these results.

113


Charles Sturt University Pathways

The Charles Sturt University Pathway course is an admission pathway into a selection of undergraduate courses. The course was introduced in 2020 alongside the improved Diploma of General Studies. The Pathway course is a half year full time course and students can select the foundation option (four core subjects) or the streams option (two core subjects and two compulsory subjects from either the humanities or science streams). The course is administered by the Division of Student Services.

As the Charles Sturt University Pathway course was introduced in 2020, reporting of conversion rates will begin in the 2021 - 2022 Student Performance Report.

Key Metrics

Metric On Campus Online Total

Total Enrols 122 339 461

Total Load 41.4 163.9 205.3

Commencing Progress 55.6% 54.9% 55.1%

In its first year, the Charles Sturt University Pathway course enrolled 461 students, with 122 electing to study On-Campus and 339 studying Online. The majority of enrolments for On-Campus students are from Bathurst (34), Wagga Wagga (28), Port Macquarie (26) and Albury-Wodonga (23) with a small cohort at Dubbo (11). Students are admitted to the Charles Sturt University Pathway course predominantly via the Other Basis of Admission (79%) with smaller cohorts admitted via VET (12%), Secondary Ed (8%) and Higher Ed (1%). Students from Medium SES backgrounds account for the majority of enrolments in the Charles Sturt University Pathway course (60%), followed by students from a Low SES background (31%) and a High SES background (8%). Enrolments by First Nations students comprised 9% of total enrolments in the Charles Sturt University Pathway course in 2020. Composition of students differs by mode, with First Nations students making up 15% of all On-Campus enrolments compared to just 7% of all Online enrolments. Progress for this cohort is significantly lower than for non-First Nations students with rates of 32.4% and 57.3% respectively. The disparity is even more distinct for On-Campus students where the difference in progress rates is 30pp.

The number of enrolments at a campus appears to coincide with the progress rate: the highest rates are from Bathurst (64.3%), Wagga Wagga (61.8%) and Port Macquarie (56.1%) and lowest rates from Albury-Wodonga (45.8%) and Dubbo (33.3%).



• The progress rate for Online students (54.9%) is on par with the average rate across all campuses.

• The reasonably sized VET cohort studying Online exceeded the average progress rate by more than 7pp at 62.1%.


Several focus areas for improvement were identified:

• Progress for First Nations students is significantly lower than for non-First Nations students with rates of 32.4% and 57.3% respectively. The disparity is even more distinct for On-Campus students where the difference in progress rates is 30pp.

• Progress rates for Stream 1 subjects (POL112, 41.2% and EED173 47.7%) are following a similar trend to the DGS with the progress rate being lowest of all subjects.

ACTIONS

As noted in the Diploma of General Studies, this new course is much shorter and free to students, and with the introduction of the online versions, the progress and attrition results were expected. Work is continuing on subject design with future improvements planned to improve these results.

114


University Certificate in Workforce Essentials

The School of Policing Studies offers the University Certificate in Workforce Essentials, an enabling course which is a mandatory pre-entry level requirement for seeking a career in the NSW Police Force and provides a pathway into the Associate Degree in Policing Practice. It is the only enabling course offered by Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences. This is a single subject, non-award course, and accounts for around 300 EFTSL a year. The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Studies Student Performance Report Appendix 2 provides insights into key achievements and focus areas for improvement.

115


2. Undergraduate

Please note this excludes Third Party Provider students (refer to Onshore and Offshore Third Party Provider sections) and pathways (refer to Undergraduate Pathways section).

Commencing Undergraduate enrolments increased by 3% in 2020, with strong growth in the much larger Online cohort counteracting a continued decline in On-Campus enrolments. This translates to a 1.4% increase in EFTSL.

Key Benchmarks

Metric On-campus 1 Yr Chg 5 Yr Chg % Course Profile Online 1 Yr Chg 5 Yr Chg % Course Profile

Total Enrols 6893 -3.4% -22.6% 100.0% 13020 +5.1% +2.5% 100.0%

Commencing 2451 -0.4% -18.5% 35.6% 4469 +4.9% +5.5% 34.3%

Continuing 4442 -5.0% -24.7% 64.4% 8551 +5.1% +1.0% 65.7%

Total Load 4646.2 -5.8% -28.3% 100.0% 7105.3 +6.3% +9.5% 100.0%

Commencing 1745.3 +0.2% -24.6% 37.6% 2266.8 +2.3% +12.8% 31.9%

Continuing 2901.0 -9.1% -30.3% 62.4% 4838.5 +8.3% +8.1% 68.1%

Metric On-campus 1 Yr Chg 5 Yr Chg vs Benchmark Online 1 Yr Chg 5 Yr Chg vs Benchmark

Commencing Progress 87.5% +1.3 +2.1 79.1% 79.2% +2.2 +6.6 73.0%

First Year Attrition 18.6% +2.5 +2.5 26.2% 31.5% -2.5 -2.2 34.1%

Completions 61.2% -1.6 -4.3 59.6% 34.9% -0.1 -6.4 40.3%

StES Overall Satisfaction 69.5% -10.3 -15.8 73.1% 80.3% -4.3 -0.1 81.7%

StES Teaching Quality 81.3% -1.5 -4.1 82.8% 84.2% -1.9 -0.7 85.6%


GOS - CEQ Overall Satisfaction 81.5% +5.5 +1.3 79.8% 83.9% +1.0 +2.4 84.5%

GOS - Full Time Employment 81.2% -2.5 -1.6 66.5% 85.3% -2.2 +0.3 81.4%

GOS -Further Full Time Study 6.7% -3.7 -2.6 12.9% 8.9% +1.7 +1.5 9.9%

The decline in On-Campus enrolments in the last year is not as pronounced, down 3.4%. The stabilisation of commencing enrolments is evident in the last year, down only 0.4%, however continuing enrolments declined 5%. Commencing progress for the On-Campus cohort is not as high, improving by 1.3pp to 87.5%. First Year attrition results for On-Campus students are better, despite having increased 2.5pp over the last year. Six-year completion rates for On-Campus students are lower having declined by 4.3pp over the five-year period. Student Experience Survey and Graduate Outcomes Survey results are dominated by Main and Other campus students, so the results do not differ very much from that of the Overall Undergraduate cohort. Full time employment rates are the exception, where excluding Third Party figures, result in a substantially higher rate.

116




• An increase in progress rates in Online and On-Campus

• A decrease in Online attrition

• Online teaching quality stable and Creative Arts field of education increased 10.3pp and now above RUN benchmark

• Improved Graduate Outcomes (CEQ) Overall Satisfaction, particularly for On-Campus cohorts


Several focus areas for improvement were identified across multiple cohorts:

• Slight drops in commencing progress and teaching quality concerns in particular Fields of Education

• An increase in On-Campus attrition

• Drop in completions for both study modes with online below the RUN Benchmark

• On-Campus teaching quality 5-year decline trend

• Dubbo campus

• First Nations

• VET (TAFE) cohort

• Credit Packages in two courses with Faculty of Science and Health

Field of education

Commencing progress rate in the following Field of Education:

• (03) Engineering and Related Technologies, Online: 59.0%, dropped 32.4% last year

• (04) Agriculture, environmental and related studies, On-Campus: 85.7%, dropped 5.6% last year

• (10) Creative Arts, On-Campus: 79.5%, dropped 5.0% last year and Online: 68.0%, whilst increased 4.9%, remains below RUN Benchmark of 69.5% (5 year overall decline 3.9%)

Figure 6: Undergraduate Progress Rates by Field of Education

On-campus attrition rate increased in the following Fields of Education, and are now above the RUN benchmark:

• (01) Natural and physical sciences, 26.6%, increased 9.9%

• (05) Agriculture, environmental and related studies, 17.3% increased 6.4%

• (07) Education, 26.4%, increased 6.0%

117


On-campus attrition rate increased moderately in the following Field of Education, but remain below the RUN benchmark:

• (02) Information technology, 25.0%, increased 3.2%

• (08) Management and Commerce, 28.1%, increased 5.1%

• (09) Society and culture, 25.3%, increased 4.0%

Figure 7: Undergraduate attrition Rates by Field of Education

Completion rates for Online students overall (34.9%) are below the RUN benchmark of 40.3% in the following Field of Education:

• (01) Natural and physical sciences: 26.7%, decreased 3.2% last year

• (02) Information technology: 28.8%, increased 8.5% last year

• (05) Agriculture, environmental and related studies: 18.7%, decreased 1.2 last year

• (06) Health: 32.9%, decreased 1.8% last year

• (08) Management and commerce: 27.4%, decreased 27.4% last year

• (09) Society and culture: 38.2%, increased 2.8%

• (10) Creative Arts: 35.9%, decreased 0.5% last year

Figure 8: Undergraduate Completion Rates by Field of Education

On-Campus Teaching Quality rate has a decline trend of 4.1pp over the 5-year period, dropping again last year by 1.5pp. The following Field of Education areas have been identified for improvement:

• (01) Natural and physical sciences, 75.5%, increased 1.5pp but 11.8pp decline over 5 years and below the RUN benchmark

• (02) Information technology, 66.7%, decreased 9.5pp and now below the RUN benchmark

• (08) Management and commerce, 80.6%, decreased 5.7pp and now below the RUN benchmark

• (09) Society and culture, 77.7%, decreased 13.0pp and now below the RUN benchmark

118


Online Teaching Quality in the three Field of Education areas require a focus for improvement with significant decreased and falling below their respective RUN benchmark:

• (01) Natural and physical sciences, 84.2%, decreased 9.8pp last year

• (07) Education, 81.7%, decreased 7.2pp last year

• (08) Management and commerce, 81.6%, decreased 11.1pp last year

Overall Satisfaction Online rates in the following Field of Education had significant drops last year and are now below their respective RUN benchmark:

• (06) Heath, 71.0%, decreased 10.1pp

• (07) Education, 80.8%, decreased 10.7pp

• (08) Management and commerce, 80.0%, decreased 15.1pp

The following collates the above Field of Education areas for improvement and discusses the causes and actions to address:

(01) NATURAL AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES

On-Campus progress rates are 10pp above the RUN benchmark however attrition rate increased 26.6%, increased 9.9% to 26.6% and now above the RUN benchmark. Teaching quality increased slightly but has a 11.8pp decline over 5-years and below the RUN benchmark (as well as overall satisfaction).

Online completions continue to decline and at 26.7% are currently 10pp lower than the benchmark. Teaching Quality experienced a significant decreased last year (almost 10pp), and now falls below RUN benchmark.

Faculty of Science and Health identified subjects in the Natural and Physical Sciences with poor progress rates in an action in their 2019 – 2020 Report (FOSH-5 2019-2020). FOSH has developed a plan with Division of Learning and Teaching to improve subject quality. Five subjects were identified for improvement. Students are also being contacted to discuss their study options. The action will remain open until 2022 metrics are available to monitor the effect on progress and completion rates.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences have noted that courses needing specific interventions will be evaluated via FOBJBS-4 in the Faculty Plan.

(02) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

On-campus attrition rate increased to 25.0%, 3.2pp last year and further contributing to the 10pp climb since 2017. Whilst response rates are low, Teaching Quality rate has a declined to 66.7%, decreased 9.5pp last year and now below the RUN benchmark

Online completions have improved considerably in 2020 (up 8.5pp) however information technology has one of the lower completions rates of all Field of Education areas.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences identified COVID-19 impacts as the main cause of increased attrition and lower satisfaction across the undergraduate IT courses in 2020. The pandemic led to an increased demand for IT workers to support the growth in remote working. Numerous students also changed to government supported programs rolled out via the job ready graduate scheme. In addition, the move to online learning did not suit some On-campus students. The Faculty is undertaking a revitalisation of the Bachelor of IT course which will focus on the online learning designs used in subjects across the course.

(03) ENGINEERING AND RELATED TECHNOLOGIES

This consists of the combined Bachelor of Tech (Civil Systems) / Master of Engineering (Civil Systems) which commenced in 2016 and the new Bachelor of Geospatial Science. Courses are delivered both through On-Campus and Online mode components.

On campus progress rates are very high at 96.4%, however progress online is low at 59%. This is solely based on load from the Bachelor of Geospatial Science. The decrease of 32.4pp in the Online rate represents a disparity in results from the Bachelor of Tech (Civil Systems) / Master of Engineering (Civil Systems) in 2019 (complicated by including students who transferred into the course and were not truly commencing), and the B Geospatial Science in 2020. No focus for improvement required as a result.

119


(05) AGRICULTURE, ENVIRONMENTAL AND RELATED STUDIES

On campus progress rates have dropped 5.6pp in the last year and now sit lower than the RUN benchmark for this at 87.2%.

On-campus attrition rate increased, 17.3% increased 6.4% and now sits just above the RUN benchmark.

Online completion rates are consistently very low compared to other results (currently 18.7%) and compared to the RUN benchmark rate (almost 10pp below the benchmark).

Faculty of Science and Health revitalised the Bachelor of Environmental Science and Management (with specialisations) in 2020 and has a specific action (FOSH-3 2020-2021) to monitor the course against metrics and in the context of the revitalisation project. The new Bachelor Agricultural Science (and Bachelor Agriculture/Associate Degree in Farm Production) were implemented in 2020 with an action in the 2019 - 2020 Faculty Report FOSH-6 2019-202 to monitor the courses until December 2023.

(06) HEALTH

Online completion rates are relatively low when compared to the benchmark and this Field of Education continues a downward trend over five years (down 13.2pp) and currently sitting almost 10pp below the RUN group result.

Overall Satisfaction Online rate dropped last year (10.1pp) which was comparable to the sector, however, is now below the RUN benchmark, 71.0%.

Faculty of Science and Health identified a number of online courses with poor progress and completion rates in their 2019 -2020 Faculty Report (FOS-1 2019 - 2020). Courses with large online cohorts including the Bachelor of Nursing and Bachelor of Exercise & Sport Science have been reviewed and refreshed with help from DLT during 2021. The action remains open. New actions FOSH-2 and FOSH-7 focus on improvements in the Bachelor of Nursing and Bachelor of Pharmacy in the 2020 - 2021 Faculty Report.

(07) EDUCATION

On-campus attrition rate increased 26.4%, increased 6.0pp last year and is becoming one of the higher attrition rates across the On-Campus cohort. Note: progress increased 4.1pp last year and now above RUN benchmark.

Online Teaching Quality significantly decreased by 7.2pp last year which was far more than the average decline and is now below the RUN benchmark. Overall Satisfaction rate followed this trend, decreased 10.7pp to 80.8%. Completion rates have remained relatively stable over the period however remain well below the benchmark rate (by 12pp).

Faculty of Arts and Education has introduced action FOAE-1 in the 2020 – 2021 Faculty Report to undertake a deep-dive to explore the underlying causes of undergraduate and postgraduate Education FOA data with a view to exploring possibilities in a Prototype/Test in 2022.

(08) MANAGEMENT AND COMMERCE

Despite the On-campus progress rates increasing considerably in the last two years (and above the RUN benchmark), the attrition rate increased 28.1%, after increasing 5.1pp last year and whilst below the RUN benchmark, this is one of the higher rates across all the Fields of Education. Teaching Quality rate decreased 5.7pp last year, now 80.6%, making it below the RUN benchmark.

Online completion rates have remained relatively stable over the period however remain well below the benchmark rate by 12pp. Teaching Quality had a significant decrease (11.1pp), falling below the RUN benchmark to 81.6%. Overall Satisfaction rate followed this trend decreasing 15.11pp last year and now RUN benchmark.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences revitalised the Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of Accounting degrees in 2021 to increase course relevancy, linkages to industry and to reframe teaching to better connect students to real world challenges and opportunities.  The Faculty expects that these changes will deliver greater levels of student satisfaction and greater satisfaction of teacher quality.

(09) SOCIETY AND CULTURE

On-campus attrition rate increased moderately to 25.3%, following a 4.0pp increase last year. Notably progress rate is above the RUN benchmark with marginal improvement across the 5-year period. Teaching Quality rate has a declined to 77.7%, decreasing 13.0pp last year and now below the RUN benchmark. Overall satisfaction is also below the RUN benchmark (and decreased by 17.6pp, more than most other Field of Education areas).

120


Faculty of Arts and Education has undertaken significant work with Division of Learning and Teaching in revitalisation of courses in this FOE (during 2021) which has resulted in an uplift in student satisfaction in the short term and will potentially result in improved attrition and completions in the 2021 metrics. Faculty is monitoring.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences completed key actions in the School of Policing associated improving Overall Satisfaction late in 2020 and have noted continue to monitor these interventions. Any other courses needing specific interventions will be evaluated via FOBJBS-4 in the Faculty Plan.

(10) CREATIVE ARTS

This Field of Education has suffered large declines in both on campus and online and progress rates in both modes and are below the RUN benchmark. On campus declined 5pp in the last year and online increased by 4.9pp in the last year, however, does experiences variation year on year but has typically been low.

Online completions rates have remained stable for the last three years at 35.9% and continues to sit below the RUN benchmark. This Field of Education is notably the third largest of all student cohorts.

Faculty of Arts and Education notes that the courses in this FOE are in phase out, this and the uncertainty of on-campus classes due to COVID-19 in these traditional studio-based disciplines has compounded the effect. It is expected that the rates will remain low as phase out of courses continues. Courses will continue to be monitored.

Dubbo On-Campus Attrition and Overall Student Satisfaction

Bachelor students on all main campuses are exceeding the commencing progress rate benchmark except for Dubbo at 74.9% (4.2pp below the benchmark). Attrition rates have substantially improved, down 10.7pp last year along with completion rates, up 17.2pp to 52%. Student satisfaction does fluctuate however it experienced the largest decline and lowest rate of satisfaction (50% and 63.6% respectively) in comparison to other campus locations. This trend is followed in the graduate satisfaction results and graduate full-time employment rate.

The Faculty of Arts and Education and Faculty of Science and Health participated in the three-day timetable initiative in 2019, which was overwhelmingly popular with students. Further course level actions which looked at progress and satisfaction have been introduced in 2021.

Some larger subjects delivered at Dubbo, including NRS160 Contexts of Nursing, were nominated in late 2021 for Division of Learning and Teaching moderate builds for 202230.

Additional HEPPP support was offered to nursing students during 2021.

The TAFE integrated Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) had the order of subjects changed to ensure students are not overloaded with challenging assessments in their first year. Significant negotiations have taken place with TAFE NSW to ensure the combined assessments from TAFE and the University in the integrated course are not overwhelming to students. The effect will be monitored in 2022.


First Nations

First Nations student commencing progress, whist above the RUN Benchmarks for Online and On-Campus students and improving last year, will remain a focus as the gap between non-First Nations students and First Nations students continues and results are lower than the overall sector benchmark. Additionally, this remaining as a focus area for improvement aligns with the 2030 University Strategy.

Refer to the 2021 - 2022 University-wide, Key Operational Initiatives section of this report for actions to address. Faculty Student Performance Reports also include specific actions related to courses in support of improvements for these students.

Basis of Admission: VET (TAFE)

This is the largest admission cohort to online undergraduate courses, with nearly 2,000 commencing students each year. Enrols rose by nearly 9% and load by 3% in 2020.

On-Campus progress for the VET (TAFE) cohort are the lowest amongst all basis of admission at 80.8%. Whilst Charles Sturt exceeds RUN benchmarks for this cohort of students in both study modes and they

121


have demonstrated improvements in progress over the one- and five-years periods, there is a need to continue with a University-wide focus given the 2030 University Strategic imperatives and related equity targets.


Figure 9: Undergraduate Progress Rates by Basis of Admission

Credit Packages

Significant declines in the following offerings were identified for action by faculties:

• Diploma of Nursing progress on campus rate declined significantly in the last year down 37.8pp

• Certificate IV in Veterinary Nursing online rate declined 32.2pp.

The Faculty of Science and Health has evaluated the Diploma as part of the Bachelor of Nursing curriculum review, to inform the new credit package. This involved content mapping between the Diploma of Nursing and first-year nursing subjects (refer to FOS-6, estimated completion July 2022). In addition to this an evaluation of the ‘TAFE transition to University resources’ is being planned in collaboration with DLT and DIT. The Certificate IV in Veterinary Nursing has been highlighted for a follow up action.

122


3. Postgraduate by Coursework

Commencing Postgraduate by Coursework enrolments have increased by 20% in 2020, with the uplift translating to an 18% increase in EFTSL. With the exclusion of third-party partnerships, the postgraduate cohort is dominated by online students. With the online mode of study being such an important factor in student performance and experience, the impact of other factors tends to be less influential than amongst on campus cohorts.

However, there are several small but important cohorts that should not be overlooked, although they may not be discussed in great detail in this report due to small cohort size and/or strong metrics, poor or variable results have been identified and addressed. The On-Campus cohort is dominated by international students (predominantly at Port Macquarie) and domestic students at Other campuses – Canberra, Manly and the United Theological College. Trends for this group can be volatile due to the relatively small cohort numbers.

Key Benchmarks


Total Enrols 196 -11.7% +110.8% 100.0% 9026 +9.9% -0.3% 100.0%

Commencing 78 -18.8% +122.9% 39.8% 4410 +20.7% +5.0% 48.9%

Continuing 118 -6.3% +103.4% 60.2% 4616 +1.3% -4.9% 51.1%

Total Load 75.5 -17.6% +88.8% 100.0% 3190.4 +11.7% +8.2% 100.0%

Commencing 30.5 -30.1% +52.5% 40.4% 1681.9 +18.6% +14.3% 52.7%

Continuing 45.0 -6.3% +125.0% 59.6% 1508.5 +5.0% +2.2% 47.3%


Commencing Progress 95.2% +24.5 -3.4 81.7% 89.9% +2.5 +3.9 84.0%

First Year Attrition 32.6% -2.8 +19.4 22.3% 24.4% -2.6 -0.5 28.9%

Completions 82.9% +7.4 +18.4 72.8% 63.0% -1.3 -2.3 65.6%

StES Overall Satisfaction 74.3% -15.4 - 72.7% 80.0% -0.5 - 79.1%

StES Teaching Quality 87.9% -1.4 - 81.7% 86.7% +2.7 - 84.6%


GOS - CEQ Overall Satisfaction 78.3% -15.0 -5.0 80.6% 83.1% -0.5 -2.0 85.5%

GOS - Full Time Employment 52.2% -32.4 -47.8 40.9% 90.4% +0.3 -1.5 88.1%

GOS -Further Full Time Study 4.0% -16.0 -11.4 14.9% 4.8% -0.7 -0.7 6.2%

The On-Campus cohort has increased substantially yet more gradually over the period, up 110% in enrolments and 88% in load. In the last year, commencing enrolments and load fell sharply for the second year in a row, down 18% and 30% respectively, while continuing enrolments and load fell by just 6%. Commencing progress has exhibited a greater increase, up 24.5pp to 95.2%. The On-Campus cohort has recorded fluctuating progress rate in the last five years ranging from 98.6% down to 66.5%. First Year attrition results are extremely variable and currently relatively high at 32.6%, significantly in excess of both the RUN benchmark and the overall sector result. In contrast to the total cohort, six-year completion rates have increased in 2020 to 82.9%, up 18.4pp over five years and performs strongly against the RUN benchmark. Small sample sizes for the Student Experience and Graduate Outcomes Surveys result in highly variable satisfaction scores.

123



Several key achievements across multiple student groups:

• An increase in progress rates for Online and On-Campus cohorts

• A decrease in attrition rates for Online cohorts

• Strong graduate full-time employment rates for Online and On-Campus

Field of Education

All Field of Education improved online progress rate and above RUN benchmarks.

Figure 10: Postgraduate Online Progress Rates by Field of Education

Teaching Quality: Online and On-Campus

Both online and on-campus cohorts are above the RUN benchmarks and teaching quality for the Online cohort increased 2.7pp to 86.7% with relative consistency across the largest cohort (Online); 8 of the 9 Fields of Education being above the benchmark. All three Faculties improved their teaching quality in the past year with the Online cohort.

Basis of Admission

Though the vast majority of Postgraduate students are admitted on the basis of Higher Education, there is a growing cohort who are admitted via the ‘Other’ Basis of Admission. This is a growing cohort, more than doubling over the five-year period to 839 enrolments to ~20% of the postgraduate cohort last year. A large proportion of this cohort are students whose study is associated with their employment. Progress, attrition, completions, and student satisfaction rates are all improving and positioned well against RUN Benchmarks.

First Nations

After averaging approximately 90 commencing students each year, 2020 saw a significant increase with over 150 First Nations students enrol in Online Postgraduate by Coursework courses. The majority of enrolments were in the Graduate Certificate in Wiradjuri Language, Culture and Heritage.

124


Socio-Economic Status

Whilst attrition rates continue to be above the RUN Benchmark, they are trending downwards across all cohorts following a higher period for 2 to 3 years.

Figure 11: Online Postgraduate Attrition Rates by Socio-economic Status

Focus Areas of Improvement

Several key focus areas for improvement were identified across multiple student groups:

• Online Teaching Quality withing particular Fields of Education

• Online steep decreases in Overall Student Satisfaction within particular Fields of Education

• Online declining completion rates

• Online Graduate Outcomes (CEQ) Overall Satisfaction below RUN benchmark

• On-Campus small cohort areas

• First Nations cohort

Field of education

ONLINE STUDENTS

Teaching Quality rate in the Education Field of Education for courses within the Faculty of Arts and Education had a 0.2pp increase last year and remains below the Benchmark (84.1%).

The following Fields of Education are above the benchmark, but had significant declines last year:

• (03) Engineering and Related Technologies: 85.7%, decreased 14.3% last year (now below Benchmark). Noted as a small cohort

• (04) Agriculture, environmental and related studies: 81.8%, decreased 18.2% last year (remains above Benchmark)

Overall Satisfaction Online rates in the following Field of Education:

• Natural and physical sciences: 69.2%, decreased 11.8% last year (now below Benchmark)

• Engineering and Related Technologies: 71.4%, decreased 28.6% last year (now below Benchmark). Noted as a small cohort

• Agriculture, environmental and related studies: 69.6%, decreased 19.3% last year (remains above Benchmark)

• (07) Education: 78.0%, decreased 1.9% (large cohort noted and now below the Benchmark)

125


Completion rates are below the RUN Benchmark of 40.3%, at 34.9%. The following Field of Education are highlighted for improvement actions:

• Natural and physical sciences: 26.7%%, decreased 3.2% last year

• Information technology: 28.8%, increased 8.5% last year

• (05) Agriculture, environmental and related studies: 18.7%, decreased 1.2% last year

• (06) Health: 32.9%, decreased 1.8%

• (07) Education:42.3% and above RUN Benchmark of 41.8%, decreased trend 1.8% last year (11.3% over 5 years)

• (08) Management and commerce: 27.4%, decreased 0.3% last year

• (09) Society and culture: 38.2%, increased 2.8% last year

• (10) Creative arts: 35.9%, decreased 0.5% last year

Figure 12: Postgraduate Completion Rates by Field of Education

The following Graduate Outcomes (CEQ) Overall Satisfaction rates overall are below the RUN Benchmark of 84.5%, at 83.1%. The following rates Field of Education declined and remain below the RUN benchmark:

• (01) Natural and physical sciences: 79.3%, decreased 4pp last year

• (02) Information technology: 77.5%, decreased 5.9pp last year

• (06) Health: remains stable over 5-years and 6pp below RUN benchmark

• (07) Education: 81.9%, 3.0pp 5-year decline

• (08) Management and commerce: 85.9%, 3.1pp 5-year decline

The following collates the above Field of Education areas for improvement and discusses the causes and actions to address:

(01) NATURAL AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES

Online completion rate is relatively low. Although it has improved in the last year (up 6.1pp to 54.4%) it remains down substantially over the five-year period (-16.9pp). The rate is only marginally lower than the RUN benchmark but is quite a bit lower than the overall sector result of 62.7%.

Online overall student satisfaction has a variable response rates, thus an amplified movement in student satisfaction in recent years. Overall satisfaction dropped substantially in 2020 to 69.2% (down 11.8pp) and is currently the lowest rate of all Field of Education areas. The rate sits almost 5pp below the RUN benchmark. In contrast, satisfaction with teaching quality improved to 92.3% (up 6.6pp in the last year) and is well above the benchmark.

Online graduate satisfaction with course experience has been in steady decline since 2017 down from 87.8% to 79.3% in 2020. Despite the rate being below the RUN benchmark, it’s worth noting that it is higher than the overall sector rate of 75.6%.

Faculty of Health and Science have noted that postgraduate courses in this FOE will be evaluated via FOSH-5 in the Faculty Plan.


126


(02) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Online completions have remained stable in the last year and are up 9pp over the five-year period. Despite the rate being on par with the overall sector result, the Charles Sturt rate of 66.6% is more than 5pp below the RUN benchmark and the lower of the completion rates of all the Field of Education areas at Charles Sturt.

Online Graduate Outcomes (CEQ) Overall Satisfaction experienced a 5.9pp decline last year and is below the RUN Benchmark and On-Campus Overall Satisfaction for Student Experience decreased 33.3pp last year to 66.7%.

On-Campus attrition for this cohort increased 11.6pp last year, widening the gap with the RUN benchmark by over 20pp (noted as small cohort of 17 students).

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences identified that this is likely due to the negative impacts of COVID-19. The Faculty will look at the granular data to understand the issues and develop future interventions.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences On-campus Students Experienced Overall Satisfaction had large declines (33.3pp) to 66.7%, and Teaching Quality. This cohort comprises international students based at Port Macquarie – 2018 saw its largest intake of 41 students (almost quadrupling from 2017) but had reduced to just 17 commencing enrolments in 2020. Refer to the ‘Main Campus Internationals’ section below for further information.

(03) ENGINEERING AND RELATED TECHNOLOGIES

Online Student Experience Overall Satisfaction 71.4%, decreased 28.6% last year and Teaching Quality 85.7%, decreased 14.3% last year (now below Benchmark). Noted as a small cohort and unable to provide analysis. However, the Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences identified that this is likely due to the negative impacts of COVID-19. They will look at the granular data to understand the issues and develop future interventions.

(05) AGRICULTURE, ENVIRONMENTAL AND RELATED STUDIES

A small On-Campus cohort and a slightly larger Online cohort exists. On-Campus enrolments peaked at 19 in 2017 and have declined to 8 in 2020. In total, Online offerings have maintained fairly steady enrolments of between 80 and 90 over the last five years.

Online Completions rates are consistently very low compared to other results (currently 18.7% after dropping 7pp in 2020 to 51.6%) and compared to the RUN benchmark rate is almost 15pp below the RUN benchmark.

Online Teaching Quality (81.8%, decreased 18.2% last year) overall satisfaction (69.6%, decreased 19.3% last year) demonstrative of results dropped considerably in both in 2020, but both continues to sit just above the RUN result.

On-Campus Graduate Outcomes Survey (CEQ) experienced a 4.2pp decline last year and is below the RUN Benchmark by 10pp. Whereas the Online cohort had 100% satisfaction, up from 78.3%.

Faculty of Science and Health identified attrition and progress rates in postgraduate agricultural courses as an issue in 2020 in FOS-9. The Graduate Certificate Agricultural Business Management was phased out. A new Masters of Agricultural Science has been introduced. The Master of Environmental Management (Articulated Set) was also identified in 2019 for interrogation at the subject level, significant changes were made to specialisations during 2020. The Faculty will monitor the results of these changes in the 2021 metrics.

(06) HEALTH

A sizable Online cohort exists for this cohort and contributes the fourth largest share of enrolments, and the third largest share of load in the Online cohort. Given the high load yield of these students, load has reported an increase of almost 40% over the period while enrolments have risen by approximately 30%.

Online Completions rate decrease is relatively low (73.5%) when compared to the benchmark with other the Field of Education areas and experienced a decline last year of 2.6pp and remains below the RUN benchmark (74.7%).

Online Graduate Outcomes Survey (CEQ) experienced a 0.6pp increase last year and remains stable but also approximately 6pp below the RUN Benchmark.

127


Faculty of Science and Health identified Postgraduate Coursework subjects in the Health FOE in FOS- 8 in the 2019 - 2020 Faculty Plan for examination. The Faculty is in the process of working with educational designers in DLT to develop a plan for poorly performing subjects. The plan is expected to be completed by the end of 2021.

(07) EDUCATION

The Education cohort contributes the second largest share of enrolments and load in the Online space. Enrolments have grown by 20% over the period, however students have been increasingly taking more load, with load up by approximately 40%. In the last year alone, enrolments and load have increased by almost 30%.

Online Completions have remained stable in the last year but with a small decline over the five-year period (by 2.6pp). The rate is relatively low compared to the University average and at 59.7% is more than 5pp below the RUN benchmark.

Online Student Experience Overall Satisfaction is now 78.0%, decreased 1.9pp last year and Teaching Quality have remained much the same in the last year meaning both continue to sit just below the benchmarks.

Online Graduate Outcomes Survey (CEQ) experienced a 0.1pp decline last year and 3.0pp 5 year decline trend and remains 2pp below the RUN Benchmark.

Faculty of Arts and Education has introduced action FOAE-1 in the 2020 – 2021 Faculty Report to undertake a deep-dive to explore the underlying causes of undergraduate and postgraduate Education FOE data with a view to exploring possibilities in a Prototype/Test in 2022.

(08) MANAGEMENT AND COMMERCE

A very small On-Campus cohort and a very large Online cohort exists for this Field of Education. On-Campus enrolments which were negligible until 2017, peaked at 42 in 2018 and have declined to just 7 in 2020 – international students account for all enrolments in these offerings. In the Online space, enrolments and load declined steadily until 2018 when enrolments plateaued. A moderate increase was seen in 2020 with a 3.8% uplift in enrols and a 7.6% uplift in load.

Online completions have remained relatively stable over the period and while the rate is slightly lower than the RUN benchmark it has remained above the overall sector result.

On-campus Student Experience Overall Satisfaction is 40.0%, decreased 60.0% last year. Noted as a small cohort and unable to provide analysis. However, Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences identified that this is likely due to the negative impacts of COVID-19. They will look at the granular data to understand the issues and develop future interventions.

(09) SOCIETY AND CULTURE

Society and Culture contributes around one third of enrolments and load in the Online space with growth of approximately 18% over the five-year period.

Online Completions rates continue to drop with a 6.5pp decrease in the last five years. The rate is currently 61% and while just above the RUN benchmark, sits almost 5pp below the overall sector rate.

On-Campus attrition rate remains well above the RUN benchmark by over 20pp. (Relatively small cohort size of 45 noted).

Faculty of Arts and Education has undertaken significant work during 2021 with Division of Learning and Teaching in revitalisation of courses in this FOE which has resulted in an uplift in student satisfaction in the short term and will potentially result in improved attrition and completions in the 2021 metrics. Faculty is monitoring.


(10) CREATIVE ARTS

A small Online cohort exists. Over the five-year period, enrolments and load have declined approximately 35% and 25% respectively with only 27 enrolments in 2020.

Online Completions rates declined substantially over the last two years from 74.6% in 2018 to 50% in 2020. Despite this field of education having a relatively small cohort (n=42) and fluctuations being accentuated, the completion rate is currently 20pp below the benchmark.

128


Faculty of Arts and Education notes that the courses in this FOE are in phase out, current student metrics are being monitored regularly to ensure enrolled students are supported.

On-Campus

With the Online mode of study being such an important factor in student performance and experience, the impact of other factors amongst Postgraduate On-campus cohorts, of which, there are several small but important cohorts that should not be overlooked and while very small cohorts such as On-Campus students, or Main campus internationals don’t impact overall metrics, but poor or variable results need to be addressed.

NON-MAIN CAMPUSES

The vast majority of this cohort study online, but are representative of courses administered through Manly,

Canberra and United Theological College. Enrolments increased ~17% in the last year alone and ~7% over

the five-year period.

Completions rates in Canberra and many are above the RUN benchmark, but United Theological College sits well below benchmark at 46.7%. Although the completion rate was much higher five years ago, the result was based on a very small cohort. Since a substantial increase in enrolments in 2011, the six-year completion rate has remained low.

The Faculty of Arts and Education have examined the drop in completions at the United Theological College and note that the nature of this student cohort means that competing life priorities often interfere with ability to study (predominantly students are mature age). COVID-19 compounded this effect. Whilst there is no specific action in the Faculty plan the FOAE and the College will monitor and support students.

MAIN CAMPUS INTERNATIONALS

In 2020 there were 30 On-Campus international students, almost all at main campuses and with nearly 80% in the School of Computing and Mathematics at Port Macquarie. Enrolments were down almost 40% in 2020 likely due to COVID restrictions.

The attrition rate improved for the first time since 2016, however lower attrition in a couple of courses masks increased attrition from the largest course. The rate remains 14pp higher over five years and above the RUN benchmark.

The overall satisfaction rate plummeted to 55% in 2020 after a drop of nearly 40pp. This rate compares poorly to the domestic rate (100% satisfaction) and the corresponding RUN benchmark (70.6%). Satisfaction with teaching quality also fell by nearly 10pp reducing the rate to 77.8%. Again, the international rate is far lower than the domestic rate (100% satisfaction) but only slightly lower than the benchmark. Note that respondent numbers are relatively low, and caution should be taken when interpreting results (domestic count = 15; international count = 20).

The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences notes that the fall in satisfaction was due to On-Campus courses transitioning to online for the majority of 2020. The decline in perceived teaching quality was, to some degree, a reaction from On-campus students who were suddenly forced into online learning, and who felt that they were not getting the type of university experience they had paid for. COVID-19 severely affected international students, with the casual job market drying up, some students left the country and others decided to discontinue their education due to financial pressures. With international borders re-opening in 2022, it is anticipated that this trend will see an improvement. This cohort will be monitored post the COVID-19 changes.

FIRST NATIONS

Note: Relatively small numbers in the First Nations cohort tend to cause volatility in results.

First Nations Online Commencing Progress is 77.1% and whist above the RUN Benchmark of 73.5%, Charles Sturt remains lower than the overall sector benchmark. Attrition is also below the RUN Benchmark, despite a 5.2pp increase last year and Graduate Outcomes Survey, Full Time Employment rate increased 12.9pp last year and is high at 94.7%.

All metric other areas for First Nations students are below the RUN Benchmark and decline in the past year:

• Completions: 57.3%, decreased 5.9pp last year

• Student Experience Overall Satisfaction: 65.8%, decreased 23.7pp last year

• Teaching Quality: 78.9%, decreased 5.3pp last year

129


• Graduate Outcomes Survey (CEQ) Overall Satisfaction: 71.4%, decreased 24.4pp last year

• Graduate Outcomes Survey Further Full Time Study: 9.5%, decreased 10.5pp last year

First Nations students are to remain an area of focus for improvement in alignment with the 2030 University Strategy. Refer to the 2021 - 2022 University-wide, Key Operational Initiatives section of this report for actions to address.

130


4. Higher Degree by Research

Background

Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students are an important but very small cohort in the context of the broader student population. Small cohort sizes impact on the ability to analyse performance by certain demographic factors. Small cohort sizes, along with the nature of HDR study also mean that specific study circumstances are likely to have a stronger association with overall student performance than for coursework cohorts. As such, a high degree of variability in student performance metrics is observed within this analysis.

In 2020, just over 430 students were enrolled in a Higher Degree by Research, with 95 of these students commencing in their course. While commencing enrolments have fallen by approximately 20% over the five-year period examined in this report, continuing enrolments are down by more than 30%. This is explained in part by the pipeline of larger commencing cohorts prior to this period but may also point to potential issues with completion and later year attrition. International enrolments, though always a very small cohort, (due to a government mandated 10% cap on expenditure from Research Training Program scholarship funding), have also declined in both absolute numbers and proportion of total students, a trend likely confounded by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

There is a strong degree of alignment between attendance type (full-time or part-time study) and attendance mode (on-campus or online), with most students studying on-campus studying Full-Time and online is Part-Time. In 2021, the faculties have added the HDR cohort to their reports for the first time. Analysis at the faculty level is conducted in the Faculty Student Performance Reports which form part of this overall University Student Performance Report.

Metric Full Time 1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg % Course

Profile Part Time 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

% Course Profile

Total Enrols 203 -7.3% -28.5% 100.0% 229 -11.6% -33.2% 100.0%

Commencing 51 -17.7% -23.9% 25.1% 44 -18.5% -21.4% 19.2%

Continuing 152 -3.2% -30.0% 74.9% 185 -9.8% -35.5% 80.8%

Total Load 180.3 -9.0% -27.6% 100.0% 92.0 -18.7% -39.1% 100.0%

Commencing 42.3 -17.2% -24.9% 23.4% 17.3 -22.9% -22.9% 18.8%

Continuing 138.0 -6.1% -28.4% 76.6% 74.8 -17.6% -41.9% 81.3%

Metric Full Time 1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg vs On-campus

Benchmark Part Time 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

vs Online Benchmark

First Year Attrition 6.5% -6.8 -6.2 6.5% 13.0% -2.0 -9.8 13.5%

6 Year Completion Rate 52.2% -1.8 +5.8 54.9% 28.6% +0.5 +14.1 31.0%

Timely Completions 75.6% +1.2 +15.3 N/A 73.0% +0.6 +17.1 N/A

Metric Rate 1 Yr chg

4 Yr chg vs Benchmark

GOS - PREQ Overall Satisfaction

87.9% +0.4 -5.3 91.1%

GOS - Full Time Employment 87.1% -3.2 +5.5 72.0%

GOS -Further Full Time Study 6.1% +4.0 +6.1 7.1%

131



Several key achievements across multiple student groups and metrics were made:

• Improvements in attrition:

• After an increase in attrition in 2019, the rate has dropped to 6.5% in 2020 (down almost 7pp) and is the lowest in 5 years

• The rate of attrition for the Part-Time cohort remained relatively stable with an improvement from 15% in 2019 to 13% in 2020. This is after variation of up to 15% during the previous 5 years

• Both Full-time and Part-time cohorts are on par with the RUN benchmark

• Improved timely completions:

• The rate of timely completion for both the Full-Time and Part-Time cohorts has improved over the 5-year period, up by 15.3pp and 17.1pp to 75.6% and 73.0% respectively

• However, as noted in the FOSH plan timely completions will be a focus for the Faculty as it has the lowest rate across the faculties for both Full-Time and Part-Time students. The rate of timely completion for the FOSH Full-Time cohort from 2016 to 2020 has dropped approximately 15pp to 57.9%. The Part-Time FOSH completion has had a slight increase in 2020 to 50% but is still the lowest of the faculties

• Consistent graduate satisfaction:

• Responses are not split by attendance type but largely reflect Part-Time student sentiment.

• After a large drop in 2017, satisfaction has been climbing and in 2020 sits at 87.9%, up slightly from 2019

• The 2020 result is only slightly below the RUN benchmark rate and exceeds the overall sector rate

• Since 2018, On-Campus student satisfaction has increased and in 2020 sits at 93.3% satisfaction

• Full-time employment above sector:

• Reported Full-Time employment rates for graduates have generally improved over the 5-year period (up 5.5pp), however fell slightly in 2020 by 3.2pp to 87.1%

• The employment rates are well above both the RUN and sector benchmark rates

• The proportion of students undertaking further Full-Time study increased in 2020, up 4pp to 6.1% and is approaching the RUN benchmark and sector results of approximately 7%


Several key focus areas for improvement were identified across multiple student groups:

• Full-Time and part-time enrolments have fallen in commencing and continuing cohorts

• Graduate Satisfaction for Online students

• 6-year completion rates for Full-time students dropped for the second year in a row and sits below both the RUN benchmark and the overall sector rate. At 52.2%, the rate of completion is 2.7pp below the RUN rate for On-Campus study and ~12pp below the sector

• 6-year completion rates for Part-Time students improved marginally by 0.5pp to 28.6% in the last year, but the rate of remains below the RUN and sector rates. Note: If the 2020 completion rates for the cohort of Part-Time students are reviewed at both 6 and 9 years (which is a more realistic completion timeframe for Part-time students who gave 8+1 year to complete the degree), the rate improves from 24.1% in 2017 (6 years) to 48.1% in 2020 (nine years)

132


Enrolments

Continuing enrolments make up almost 80% of the HDR course profile in 2020. Total Full-Time enrolments in HDR have fallen by 28% over the five-year period, with declines seen in both the commencing and continuing cohorts (down 24% and 30% respectively). In the last year however, the drop in Full-Time enrolments was driven predominately by the commencing cohort with a 17% decline in new students.

Total Part-Time enrolments in HDR have dropped by 33% over the five-year period, due primarily to a fall in continuing enrolments. Commencing enrolments have fallen to a lesser degree over the period (down 21%). In just the last year, the number of part-time students fell 11%, driven by a drop in commencing enrolments but also impacted by a decline in continuing enrolments.

Figure 13: Higher Degree Research Enrolments by Commencing Status, Attendance Mode

ACTIONS

Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies (ORS&GS)

Identified that this issue is largely driven by the availability of scholarships. A review of scholarship funding and availability of scholarships has been undertaken during 2021. At the time of writing, a new scholarship strategy was being considered by the University Executive leadership. In addition, ORS&GS is working with the Division of Marketing to develop a marketing strategy for HDR candidates. They will also have a presence at marketing expos to increase awareness of HDR opportunities at Charles Sturt. ORS&GS has built an EOI process into CRM to track student engagement and provide data to be analysed to assist with future direction of marketing.

Faculties

The Faculties have also introduced actions to address the drop in enrolments, including developing industry partnerships for scholarships and building supervisory capacity among academic staff. The Faculty of Arts and Education introduced the 2021 – 2022 HDR Growth Plan and the other faculties are currently investigating similar plans.

Under optimization the three faculties have rationalised their PhD offerings. For instance, the Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Studies reduced their PhD offerings from 7 to 3 and merged subjects in its Professional Doctorates. Faculty of Arts and Education introduced a new Honours program, which is aimed at ensuring viable enrolments, focusing resources, and providing pathways into HDRs from a range of disciplines. The impact of these changes is yet to be assessed and will be addressed in future evaluations.

The Faculty of Science and Health introduced FOSH-8 in their 2020 – 2021 Faculty Plan to examine data at a granular level to identify and address reasons for low rates of timely completion for both full-time and part-time HDR students. The Faculty will use the results in a future HDR plan.

Refer to Faculty plans in appendices for more information.

No new actions will be introduced in 2021. Progress on existing measures AS/90 and AS/91 from 2019 – 2020 plan which focus on enrolments will remain open and will be monitored in 2022.

133


Graduate Satisfaction for On-line Students

Since 2018, On-line student satisfaction has declined to 83.3% and now sits well below the RUN benchmark and approximately 10pp below the On-campus cohort.

Figure 14: PREQ Satisfaction Rate by Attendance Mode

ACTIONS FOR GRADUATE SATISFACTION AND COMPLETIONS

Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies (ORS&GS)

Implemented an annual Graduate Research Experience Survey (GRES) in November 2020. The survey enables ORS&GS to be more responsive to the needs of students. The second GRES survey will be conducted in November 2021 and will be useful in terms of monitoring the success of on-line support programs.

ORS&GS has introduced a number of measures during 2020 and 2021 which endeavour to engage with both On-campus and On-line students. These include:

• Introduction of the Expectation Alignment & Communication Plan (EACP) and Individual Development Plan (IDP), to provide clear understanding between supervisor and student.

• Re-invigorating the Doc Fest event to provide training and information sessions to HDR candidates and supervisors.

• A 6-month pilot Peer to Peer HDR mentoring program was introduced in September 2021 within Faculty of Arts and Education. The program will be assessed on its completion in early 2022, depending on the results it may be rolled to the other faculties.

• Increase engagement options with a Postgraduate Res student committee established, with Facebook and interact 2 sites developed, with regular drop in sessions for students.

• Supervisory training sessions run throughout the year.

• Increased funding to improve technology for a better student experience, for instance Examination Module within Research Master.

• Expression of Interest process is being built in the Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system to track the engagement and provide data to be analysed to assist with future direction of marketing.

A new action will be introduced to monitor the success of the above mitigations on satisfaction for On-line students and completion rates.

134


5. Onshore Third Party Providers

The Onshore cohort is predominantly comprised of International students studying On-Campus through Charles Sturt Study Centres. A very small cohort of Domestic students is enrolled On-Campus through Holmesglen TAFE and Northern Sydney Institute of TAFE. Only one student commenced an Online course through Third Party Providers in 2020.

Approximately 18% of Onshore commencing students are studying Bachelor (Undergraduate) courses whilst 82% are studying Postgraduate by Coursework (Postgraduate) courses. Undergraduate enrolment figures have fallen by 64% in 2020, largely due to restrictions imposed as a result of COVID-19. Load for commencing students has dropped but not to the same degree as enrols (down 35%). Postgraduate figures follow a similar trajectory with a decline of 70% in enrolments and 35% in load.

Overall Key Benchmarks

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % Course Profile Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % Course

Profile

Enrols 794 -34.1% -30.0% 100.0% 4601 -36.0% +14.5% 100.0%

Internal 769 -35.5% -32.1% 96.9% 4593 -36.0% +19.3% 99.8%

Commencing 209 -64.1% -56.8% 26.3% 947 -69.9% -54.1% 20.6%

Continuing 560 -8.2% -13.7% 70.5% 3646 -9.3% +104.3% 79.2%

Online 25 +92.3% +1150.0% 3.1% 8 -33.3% -95.2% 0.2%

Commencing 1 - - 0.1% 0 - - 0.0%

Continuing 24 +84.6% +1100.0% 3.0% 8 -33.3% -90.2% 0.2%

Load 508.1 -35.9% -32.4% 100.0% 2606.6 -35.9% +15.9% 100.0%

Internal 508.1 -35.9% -32.4% 100.0% 2606.6 -35.9% +18.2% 100.0%

Commencing 134.3 -65.0% -55.1% 26.4% 576.0 -67.6% -46.7% 22.1%

Continuing 373.9 -8.5% -17.4% 73.6% 2030.6 -11.2% +80.6% 77.9%

Online - - - - - - - -

Commencing - - - - - - - -

Continuing - - - - - - - -

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark* Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs

Benchmark*

Commencing Progress

Internal 71.8% +9.1 -3.6 86.3% 91.6% +13.0 +8.4 91.8%

Online - - - - - - - -

First Year Attrition

Internal 45.7% +7.9 +26.6 15.5% 24.7% +10.6 +17.8 13.5%

Online - - - - - - - -

Completions

Internal 51.4% -3.3 -10.4 69.6% 75.1% -2.7 +0.7 82.9%

Online - - - - 83.5% +1.4 -8.8 67.7%

StES Overall Satisfaction

Internal 75.0% +12.4 +5.7 69.5% 69.3% -7.9 - 64.7%

Online - - - - - - - -

StES Teaching Quality

Internal 81.5% +7.9 -5.2 80.1% 79.5% -2.2 - 77.5%

Online - - - - - - - -

135


Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 4 Yr chg vs Benchmark* Postgrad 1 Yr chg 4 Yr chg vs

Benchmark*

GOS - CEQ Overall Satisfaction

Internal 79.1% -3.3 -1.8 80.1% 74.5% -6.0 -4.2 80.3%

Online - - - - 100.0% +12.5 +7.4 85.6%

GOS - Full Time Employment

Internal 36.0% -19.9 -23.1 63.9% 36.3% -1.0 -7.3 63.2%

Online - - - - 83.3% -16.7 -2.9 89.9%

GOS -Further Full Time Study

Internal 4.5% -6.6 -9.7 20.8% 16.4% 1.7 3.6 9.9%

Online - - - - 20.0% 8.2 12.9 7.3%

Student performance metrics have been impacted to varying degrees by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Charles Sturt adapted learning and teaching arrangements in response to government mandated restrictions and students who were enrolled to study On-Campus were required to study online for the majority of the year. Note that that officially reported attendance modes that form the basis of this report were not changed to reflect this temporary modification. The retention of original study modes has enabled analysis of the impacts of COVID on the On-Campus cohort that was ‘forced’ online, a summary of the overall effects is:

• Attrition increased for the international cohort with onshore students impacted to a greater degree

than students enrolled offshore. Onshore undergraduate students experienced the highest rate of

attrition.

• The commencing onshore cohort studying at the undergraduate level reported an improvement in

both overall satisfaction and satisfaction with teaching quality compared to both the previous year’s

cohort and their postgraduate counterparts.

• Graduate full-time employment decreased across the sector, but undergraduate students enrolled at

Charles Sturt Study Centres appear to have been severely impacted.

• Several themes were identified within the scope of the student performance analysis which warrant consideration at the specific provider level:

• High attrition and low completion rates at Charles Sturt Study Centres, particularly at the

undergraduate level.

• Student experience overall satisfaction and teaching quality both low and declined last year for

Charles Sturt Study Centre students in Postgraduate courses.

• A drop in graduate satisfaction and full-time employment rates for Charles Sturt Study Centre

students at both course levels.

136


Charles Sturt Study Centres

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % of UG

Onshore Cohort Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

% of PG Onshore Cohort

Commencing Enrols 167 -66.9% -46.1% 79.5% 947 -69.9% -54.1% 100.0%

Commencing Load 100.6 -69.3% -43.3% 75.0% 576.0 -67.6% -46.7% 100.0%

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark* Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark*


First Year Attrition 49.9% +8.0 +29.1 9.8% 24.7% +10.6 +17.8 13.2%

Completions 45.5% -1.6 -13.3 79.8% 75.1% -2.7 +4.2 84.9%

StES Overall Satisfaction 81.8% +19.8 +18.8 62.2% 69.4% -7.8 - 60.5%

StES Teaching Quality 83.3% +6.7 -1.9 75.4% 79.5% -2.2 - 74.1%



GOS - Full Time Employment 28.6% -17.8 -22.9 42.9% 36.3% -1.0 -7.3 44.7%


The Charles Sturt Study Centres are operated by Study Group Australia. The partnership between Study Group Australia and Charles Sturt University has successfully operated for 25 years providing education to international students onshore on metropolitan campuses in Melbourne and Sydney, and more recently, Brisbane.

Composition of Charles Sturt Study Centre 2020 commencing enrolments:

• Undergraduate students account for approximately 15%. With a steep decline in enrolments in the last year (down 67%) this cohort now has just 167 students.

• Postgraduate students account for over 85%. Commencing postgraduate enrolments are down from approximately 3150 students in 2019 to 947 in 2020 (down by 67%).

Figure 15: Charles Sturt Study Centre Commencing Enrolments by Course Level

Charles Sturt Study Centres have detailed insights and actions in the Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Studies Student Performance Report.

137



UNDERGRADUATE

Student satisfaction and teaching quality improved last year and both now above the benchmark.

POSTGRADUATE

Commencing progress rates now above RUN benchmark and the disparity seen between campuses in 2019 has largely been resolved with both Sydney and Melbourne now at 92% (up 18.6pp and 10.3pp respectively) and Brisbane at 85.4% (up 19.4pp).


ATTRITION

Attrition has more than doubled over the period (45.7%), with very sharp increase experienced in 2018, reflecting accreditation issues at Charles Sturt Study Centres, and as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and similar in the postgraduate courses.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences identified the increase in attrition rates across all three Study Centre campuses as likely to be due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The largest attrition rate was in Sydney at 34.97%. The Faculty notes that attrition rates will be monitored via the Study Centre Academic Management Committee meetings.

UNDERGRADUATE

• Commencing progress rates improved after 3-year decline and needs to continue to improve as remaining below benchmark.

• Completions are low and in decline.

Field of Education: Management and Commerce

Undergraduate course progress rates, whilst improved, remain low at 50.8% (RUN benchmark 76.5%).

Undergraduate course completion rates continue to fall. Given this partnership will be in phase out, needs to be a focus to get students to complete.

POSTGRADUATE

• Overall satisfaction and teaching quality low and declined last year.

Field of Education: Management and Commerce

Accounts for 27% of all Study Centre enrolments with 81% in Postgraduate courses.

Progress rates, whilst have improved for the third year in a row, the size of this cohort means a continued focus of improvement needs to remain at the rate remains below the RUN benchmark (89.1%).

Student overall satisfaction dropped in 2020 after several years of improvement but continues to sit more than 10pp above the Management and Commerce benchmark. In contrast to Information Technology, this cohort reported increasing rates of satisfaction with teaching quality with a 15.2pp uplift since 2017.

Field of Education: Information Technology

Information Technology accounts for 72% of enrolments at Study Centres with 86% studying at the Postgraduate level.

Postgraduate student satisfaction rates continue to fall, down 18.1pp since 2017 to 69.9% in 2020. Despite being relatively low, the rate sits above the sector Information Technology benchmark of 57.6%. Satisfaction with teaching quality has seen gradual decline, down 8.1pp over the three-year period to 78.2% but also compares favourably to the benchmark.

Due to the recent decision by Charles Sturt University to not extend the agreement with Study Group Australia beyond December 2022, teaching quality and improving outcomes for currently enrolled students, will be monitored in action AS/77 in the Faculty Plan. The Faculty notes that all rates will also be monitored via the regular Study Centre Academic Management Committee meetings. Teaching quality in particular will be regularly monitored during 2022 via action FOBJBS -1 in the 2020 - 2021 plan which includes staff induction and peer reviews, by Charles Sturt academic and DLT staff, of teaching quality.

138


Holmesglen TAFE

This is an On-Campus, Undergraduate, largely Domestic cohort representing around 20% of Onshore partner enrolments (up from 10% in 2019). There were 42 commencing students in 2020, a large decrease after student numbers peaked in 2019. For five years, enrolments at Holmesglen represent the Bachelor of Oral Health (Therapy/Hygiene), though multiple courses (that are no longer offered) figure in the five-year change calculations for attrition and completions. There are no graduate outcome results available for this cohort.

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % of UG Onshore Cohort Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % of PG Onshore

Cohort

Commencing Enrols 42 -30.0% +7.7% 20.1% - - - -

Commencing Load 32.6 -30.8% -8.7% 24.3% - - - -

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark* Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark

Commencing Progress 94.0% +12.8 +3.0 86.3% - - - -

First Year Attrition 15.0% +9.1 -5.0 17.3% - - - -

Completions 79.5% +3.9 +20.8 66.9% - - - -

StES Overall Satisfaction 50.0% -11.5 -30.0 70.8% - - - -

StES Teaching Quality 75.0% +11.0 -11.7 80.9% - - - - *Benchmarking for Holmesglen TAFE is based on On-Campus, domestic, undergraduate sector-wide results.


Progress rates improved dramatically in 2020, with a 12.8pp increase to 94%. After several years of not meeting the benchmark, the recent improvement lifts the cohort result well above the target of 86.3%.

Figure 16: Progress rates Homesglen

139



• Commencing student satisfaction has declined sharply for the second year in a row. Though cohort sizes are small (n=12), the fall from 85.7% in 2018 to 50% in 2020 warrants attention, with last year’s results clearly the lowest over the five-year period, and well below the relevant benchmark. Despite the rate of satisfaction with teaching quality improving in 2020 (up 11pp to 75%), it too remains below the benchmark. There are no graduate outcome results available for this cohort.

• Completion rates for this cohort essentially represent courses that are no longer offered. Excluding these courses, the rate dropped 3.3pp in the last year to 79.5%, yet far exceeding the benchmark of 66.9%. While the rate is relatively high, it would be expected to decline in coming years given trends in first year attrition.

In 2020 a number of measures were instigated including the Faculty of Science and Health developing a plan, in conjunction with the Division of Learning and Teaching, to improve subject quality with a specific focus on increasing first year progress and student satisfaction. The plan should be completed in December 2021.

FOSH was also asked to monitor the improved communication tactics introduced in 2020 to ensure that the Faculty continues to be upfront with students regarding the costs in completing the Bachelor of Oral Health and the requirement to spend long blocks of time in Wagga, and if this corresponds to increased student satisfaction. This is ongoing.

No new actions will be introduced in 2021. Progress on existing measures from the 2019 – 2020 plan will remain open and will be monitored in 2021 & 2022.

Northern Sydney Institute of TAFE

Northern Sydney Institute of TAFE only reported one commencing enrolment in 2020 and therefore student performance metrics will not be discussed in this report.

Note: Northern Sydney Institute of TAFE teach out completed 202160, with any remaining students to transfer to Charles Sturt’s online offering of the Bachelor of Education (Birth to Five) years.

140


6. Offshore Third Party Providers

The Offshore cohort is overwhelmingly enrolled in On-Campus Undergraduate degree courses at Chinese partner institutes, whilst very small cohorts exist for On-Campus Postgraduate by Coursework (Postgraduate) study and Online study at both Undergraduate and Postgraduate level.

In 2020, 93% of Offshore commencing students were studying Undergraduate courses whilst 7% were studying Postgraduate courses. The size of the Bachelor cohort declined sharply between 2015 and 2017 (due to falling enrolments at Jilin Uni) and despite growth again in the last three years, remains approximately 10% down over the five-year period. The Postgraduate cohort is very small by comparison with around 65-75 students enrolled each year. Offshore offerings at Third Party Provider campuses in most cases represent a single and unique combination of Partner, Course Level, Attendance Mode and Broad Field of Education. For this reason, trends, and trajectories as well as comparisons to benchmarks are best examined at a partner level, the focus of the detailed sections of this report.

Key Benchmarks

Benchmarks in this section refer to internal, international, undergraduate results for the sector.


Commencing Progress

Internal 94.1% +8.3 +0.8 86.1% 84.2% +21.0 +14.6 90.3%

Online 88.9% -3.4 0.0 83.9% 96.8% +0.6 +6.4 88.2%

First Year Attrition

Internal 15.5% +4.6 +5.1 9.8% 34.4% +1.1 +21.9 13.2%

Online 0.0% -10.0 0.0 9.7% 2.7% -0.1 -24.6 17.3%

Completions

Internal 79.4% -4.3 -13.4 79.8% 76.2% -8.2 -16.3 84.9%

Online 90.0% +23.3 +2.5 73.7% 65.1% +10.6 -15.5 76.7%

*Benchmarking for the Offshore cohort is based on international student sector-wide results contextualised by attendance mode and

course level.

Third Party Providers with commencing enrolments in 2020

Provider Course Level Mode Student Domesticity

China Partners

Economic & Finance Institute

Ming Hua

SPACE, University of Hong Kong

Undergrad

Postgrad

Undergrad & Postgrad

Undergrad & Postgrad

On-Campus

On-Campus

On-Campus

Online

International

International

International

International

141


China Partners (Joint Cooperative Program)


Offshore Cohort Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

% of PG Offshore Cohort

Commencing Enrols 938 +6.2% -9.4% 98.5% - - - -

Commencing Load 820.5 +6.7% -9.2% 99.6% - - - -

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark* Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark

Commencing Progress 94.1% +8.4 +0.8 86.1% - - - -

First Year Attrition 15.5% +4.7 +5.1 9.8% - - - -

Completions 79.4% -4.3 -14.0 79.8% - - - -

*Benchmarking for China Partners is based on On-Campus, international, undergraduate, sector-wide results.

This partnership accounts for over 99% of commencing Offshore load. Enrolments have varied significantly over the five years examined, with 938 commencing last year after previously declining from ~1,100 to ~600. Students all study the Bachelor of Business Studies, On-Campus at four different sites. The largest site, Jilin University of Finance and Economics (JUFE), accounts for around half the commencing enrolments and nearly all of the variability observed across the five-year period. Enrolments have been consistent at Yangzhou, Tianjin and Yunnan. Benchmarks in this section refer to On-Campus, International, Undergraduate results for the sector.


Progress rates have risen substantially in 2020, up 8.4pp to 94.1% and exceed the benchmark overall. Results vary by campus however, with JUFE largely accounting for the improvement, with a 25.1pp increase in the last year. In 2020, JUFE reported a commencing progress rate of 89.5% while all other sites were above 95%.


Attrition rates JUFE recording far higher and more variable rates than other sites. Since reporting zero attrition in 2018 the JUFE rate has risen to 31.2% in 2020. JUFE has seen a continued decline in completion rates last year, corresponding to increased attrition for that cohort. Attrition trends point to further declines in coming years.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences notes that they are undertaking significant work to prepare China students for learning in the Australian context. From 202175, Charles Sturt’s staff will commence teaching an additional 8 of the 16 JCP pathway subjects, bringing the total number of subjects taught by Charles Sturt to 16. This increased teaching will assist students to become more familiar with Australian pedagogical models. The teaching of the additional subjects also ensures students are less likely to exit the degree with a Chinese qualification. Additionally, the Faculty aims to increase professional development sessions for China academic staff and undertake further reviews of subjects in China. Measures are outlined in Action 72 from the 2019 -2020 plan which remains open.

142


Economic and Finance Institute (Cambodia)




Commencing Enrols - - - - 35 +29.6% +66.7% 48.6%

Commencing Load - - - - 14.3 +0.9% +65.2% 62.3%

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark*

Commencing Progress - - - - 84.2% +25.6 +14.6 90.3%

First Year Attrition - - - - 40.7% +6.1 +28.2 13.2%

Completions - - - - 76.2% -8.2 -0.1 84.9%

*Benchmarking for Economic and Finance Institute is based on On-Campus, international, postgraduate, sector-wide results.

This is a small partnership, representing less than 2% of Offshore load with all students studying the Master of Commerce (with Specialisations) on campus. Thirty-five students commenced last year, up from 21 in 2015. Benchmarks in this section refer to On-Campus, International, Postgraduate sector results.


Commencing progress has increased sharply, up from a low of 58.6% in 2019 to 84.2% in 2020 (25.6pp).

This is a result of the 2019-2020 Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences actions which included the change of teaching delivery and assessment responsibilities to Charles Sturt and the shift to online delivery due to COVID-19. Teaching support and resources were also increased during this period.


Attrition increased for the third year in a row to a high of 40.7%. At just 12.5% in 2015, the rate has risen 28.2pp over the five-year period and sits more than 25pp above the benchmark result. Completion rates fell 8.2pp in 2020, corresponding to the increase in attrition rates from 2016. As completion rates correlate closely with first year attrition, a steep decline in completions is likely to occur in the next few years.

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences instigated a number of measures during 2020. Student Performance Data is regularly monitored as a standing work plan item at EFI Academic Management Committee meetings. Reporting has identified where improvements are required, such as in FIN531. In particular, learning materials for pathway subjects MKT501, ECO501 and FIN 156 were updated to support the transition to online delivery required due to COVID-19 restrictions. Additionally, face-to-face exams changed to an online electronic submission to accommodate online education due to the impacts of Covid. An upward trajectory is expected from 2020.

143


Ming Hua




Commencing Enrols 5 -37.5% - 0.5% 2 -60.0% - 2.8%

Commencing Load 0.9 -65.0% - 0.1% 0.8 -62.5% - 3.3%


Commencing Progress 100.0% 0.0 - 86.1% 100.0% 0.0 - 90.3%

First Year Attrition 12.5% -12.5 - 9.8% 0.0% -25.0 - 13.2%

Completions - - - - - - - -

*Benchmarking for Ming Hua is based on On-Campus, international, sector-wide results contextualised by course level.

Established in 2017, this is a very small cohort with Undergraduate and Postgraduate study in Theology.

Commencing enrolments were just 7 last year, the lowest number of students since inception.

With so few students commencing, few metrics have sufficient sample size to provide insight into student

performance. Progress was 100% for both course level cohorts last year, as it was in the previous year.

Attrition for the Undergrad cohort was 12.5% in 2020 (n=8), down from 25% in 2019 (n=4). Postgrad attrition

was zero and the cohort is too new to observe any completion rates.

SPACE, University of Hong Kong

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % of UG Offshore

Cohort Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg



Commencing Load 2.3 -30.8% -55.0% 0.3% 7.9 +21.2% +14.5% 34.4%


Commencing Progress 88.9% -3.4 0.0 83.9% 96.8% +0.6 +6.4 88.2%

First Year Attrition 0.0% -10.0 0.0 9.7% 2.7% -0.1 -24.6 17.3%

Completions 90.0% +23.3 +2.5 73.7% 65.1% +10.6 -21.1 76.7%

This is a small cohort with considerable variance between 2015 and 2018 and increased stability in the last

three years. Last year 44 students commenced across the Bachelor and Master of Information Studies.

Benchmarks in this section refer to Online, International sector results per course level.


Remains above the RUN Benchmarks in both undergraduate and postgraduate and completions have been a focus of the Faculty in the past year with an improvement of 10.6% resulting.

144


Appendix 1. 2019-2020 Evaluated Actions

2019 Strategy Transition and 2020 Sustainable Futures Transformation Program

In May 2020 the Sustainable Future transformation program reshaped and reposition the University, parts of the 2022 University Strategy were accelerated, and budget remediation was completed.

The 2020 TEQSA Provider Risk Rating changed our overall risk to financial position to be rated to moderate which was an increase from low applied in 2019 meaning the focus will remain on financial sustainability into 2021 and 2022. The Sustainable Futures Transformation Program has now been completed in 2021 to address this and the below table identifies completed actions and those transitioning to 2030.

Our Student Outputs

Activities 2020+ Activities (to continue)

2020+ Sustainable Futures Activities

Student-Centred Culture

• Student Lifecycle Project

• Centralised student communication model

• 24/7 IT Helpdesk

• ResLife refresh

• Campus hubs

• Student co-creation mechanisms

• Optimised student-facing functions

• Student Retention Strategy (Student Retention Operational Plan)

• Immediate actions potential support service reductions

High-quality learning and teaching

• End to end GLO solution

• Professional development processes and reporting for Learning and Teaching staff

• Learning and Teaching Framework

• Charles Sturt Advantage Model

• Learning and Teaching Framework


• Scholarly Environmental Model

Transformed learning

environments

Transform online learning proof of concept:

• Collaborative subject design

• New delivery model

• Personalised student support (removed)

• Development of online and blended teaching strategies

• Quality learning spaces

• Transform online embedded


• Immediate actions potential support service reductions

Market-oriented courses, services and facilities

• Course and subject profile review

• Framework to support co-design

• Staff understanding of market orientation

• International and PG Fee Paying growth plans

• Revitalised courses (market orientated and co-created)

• Annual Course Health Checks

• Load Planning Project

• Courses and Campus - Optimisation Project - Campus Futures - International

Strategy

• Revenue generation - Micro-credentials - Future Learn

Brand awareness and marketing activities

• Brand message and value proposition

• Marketing plans aligned to key market segments

• Implement workforce capability review

• Operationalise student acquisition and conversion project

• Customer Experience Strategy

• School and community engagement strategy

• Course entry requirements aligned to brand position

• Marketing plans aligned to key market segments

• School and community engagement strategy

• Admissions Process Improvement Project

145


Action Summary Table


2020 Number of Actions

Evaluated (New 2021 Action)

Evaluated (Recommend Closure)

VCLT 20 5 15

IPC 0 0 3

APLT 9 1 8

PVO 15 3 12

FOSH 7 0 7

FOBJBS 13 4 9

FOAE 8 2 4

146


Action Plan

Evaluation and progress against actions from 2019 - 2020 report on student performance is shown in the following table.

Metric/Action Progress/Evaluation STATUS

AS/68 Special Entry Programs

Responsibility: Provost and Exec Deans Focus: Progress and attrition

Charles Sturt has special entry programs that provide potential students with alternative pathways into Charles Sturt programs. Special entry programs have been shown to be generally positive in terms of student outcomes. The Faculties have adopted the Charles Sturt Advantage program (2019 implementation for 2020 Session 30 intake) for most undergraduate courses. Student success under this program should be assessed as soon as relevant student outcome is available. Faculties also request additional training for Faculty and School Leadership on the data and dashboards including the provision of support to ensure this data is comprehensively considered by School and Faculty Boards which reports are tabled for discussion.

May 2021

In progress Charles Sturt Advantage. Initial analysis for all Charles Sturt students enrolled in 2020 were;

• applicants are 10% more likely to be here at the start of university than their school-leaver counterparts.

• 10% higher progress rate • 20% lower withdrawal rate.

The faculties are working with DLT to develop training for Faculty and School leadership on the data and dashboards to be rolled out in the second half of 2021.

FOAE: Last year FOAE increased the number of FOAE courses participating in the Charles Sturt Advantage program.

BJBS: In 2021 the number of courses in the Charles Sturt Advantage program has increased.

FoS: In 2021 the FoS had the highest proportion of courses and enrolments of students through the Charles Sturt Advantage program.

August 2021

Training has been completed for staff in FOSH and BJBS, now moved to BAU process.

FOAE: Training requested including specific monitoring of the new Bachelor of Communication. Training to begin mid-September 2021 at data-maturity and then run monthly as long as necessary. Anticipated project close December 2021 and moved to a BAU process.

In progress - for FOAE only.

Estimated completion date – December 2021

AS/69 HDR Progress and Attrition Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) Focus: Progress and attrition

May 2021 Exit survey data will be retrieved from last 12 months, analysed and a report to be developed by the end of July. August 21 – Review of exit surveys from candidates, a sample of 40% of all WC over the last 12 months. Major factor for withdrawal is due to family and/or work issues. The findings from the second annual Graduate Research Experience Survey (GRES) 2021

survey will be analysed to provide a clearer view of issues as the exit survey had such small

numbers. Dependent on the outcomes of this survey and further discussion with relevant

stakeholders, it will form appropriate actions to address the findings.

In progress

Estimated completion date - 1st quarter of 2022. Will be incorporated in the 2022 report.

147



Influencing factors that are outside of the University’s control (such as family or work-related reasons) for HDR (Higher Degree by Research) attrition rates require further analysis to validate the anecdotal evidence to suggest that Charles Sturt does take on a high proportion of candidates who are mid or late career commencers, as opposed to candidates who commence a HDR following an uninterrupted, undergraduate degree to Honours to HDR pathway, resulting in higher attrition rates related to family or work-commitments. HDR candidate withdrawal reasons are being captured as part of the newly implemented standard exit survey process for in place for coursework candidates.

GRES 2020 results did indicate an overall high level of satisfaction by students with their HDR program, however the work done over the last 12 months impact will not be known until the 2021 GRES is undertaken and reviewed. 2020 data update: After an increase in attrition in 2019, the rate has dropped to 6.5% in 2020 (down almost 7pp) and is the lowest rate over a five-year period. This rate is on par with the RUN benchmark group for Postgraduate by Research students studying On-Campus however it exceeds the sector benchmark rate by just over 2pp.

Attrition for the Part-Time cohort has been extremely variable over the period with swings of up to 15% from year to year. However, the rate in the last two years has remained relatively stable with an improvement from 15% in 2019 to 13% in 2020.

Research areas and faculties have worked hard to provide flexibility to research for candidates, in how to approach their research project and undertaking tasks differently, for instance offering research methods online instead of face to face.

AS/70 Dubbo campus special initiatives

Responsibility: Provost and Exec Deans.

Focus: Progress and attrition.

Faculties are requesting an end of year evaluation of the impact of specific initiatives trialled on the Dubbo campus, including a condensed timetable so that students only have to be on-campus for 3 days per week. Faculties are further analysing the reasons why students are leaving degree programs in Dubbo to determine any further common factors.

May 2021

Provost Office has evaluation data to analyse and share with Exec Deans.

FoAE - As a result of optimisation efforts FOAE is now phasing out the on-campus Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) degree, leaving only social work (f2f) and SIAS (on-line).

August 2021 Dubbo campus report circulated to Faculties by Provost Office. The report (written in 2019) revealed that the condensed 3 day timetable was popular with students who were often combining study with travel to campus, work and family commitments. The 2020 - 2021 SPR data shows improving attrition (down 10.7pp in the last year) and completion rates (up 17.2pp to 52%) for Dubbo students. Progress rates in 2020 were still low on Dubbo campus at 74.9% which is 4.2pp below the RUN benchmark. Measures implemented in 2021 will not have an effect until 2022.

Completed + New action in 2020 -2021 report with focus on progress.

148



Additional early support interventions have been included for key subjects run out of Dubbo (See AS/73). Some subjects which have high enrolments delivered at Dubbo, including NRS160 Contexts of Nursing, have recently (late 2021) been nominated for DLT minor/moderate builds for 202230 (see AS/84). Other courses including the TAFE integrated Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) have had the order of subjects changed to ensure students are not overloaded with challenging assessments in their first year. Significant negotiations have taken place with TAFE NSW to ensure the combined assessments from TAFE & Uni in the integrated course are not overwhelming to students. New action in 2020 – 2021 report to look specifically at progress rates at Dubbo. This item can be closed + New action.

AS/71 Academic Policies

Responsibility: The Provost DVC (Academic).

The entire suite of academic policies is being revised under the Academic Governance Review Project. A number of these policy revisions will have a positive impact on progression and attrition rates. For example, any commencing, domestic students who have not engaged in any of their subjects prior to the census date will have their enrolment cancelled.

May 2021 AGRP and Policy work is now complete. Item can be closed. Completed

AS/72 University - Partnerships Responsibility: Provost and Exec Deans Focus: Progress and attrition

The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences (FoBJBS) is funding the major project (September 2019 to August 2021). It will take a holistic approach to educational change, and thus focuses on teachers, student resources and compliance to the HESF standards. Firstly, a design component will adapt and contextualise resources to better suit the needs of the Partners and their teaching staff. Secondly, a teaching component will support those teaching staff through improved teaching skills to be able to implement the designs and be recognised for their achievements. The student component aims to prepare students for new pedagogical and learning strategies so that they are ready for learning in an Australian context. This will be undertaken in a collaboration between both Charles Sturt and the Partners.

May 2021 Multiple actions are considered here.

(i) Complete. Significant work has been completed to improve lesson plans and resources for the China lecturers in the “pathway subjects. Following a review in 2019, BJBS Schools with significant partner delivery commenced a project of improving teaching resources provided to partners. For example, SAF has completed the blended learning project in the MPA at Study Centre. The project focused on resource provision and training of partner staff to better utilise the resource pack in their face to face teaching. This greatly helped student success during 2020 when all teaching moved Online due to COVID. Partner lecturers were able to work confidently with the Online resources to support student learning. The impact of this project resulted in enhanced student outcomes in 2020 for the MPA subjects. The project also addressed the provision of resources for use in class teaching in the China pathways subjects at the start of each session. This followed an analysis of accessibility of recourse's given restriction in China to internet resources, and textbook limitations. Resources for the subjects taught by CSU (the "final eight") have been fully adapted to be best practice Online resources to support face to face learning. These initiatives greatly assisted in 2020 in the transition when all teaching was conducted online due to COVID issues, continued in 2021. Initial analyses have confirmed that student use of resources increased, and progression rates improved over this year. SCM and SMM (now the

In progress

149



School of Business) also provided additional support for partner staff as all teaching moved from on-campus to on-line, such as the production of brief, targeted videos that could be used by partner staff.

(ii) Completed (BAU). Partner teaching staff are acknowledged for teaching excellence through Charles Sturt recognised teaching awards specific to Study Centre and awarded by the Executive Dean in public "gala" events (conducted on-line in 2020/2021), and, in the case of SCM, school specific awards. Promotion and recognition, and more importantly, the sharing of teaching excellence is an ongoing goal of the Scholarly Environment Model, which has been piloted at the Study Centres, and which is in the process of being mainstreamed at Charles Sturt.

(iii) In progress. This action was related to the strategic goal of there being a transition for China students from the Bus into postgraduate courses at CSU, and the concept of a "campus within campus" on the Port Macquarie campus. This latter project has not progressed, however, the goal of China graduates progressing to on-shore study at Port Macquarie is still a goal supported by in-country marketing within the China partners.

August 2021 In progress (iii above). Preparing students for learning in the Australian context. Charles Sturt’s staff currently teach the “final 8” subjects in China (currently on-line due to COVID travel restrictions) and will commence teaching 8 of the 16 pathway subjects commencing in 202175. This will bring the total number of subjects being taught by Charles Sturt’s staff to 16, that being 8 pathway and 8 final subjects. This increased course teaching will assist students to become more familiar with Australian pedagogical models. However, COVID restrictions have not enabled planned in-country Profession Development sessions to occur with academic staff within the partner universities in China. Progression and attrition will continue to be monitored, especially at JUFE.

AS/73 Indigenous Student Academic Support.

Responsibility: Previously Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students) now Provost DVC (Academic).

Indigenous Students progress rates 12.9% lower than non-indigenous students. Overall satisfaction is down 25% over a 5 year period.

a) Support levels are maintained and aligned to the Bachelor of Nursing needs with the increase in undergraduate enrolments. b) Close examination of the undergraduate on-campus progress with the

In progress – May 2021 Handover/update not received with the recent disestablishment of the DVCS role. Meeting set with Executive Director in Division of Student Success in May to progress actions. Action now being monitored by Provost DVC (Academic).

In progress September 2021 -

a) Nursing: Support levels in the first year subjects in the Bachelor of Nursing have been increased during 2021. More tutors have been embedded in first year subjects and targeted phone support for disengaged students has been implemented. All First Nations nursing students were communicated with at least once per session. Additionally, the First Nations team has collaborated with the Retention Team to contact students who failed subjects. At this point, further support was put in place or at least offered. Stats for nursing students indicated that 86% of students who failed a subject in session one was

In progress

Roll into the 2020 -2021 report to monitor effectiveness of the actions.

150



Faculties as this is a risk, and strategies are created to address the widening gap between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous students. Important: Care and consideration to be given to the potential of this program operating online in the medium term or in a restricted format on campus given the Coronavirus Pandemic. c) Adequate support is directed to address the sharp decline in online completions, graduate satisfaction (particularly in their first year) and graduate full time employment for postgraduates.

not registered to First Nations Student Connect. Further to this, work is progressing with the School to explore a more in depth and targeted approach to supporting nursing students, through a new First Nations Pathways in Nursing initiative. With an expected rollout during 2022, this collaboration will include a joint approach to attraction and entry strategies, customisation of support based on retention data and recent trends, customisation of various aspects of First Nations Student Connect, and ongoing avenues to receive and respond to student feedback. (Also see AS/84 where courses are being redesigned).

b) In 2021, First Nations Student Connect (FNSC) was launched. Previously teams

supporting First Nations students often operated in silos, and it became confusing for students to be aware of the available touch points and were often pushed to another team to address an area of concern. A key goal of FNSC was to create a unified service that would have one point of entry for students for ease of access. Once a student is registered with FNSC an Adviser is assigned, and an appointment organised. This is the commencement of what is anticipated to be an ongoing relationship where the student is comfortable to engage at a time of need. FNSC advisers contacted 103 students in order to understand individual student issues, commence rapport building with students who have yet to engage and offered support to follow up with the concerns raised through the process. Content-specific tutoring is offered to all First Nations students registered to First Nations Student Connect.

c) In addition to the above measures, First Nations students are Assignment feedback is

available from tutors. There have been additional referrals to academic skill workshops run by the academic skills teams, including assessment writing.

The metrics will be re-examined in 2022 to see if these measures were effective.

AS/74 International Graduate Satisfaction

Responsibility: Previously Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students) now Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: Progress

Progress - on-campus is in steep decline 17% over the past 5 years. Student satisfaction has declined.

May 2021 Covid 19 has disrupted the number of international students being able to study on-campus. However, a number of new support teams have been introduced within the Division of Student Success. The International Student Officers are designated experts, case managing the international students and providing a broad and consistent level of support. They also refer international students to other support areas across the university as required. They act as the primary contact point for international students. For instance, within the Division of Student Success international students can access support from the Careers and Skills Hub and Academic Skills teams.

Completed

151



Recommend the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Students) review International student support regarding the undergraduate on-campus student satisfaction survey results and Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) progress rate decline with Faculties and develop an action plan to address.

Another initiative includes the updating the Position Descriptions for Student Representatives and Clubs' Officer roles to clarify responsibilities for supporting students. A pre-departure module for international students has been developed to improve the level of preparedness.

SSAF funding has been approved for:

• International student connection activity throughout 2021

• Pre-departure support: online workshops that cover key concerns for international students aimed explicitly at Australia.

• Successful Graduate International Job Readiness Portal (OGEP bid).

Whilst metrics haven’t been improved, they are being monitored closely given the circumstances. Item can be closed.

AS/75 Student Retention

Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic). Focus: Retention

The Student Retention Operational Plan remains as an output of the revamped strategy as previously decided by the Vice-Chancellor's Leadership Team. This will include consideration of resources, budget and other requirements needed in order to fully deliver in alignment with the Higher Education Standards Panel recommendation 5.

In progress – April 2021 Student Experience Committee has been leading the implementation of the operational plan. With recent changes, PVDVCA & PVCLT are investigating the integration of this into the Education Framework and aligning/integrating the implementation plan.

September 2021

The Student Retention Framework was released in September 2021 by DSS. The Framework is based on the TEQSA recommended model with best practice examples. Investigation of the operational items as a key output under the 2030 University Strategy, Education Pillar in relation to either Load Optimisation and Equity and/or Excellence in Teaching and Student Success.

Recommend closure as evaluation metrics will be monitored in alignment with operational areas.

Completed

AS/76 University - VET students Responsibility: Provost and Exec Deans Focus: Progress and Attrition

An evaluation of credit and support for students with VET qualifications is recommended at a University level to be led by the Associate Deans, (Academic). VET students have been found to have high attrition rates and low progress and we are yet to address this with any effective actions. The review needs to be focused on the crediting of Certificate 4 and Certificate 3 qualifications. It is noted that Division of Student Administration are requesting the entry criteria be lowered across the three Faculties and this request needs to be put on hold until the review has been completed.

May 2021 Recently the three Associate Deans (Academic) (ADA) have been contacted regarding Cert III/Cert IV credit analysis work to be undertaken and led by the ADAs. The three ADAs have had a preliminary scoping meeting to identify those relevant courses. Consideration will then be given to the significant changes in 2020 under both the optimisation and revitalisation projects. Remaining courses will then be examined and if necessary, credit awarded will be reconsidered. August 2021 Work is underway by the three ADAs to evaluate credit and support for students with VET qualifications, with a specific focus on the crediting of Certificate 4 and Certificate 3 qualifications.

In progress

Estimated completion date May 2022

152



AS/77 University - Phased out courses

Responsibility: Provost and Exec Deans Focus: Satisfaction and Progress

Some courses that are no longer offered but have students in phase-out/teach-out have been excluded from any analysis and it is recommended monitoring is completed for 2021 reporting. This will also include international students to assure Academic Senate students in phase-out/teach-out are supported given the increase in phase-out and teach-out from Sustainable Futures: Optimisation Project course decisions.

April 2021 Report is being developed with support from OPA and will be included in the University Annual Report next year as the impact of the phase outs are not present in this year’s data. This will align to the comprehensive analysis process to ensure any actions are captured.

FOAE: Once VCLT approvals are granted for the new Bachelor of Communication and two new specialisations in the BArts we can finalise the Faculty's teach-out plans and subject obsolescence schedule. The FOAE Executive Dean has been meeting with the students impacted by the teach-out of the various creative industries courses every 2-3 weeks in Wagga and is committed to continue doing so until all student issues and concerns are resolved. In progress

BJBS: As courses are identified for "phase out" as a part of the Course and Subject Optimization Project, phase out/teach out plans are developed at the time of proposed phase out, and Schools undertake appropriate staff planning, including the employment of session staff, as required. Monitoring of this, including student satisfaction and completion will be a component of the Student Performance Review.

FOSH: As courses are identified for "phase out" as a part of the Course and Subject Optimization Project, phase out/teach out plans are developed at the time of proposed phase out, and Schools undertake appropriate staff planning, including the employment of session staff, as required. Plans are in place for students who fail a subject in phase-out/teach out.

The Student Performance Reporting will continue to monitor student satisfaction and completion. August 2021

University - Reporting on this cohort will commence in 2021-22 as data for this current report 2020-2021 is created from 2019-2020 data so does not contain students impacted by the Optimisation course phase out decisions. These students will start to emerge in the reporting from 2021-22 onwards. Report is being developed with support from OPA and will be included in the University Annual Report in 2022 as the impact of the phase outs are not present in this year’s data. This will align to the comprehensive analysis process to ensure any actions are captured.

FOAE -Teach out plans have been produced which have informed 2022 Subject Availability Lists. Students enrolled in the Bachelor of Creative Industries (with specialisations) specifically contacted with course completion schedules. Continued maintenance on plans is being

In progress

153



undertaken. Situation continues to be monitored. Closure on immediate mapping aligned to EDRS, Oct-Dec 2021 at which point monitoring will continue as a BAU process to Q4 2023. Item can be closed.

AS/78 – Reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic).

The RUN benchmarking approach is endorsed by Academic Senate and included in future reporting.

April 2021 RUN Benchmarks established and incorporated into comprehensive analysis in 2019-2020 report. Item can be closed. Completed

AS/79 Undergraduate Pathways - The School of Policing Responsibility: Provost and Exec Dean (BJBS) Focus: Progress and attrition

Indigenous Students progress rates 12.9% lower than non-indigenous students. The School of Policing need to explore the appropriate delivery of the University Certificate in Workforce Essentials (UCWE) for Australian Indigenous students, as although progress has improved, an increased gap between Australian Indigenous students, and non-Australian Indigenous students has widened.

May 2021 Reconsidered Following consideration with the TAFE NSW Indigenous Police Recruitment Our Way Delivery Program (IPROWD) Project Co-Ordinator and IPROWD Steering Committee, it has been concluded that on campus delivery offerings is not a desirable option for enhancing the students’ progress. On campus may well in fact further restrict the viability for students to engage in the program due to the time they would be required to be away from their home environment to complete an on campus offering. A minimum of three on-line offerings are available for IPROWD students, scheduled for 2021 as planned. Non-IPROWD indigenous students will be provided with the Indigenous Academic Success Program (IASP) tutoring in the scheduled UCWA sessions.

2020 data shows: The successful collaboration between the School of Policing and TAFE NSW through the Indigenous Police Recruitment Our Way Delivery Program (IPROWD), supports Australian First Nations students to prepare for enrolment in, and progress towards, joining the NSW Police Force.

Progress rates for this cohort continue to sit well below the rate for the non-First Nations cohort with results of 75% and 87% respectively. The First Nations rate increased 4.1pp in the last year, slightly narrowing the gap to 12pp. Will be monitored by FOBJBS via Action FOBJS -3 in the 2020 -2021 Faculty Plan to ensure the measures are effective in the longer term.

Completed

AS/80 Undergraduate Pathways - The School of Policing Responsibility: Provost and Exec Dean (BJBS) Focus: Satisfaction

The School of Policing, after analysing the results of the student experience survey, has acknowledged that students are seeking further interaction with their peers. The school will implement weekly live online student tutorial sessions which are specifically designed to enable opportunities to interact with their peers. In addition to this, for

May 2021

Live online weekly tutorials and peer-to-peer learning discussion sessions were implemented in 202072 and continue. A peer-to-peer learning discussion forum was also introduced. The live online sessions are recorded, and a link provided to students to enable them to replay the sessions for learning/revision purposes and to enable students unable to attend the live sessions, the ability to access the tutorials and participate in the discussion board peer-to-peer learning forum.

Completed

154



the 202072 session, there will be tutorial sessions with students grouped for learning content discussions designed to enable collaborative learning experiences. Follow up on survey results in 2021.

September 2021: 2020 data shows: Overall positive results increased in 2020 to 85.7% from 72.9%. This is the highest rate since the course inception in 2015. Item can be closed.

AS/81 AS/80 Undergraduate Pathways - The School of Policing Responsibility: Provost and Exec Dean (BJBS) Focus: Progress From 2021, there will be three online offerings a year, exclusively for Indigenous Police Recruitment Our Way Delivery Program (IPROWD2) students with the aim of enabling higher progression rates. Indigenous non-IPROWD students will continue to be provided with IASP (Indigenous Academic Success Program) tutoring in the scheduled online UCWE sessions.

May 2021 In progress with 3 offerings now being offered as planned. September 2021 Progress rates for First Nations students improved from 70.9% in 2019 to 75% in 2020. Additional tutoring was offered in 2020 to all Indigenous students. 2021 progress rates will be reviewed again by the Faculty via the 2021 Faculty SPR report (Actions FOBJBS 2 & 3). Item can be closed.

Completed

AS/82 Undergraduate Pathways – Diploma of General Studies Responsibility: Previously Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students) and Provost DVC (Academic) now Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: Progress and satisfaction Progress rates fell by 10% in 2019 (87% in 2018 to 77% in 2019). Significant drops in satisfaction (down 25% from 91.7% in 2014 to 66.7% in 2019). Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Students) to provide an in-depth review of the Diploma of General Studies to identify actions to address the key areas for improvement given the significant drop in progress, overall satisfaction, teaching quality in 2019 and conversion rates. Insights, lead indicators and forecasts from the recently introduced (2020) non-award pathway program will be included.

April 2021 PVDVCA follow up on outcomes of previous review of Dip Gen Studies. Specific courses have been identified by OPA as potentially having significant opportunity for improved conversion, with some minor alterations to the delivery. Requested action from Faculties and Division of Student Success via email and identified as key action for Load Planning Workshops with OPA. Action now being monitored by Provost DVC (Academic). September 2021 – Major alterations to the delivery of the course were introduced in 2020. Principally the course is now delivered in-house as opposed to externally by TAFE. The Diploma of General Studies was also redeveloped to include a new set of subjects. An online offering was also introduced for the first time in 2020, with 47 students. Meetings have been held between Provost Office and the DSS staff, responsible for the delivery and monitoring of the Diploma of General Studies, to ensure that progress and satisfaction is monitored on an ongoing basis and will be reported via APLT. DSS are liaising with OPA to investigate the potential of benchmarking conversion rates for similar tertiary preparation courses at other institutions. The 2020 data shows that satisfaction levels have increased by +7.9% to 74.6%. Satisfaction with teaching quality has followed a very similar trajectory but has improved at a greater rate over the last three years. With an 11pp uplift in the last year the rate now sits at 83.9% and has returned to 2015 levels. Progress rates continued to fall to 66.5%. However, 2020 was an interrupted year with the on-campus courses moved to on-line due to Covid-19. DSS note that many students applied for special consideration and withdrew at various points during 2020. DSS are aware of this issue and both satisfaction and progress rates will continue to be monitored in 2022.

Completed

155



AS/83 Undergraduate - VET online and on-campus Responsibility: Previously Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students) and Provost DVC (Academic) now Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: Progress

Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Students) to consider a specific program of support to be established/piloted for VET online and on-campus students (noting that the review of credit activity is to be considered as part of the establishment of the program).

In progress – April 2021 Awaiting the review of credit activity before specific program is enacted otherwise, we are unable to record the effectiveness of any actions. Action now being monitored by Provost DVC (Academic). September 2021 – As per AS/76 Review of credit activity in programs is being undertaken by the three Associate Deans (Academic) (ADAs). Expected completion in first quarter of 2022.

In progress


AS/84 – Undergraduate Online Completions Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: Online completions

Drop of 5.8% in last year. Indigenous completions dropped 10% in 2019.

Online completion rates to be investigated including the declining rate of completions for low SES students and their low and declining satisfaction.

In progress – April 2021 Further analysis has been received from OPA.

Low SES student indicates Education courses have the second largest number of enrolments and had the greatest drop in completion rates with 20.7pp decline over 5 years (from 59.6% to 39.0%). Cohort has grown by 80% over the last 5 years and the TAFE basis of admission student cohort has tripled whilst they have had a drop of 30.2%pp in completions over the 5 year period. Provost Office (PVO) reviewed Faculty report and cause and whilst some broad actions have been set the cause with Education courses are yet to be identified. PVO requested Faculty to follow up with more detailed actions.

First Nation - of the 1020 low SES, 61 are First Nation. Completion rate has dropped from 48.6% to 29.5% over 5 years (down 19.1pp). Analysis from OPA notes, small cohort so large fluctuations, further analysis required as FoE data is too broad to identify causes and appropriate actions. Note: Linked to action AS/73 September 2021 – Low SES: Update from FOAE: The overall decline in Education is largely attributable to attrition in the Birth – 5 Course, which is a TAFE as a basic of entry course, as well as the media cycle fermenting concern about online teaching degrees not being seen as equivalent in quality to face to face degrees (stated by the Education minister in 2019). Intervention earlier in the student lifecycle is now occurring. FOAE has increased the BEd Birth-5 involvement in the HEPPP Retention Project since late 2020, and the Course Director is actively encouraging students at the point of enrolment to reflect on and improve their preparedness to undertake university study. Currently upon application, students are automatically enrolled in two subjects which for some students can be too high a load initially. Early intervention in this space enables us to change student load prior to census and retain students rather than having them withdraw. This will continue to be monitored in 2022 to ensure the measures were effective. In progress.

In progress To be monitored in 2022.

156



Additional support services for First Nations students have been rolled out during 2021 as outlined in AS/73.

AS/85 Undergraduate - Low SES satisfaction Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) and Exec Dean (FoSH).

Focus: Satisfaction

Sharp decline in graduate satisfaction among low SES online students to be investigated to identify the cause. Subsequent actions to address are to be reported back to Academic Senate.

In progress - April 2021 Further analysis has been received from OPA. Decline has been identified as being due to Health course (B Nursing) having the second largest number of respondents and having the lowest rate with a drop of 18.9pp in the last year to 58.3%. The Faculty Student Performance Report 2019-2020 identified an action to further analyse the low subject evaluation survey scores (particularly in Health FoE) and work with the Subject Coordinator, Head of School, and Division of Learning & Teaching to develop strategies to improve student satisfaction. Faculty has been requested to provide further details on the strategies finalised. September 2021 Faculty of Science and Health now monitoring this action. FoSH subjects nominated for DLT minor/moderate builds for 202230 ensure a focus on health students: - NRS160 Contexts of Nursing - NRS275 Caring in Nursing - NRS384 Health challenges 3 - NRS385 The registered nurse in practice - NRS386 WPL5 - NRS387 Clinical reasoning 5 - BMS165 Human Anatomy and Physiology for Nurses 1 - BMS191 Human Bioscience 1 - CHM104 and CHM115 Chemistry 1A - HIP202 Evidence-based health practice and research - HLT417 Indigenous perspectives on health and wellbeing - VSC113 Fundamentals of veterinary biology

Additionally, FoSH will work in conjunction with the Division of Learning and Teaching in order to develop a plan to develop strategies to improve student satisfaction.

In progress

Estimated completion date June 2022

AS/86 Postgrad by Coursework Responsibility: Previously Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students) and Provost DVC (Academic) now Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: Satisfaction for students admitted on ‘other’ Overall satisfaction and teaching quality results are 5% below the RUN benchmark.

In progress - April 2021 Further analysis has been requested and will be analysed and reported on in the next two months. September 2021 - Decline identified as the School of Management and Marketing, with enrolments and load down approximately 40% over 5 years. The Faculty Student Performance Report from 2019 identified the cause as: • Market relevance of courses changing.

Completed

157



Student satisfaction, overall satisfaction and teaching quality needs to be investigated for students admitted on 'other' (predominantly made up of students studying in association with their work). Investigation of these metrics is to be undertaken and actions to address identified by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students)

• A student cohort that is combining study with work and family commitments, and often have not studied at a tertiary level previously, so university study can be overwhelming for them. Students often choose the Grad Dip or Grad Cert level as exit points. The Faculty is addressing this two-fold: • By Recognising and promoting the role of credit and highlight the 10 years they retain credits for. The Course Directors engage in these conversations and ensure they explore the reasons for disengagement (which is often not the course itself). • Reviewing these courses by revitalisation (incorporating micros) and consolidating offerings (and ensuring market relevance). 2020 data: Student Satisfaction for student’s admitted on ‘other’ overall satisfaction has increased BY +7.9pp in last year to 83.6%. The satisfaction rate for this cohort now exceeds the Higher Education BoA cohort & RUN benchmark. Satisfaction with teaching quality has also improved in the last year by 7.6pp to 84.4% and is now above the RUN benchmark. Item can be closed.

AS/87 Postgrad by Coursework Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: International online progress Down 16.2% in 5 year period. Declining progress rates for online international and domestic students to be further analysed to identify causes and actions to address set by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

In progress - April 2021 Further analysis of data requested for online international from OPA. To be completed by July. September 2021 - International BJBS were found to be the main cause of the drop in 2019. BJBS asked to investigate: In 2019 a sizable cohort from the Maldives enrolled with the Australian Graduate School of Policing and Security. Noted language skills were an impediment, resources and support have now been updated. 2020 Progress: rates have risen in 2020 for BJBS online students, up 3.2pp in the last year to 89.4% (and up 3.1pp over five years). 2020 data: The progress rate for international online students increased substantially in the last year, up over 10pp to 97.3%. The improvement is driven by five of the six largest courses reporting a 100% progress rate – including one course by BJBS. Specifically: Master of International Education (School Leadership), Master of Education, Graduate Diploma of Paramedicine (with specialisations), Master of Cyber Security, Master of Medical Radiation Science (with specialisations). The BJBS course Master of Fraud and Financial Crime also had a progress rate of 93.3%.

Completed

AS/88 Postgrad by Coursework - declining online enrolments. Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: Commencing enrolments. Commencing enrolments have declined 7.4% over the 5 year period.

In progress – April 2021 Further analysis has been received from OPA.

Decline identified as the School of Management and Marketing, with enrolments and load down approximately 40% over 5 years. The BJBS Faculty Student Performance Report from last year identified the cause as:

In progress

158



Online declining commencing enrolments to be further analysed to identify causes and actions to address to be set by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

• Market relevance of courses changing

• A student cohort that is combining study with work and family commitments, and often have not studied at a tertiary level previously, so university study can be overwhelming for them. Identified by them often choose the Grad Dip or Grad Cert level.

The Faculty is addressing this two-fold:

1. By recognising and promoting the role of credit and highlight the 10 years they retain credits for. The Course Directors engage in these conversations and ensure they explore the reasons for disengagement (which is often not the course itself).

2. Reviewing these courses by revitalisation.

September 2021 – Overall online commencing enrolments increased across the board in 2020, up 20.7% in 1 year (3659 in 2019 to 4410 in 2020). The overall online decline in commencing enrolments over the 5 years has reduced to 5.06%.

In BJBS online enrolments increased 18.7% over one year.

The online enrolments for postgraduate students will continue to be monitored in the 2022 Student Performance Reports, particularly post Covid-19.

AS/89 Postgrad by Coursework - On campus students Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic).

Focus: Attrition Domestic student attrition increased 13.9% last year and 16.4% over the 5 year period and well in excess of the RUN benchmark (19.5%). Attrition for International students has climbed substantially to 35.2%, up 14% last year and is far higher than the 19.7% RUN benchmark. Attrition rate for on-campus students (including international) and online students to be further analysed to identify causes and actions to address to be set (noting this is well in excess of the RUN benchmark) by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

In progress – April 2021 Domestic - increase being driven by small cohorts: School of Theology (52.6%) - PVO reviewed Faculty report and cause and actions are yet to be identified. Requested Faculty of Arts and Education to follow up. AGSPS (23.5%) - Faculty identified cause in 2019-2020 report as being due to the student cohort being majority fully employed, and impacted as first responders or emergency management providers, and being impacted by unusual and unexpected events with their work. The following actions to address were identified: • Additional support from Subject Coordinators and learning support staff and foundational learning subjects made common. • High levels of flexibility encouraged for subject coordinators across the school. • Increased teacher presence on specific subjects and relevance of outcomes and areas of interest. • Large 16 point subjects removed and introduced 8 point subjects. Ongoing monitoring is now BAU.

In progress

159



September 2021: Domestic: School of Theology subjects identified as driving an increase in attrition with a result of 52.6% last year. FOAE replied with explanation: School of Theology (a partner School) did not feel this needed to be a priority. Their on-campus domestic student numbers are low, so the % is exacerbated by this. The nature of this student cohort means that competing life priorities often interfere with ability to study (predominantly students are mature age). The FOAE and School of Theology will continue to monitor the rates. FOAE attrition rates have improved for on-campus students in the last couple of years. Item can be closed. BJBS: Increase in attrition of on-campus students is being driven by small cohorts. As noted in the 2020 data, only 1% of all BJBS Postgraduate by Coursework students were enrolled On-Campus in 2020. School of Accounting and Finance - Port Macquarie campus (cohort of 88 students - 53.6%). Noted by OPA: Trends for this group can be volatile due to the relatively small cohort numbers. Identification of the cause and actions to address have not been captured in the Faculty report from 2019-2020. BJBS was requested to follow up. International students: In 2020 there were only 30 On-Campus international students overall, with nearly 80% in the School of Computing and Mathematics at Port Macquarie. The attrition rate for on-campus international students improved for the first time since 2016, however lower attrition in a couple of courses masks increased attrition from the largest course. The attrition rate remains 14pp higher over five years, and above the RUN benchmark. BJBS to investigate. In progress.

AS/90 Higher Degree Research Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) Focus: Enrolments

Fulltime decline 30.6% and part-time 31.9% over 5 yrs. Further enrolment declines to be analysed and recommend actions to address from the Research Office and Faculties.

May 2021 This issue is largely driven by the availability of scholarships. A review of scholarship funding and availability of scholarships is being undertaken as part of the research strategy development. Expected to be complete by end of August. August 2021 A new strategy is being proposed to VCLT on how scholarship funding should be utilised going forward. Paper will be submitted by the DVC (RDI) to VCLT meeting in September 2021. September 2021 Identified that this issue is largely driven by the availability of scholarships. A review of scholarship funding and availability of scholarships has been undertaken during 2021. At the time of writing, a new scholarship strategy was being considered by the University leadership. In addition, ORS&GS is working with the Division of Marketing to develop a marketing strategy for HDR candidates. They will also have a presence at marketing expos to increase awareness of HDR opportunities at Charles Sturt. ORS&GS has built an EOI process

In progress

Estimated completion date – early 2022.

160



into CRM to track student engagement and provide data to be analysed to assist with future direction of marketing.

AS/91 Higher Degree Research Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) Focus: Enrolments

Enrolments down 45% over past 5 years for FOAE, Down 48% for FOS online part-time students. Enrolments for commencing students to be invigorated which may include a possible review of scholarships/compact funding available. Noting the tightened restrictions on the use of Commonwealth Research Training Program funds. Notable positive impact from the old program of scholarships which are no longer in operation. Note: Faculty of Arts and Education have reinstated Honours programs from 202130 with a consolidated approach as per the Optimisation Project – Honours and HDR Review across the three Faculties. Faculty of Science specifically need to look at online (part-time) significant drop in enrolments.

May 2021 This issue is largely driven by the availability of scholarships. A review of scholarship funding and availability of scholarships is being undertaken as part of the research strategy development. Desktop review to be undertaken by PVC RI & and Graduate Studies Team on fields of research where lack of supervisory capacity may result in admissions being declined. Review of the new staff profile within faculties due to impact of Org 2. August 2021 – Scholarships in review as outlined in AS/90. Research Services has undertaken a review of a sample of where admissions declined and the associated FoR, from 202130. Sample showed no trend in any particular FoR. Similar review to be undertaken at the end of 2021 to see the impact of the Org2 restructure. September 2021 FOAE 2020 data reveals the five-year period, commencing Full-Time enrolments in HDR have fallen by 54%, however, load has not fallen to the same degree (down 36%). After almost doubling between 2018 and 2019, Part-Time commencing enrolments have remained stable in 2020 at 17 new students. Despite no change in enrolments numbers, load has dropped slightly for this cohort, down 3.6% in the last year. The drop in enrolments and load over the five-year period is the same (~40%). The FOAE 2020 - 2021 Student Performance Report notes that Faculty if following the Faculty HDR Growth Plan (2021 – 2022) which outlines a range of actions including:

• Letters to Honours and Grad Cert students with high marks.

• Ensuring HDR pathway students (Honours and Grad Cert) are given background in theory and research skills.

• Ensuring pathway students are encouraged to publish, which in turn will make them more competitive for scholarships.

• Increase scholarships from industry partners.

• Developing recruitment considerations for PhD by Prior Publication candidates.

In progress

Estimated completion date - 1st quarter of 2022.

161



AS/92 Higher Degree Research Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) Focus: Enrolments and attrition Fulltime decline 30.6% and online part-time 31.9% over 5 yrs. Enrolments for continuing students to be investigated (including a focus on-campus attrition in particular for Faculty of Arts and Education) and recommend actions to address to be developed by the Research Office and Faculties.

In progress - May 2021 Implementation of Expectations Alignment and Communication plans to enhance the understanding between supervisors and the candidate. Designed to improve likelihood of completion.

Implementation of annual Graduate Research Experience Survey (GRES) for candidates to monitor barriers to completion. Process change has also occurred which should see better capturing of reasons for attrition, and ongoing monitoring of PREQ data is continuing. Other measures:

• FOAE has reinstated pathway programs for HDR which should help address Faculty-specific issue.

• Increased Professional Development support for candidates and supervisors.

• Implementation of Postgraduate Student Association.

• Paper examining minimum resource requirements is being considered by University Research Committee and a review of organisational structure of the Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies is being undertaken for noting and all initiatives are now incorporated in business practices.

Further detail on actions stemming from Smythe Review of HDR programs is being submitted to Academic Senate (see also AS/94). August 21 – Initiatives incorporated into business as usual. Significant improvement seen in PREQ data as reported to 2nd June Academic Senate meeting.

PREQ Increases (2019 to 2020)

Overall Satisfaction ~ stable 87.5% to 87.9%

Supervision Score ~ 85% to 91% agreement

Intellectual Climate ~ 50% to 61%

After an increase in attrition in 2019, the rate for Full-time students has dropped to 6.5% in 2020 (down almost 7pp) and is the lowest rate over the five-year period.

Attrition for the Part-Time cohort has been extremely variable over the period with swings of up to 15% from year to year. However, the rate in the last two years has remained relatively stable with an improvement from 15% in 2019 to 13% in 2020. As with the Full-Time result, the Part-Time

Completed

162



attrition rate is on par with the RUN rate for Online students and sits 2pp above the sector benchmark.

FOAE: First year attrition improved substantially in 2020 falling more than 15pp to a low of 5.9%. Attrition is now on par with FOS, well below FOBJBS and slightly lower than the On-Campus RUN benchmark. For the Part-Time cohort, attrition is highly variable but is currently the same as for the Full-Time cohort at 5.9%, up from zero attrition in 2019. FOAE has introduced a HDR Growth Plan 2021 – 2022 to increase enrolments.

AS/93 Higher Degree Research Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) Focus: Completions On-campus completions for all three Faculties need to be investigated as Charles Sturt remains below the RUN benchmark.

May 2021 Need to closely analyse data to see long term trend on this point (Graduate Studies to undertake analyse, Scholarship vs Non-Scholarship, split by Faculties). This could be linked to percentage of candidates receiving scholarships. (see AS/90 and 91). August 2021 – Review undertaken of on campus completion across individual faculties, considering scholarship and non-scholarship holders. Outcome indicated different trends across the faculties, indicating unique factors impacting, no consistency across all three faculties. Additional measures in a HDR Review, such as increased Professional Development support for candidates and supervisors, were introduced in 2021 to address completions. As completion rates remain below the 2020 RUN benchmark the action will remain open.

In progress

AS/94 Higher Degree Research Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) Focus: Retention Actions introduced by the Research Office in response to the HDR Review to address retention and improve completion should be monitored and assessed in 2021.

May 2021 Final report on actions has been endorsed by URC and will go to Academic Senate (linked to AS/93) for consideration at its June 4 meeting. August 2021 – Initiatives incorporated into business as usual. Will be monitored in future Student Performance Reports and AS/93.

Completed

AS/95 Higher Degree Research

Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) Focus: Retention Participate in the CQ University and Council of Australian Postgraduate Association Project to formally investigate the reasons for student withdrawal at Australian regional universities. Refer to the Higher Degree by Research Overall Activities.

May 2021 Relevant data has been provided to the RUN Group. Provided data - completing of report. Currently data analysis and transcription being undertaken. Expected to be complete and final report in the next 3-4 months August 2021 – Delay in the project earlier in the year, however it is now back up and running and results are expected in October 2021. The data will also help with determining future actions to stem withdrawal of students.

In Progress

Estimated completion date - 1st quarter of 2022.

163



AS/96 – Onshore Third Parties - Charles Sturt Study Centres Responsibility: Executive Dean BJBS Focus: Reporting Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences to ensure that all actions from this section are captured in the Action as part of the Faculty report.

May 2021 Off-shore third parties have been incorporated into the Faculty actions in BJBS report.

Completed

AS/97 Onshore Third Parties - Charles Sturt Study Centres Responsibility: Executive Dean BJBS Focus: Progress and attrition

Progress rates have been decreasing for students from India (65% in 2018 to 50% in 2019). Attrition rates among Sri Lankan students were 60% in 2019. Review the recruitment of students in the Study Centres with a particular focus on students recruited from specific geographic locations and via specific agents.

May 2021 Complete. Study Centre Risk and Integrity Business Practices Progress Report paper tabled at February 2020 Study Centre Academic Management Committee included the Paper: Analysis of Education Agent influence on student performance. Contracts with a large number of agents with poorly progressing students and high attrition rates were terminated in 2020.

Completed

AS/98 Onshore Third Parties - Charles Sturt Study Centres

Responsibility: Exec Dean BJBS Focus: Progress and attrition.

Study Centre: Progress rates declined from 73% in 2016 to 60% in 2019. Review English Language requirements ensure there is parity across the different assessments that are used and their relationship to high attrition and poor progress.

May 2021

In progress Analysis of English Proficiency Level on Student Performance for Study Group paper was submitted to November 2020 BJBS Faculty Board. Work is continuing with International Admissions (Vishal Parmar) to review equivalences in admission criteria between assessments. PTE has been increased for some courses. August 2021

Complete Further analysis undertaken of all advertised academic and language entry criteria for courses offered by Charles Sturt Study Centres and regional campuses undertaken by Angelo Bellas and presented to AMC (23-8-2021) and endorsed for submission to Steering Committee. This report included an examination of all entry criteria language tests, and advertised concordances between them, with recommendations for changes to advertised admissions criteria to ensure consistency for international students. Progress rates at the Study Centres have risen by at least 13 pp to be over 90%, with all Study Centre campuses showing similar gains and improvements, attesting to the effectiveness of recent interventions by Study Centre and Charles Sturt’s staff.

Completed

164



AS/99 University Onshore Third Parties Responsibility: Exec Dean FOSH Focus: Progress

Progress rates declined by 10% over the past 5 years. The Faculty of Science will continue to monitor the Bachelor of Oral Health at Holmesglen. In conjunction with the Division of Learning and Teaching, develop a plan to improve subject quality with specific focus on increasing first year progress and student satisfaction.

May 2021 The Retention Team are supporting first year disengaged students in the pre census campaign and also post census with embedded tutors in IKC100. The Faculty has commenced a deep dive into student feedback from SuES, exit surveys and QUASAR action plans and DLT is investigating the i2 sites, with particular focus on student engagement and assessment design. Once this initial analysis is finalised, an action plan will be developed and implemented. Completed by end of 2021. Will be measured by improved progress and SuES scores in 2021/2022. August 2021 No progress has been made on this action item. Faculty will work in conjunction with the Division of Learning and Teaching in order to develop a plan to improve subject quality, with a specific focus on increasing first year progress and student satisfaction.

October 2021 October 2021, 2020 data: Progress rates improved dramatically in 2020, with a

12.8pp increase to 94%. After several years of not meeting the benchmark, the recent

improvement lifts the cohort result well above the target of 86.3%.

The plan (outlined above), which focuses on progress and satisfaction, is still being developed by FoSH and DLT with an estimated completion date of December 2021.

In progress

Estimated completion date Dec 2021

AS/100 - University Onshore Third Parties Responsibility: Exec Dean FOSH Focus: Satisfaction

Student satisfaction declined by -24.2% in past year (2019).

The Faculty of Science will monitor the improved communication tactics introduced in 2020 to ensure that the Faculty, continues to be upfront with students regarding the costs in completing the Bachelor of Oral Health and the requirement to spend long blocks of time in Wagga, and if this corresponds to increased student satisfaction

May 2021 Monitoring to continue including complaints received and student feedback. To be completed by end of 2022. August 2021 The 2021 orientation of Oral Health students by the Head of Discipline included the cost components of the course, as well as the requirement for travel to Wagga campus to complete WPL blocks. The ‘workplace learning’ and ‘special resources’ sections in the online course brochure for subjects with WPL – DOH100; DOH200; DOH310 – detail the required duration of residential blocks on the Wagga campus. 2021 SuES are not yet available so no comment can be provided on trends associated with the survey. Results are expected to be monitored and action taken by May 2022.

In progress


AS/101 Offshore Third Parties - China Partners

Responsibility: Exec Dean BJBS Focus: Completion JUFE: Decline 30% in 5 years to 64.4%.

May 2021 In progress Communication has been sent to all China JCP institutions offering an online subject to students requiring one subject to graduate from the Charles Sturt course. EOIs from students to be received by 30 June 2021 to determine interest.

October 2021

In progress

165



Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences to review low progress and completion rates at JUFE. Consideration to be given to offering on-line enrolment into non-completed subjects (beyond the COVID-19 adjustments).

Students at JUFE in 2019 in 2020 could graduate with a Chinese degree by completing the China subjects only. Charles Sturt taught only the final 8 subjects of 24 subjects. The action above was to encourage those 2019 and 2020 students who had graduated with the non-Charles Sturt degree to return to complete a final subject to graduate with a Charles Sturt degree. The offer of subjects to China partners has been undertaken. Take-up by students has not occurred.

From September 2021 (JUFE work on a northern hemisphere timetable), Charles Sturt will be teaching 16 subjects of 24 so this issue of exiting with a JUFE degree, before completing the CSU degree will not be an ongoing issue. This will increase in Charles Sturt teaching will assist students to become more familiar with Australian pedagogical models before they enter their final year.

Additionally, the cohort of students in the course in 2020 have progressed well. Progress rates

rose substantially in 2020 with a 25.1 pp increase in the last year. In 2020, JUFE reported a commencing progress rate of 89.5%. Measures including improved teaching resources and professional development for JUFE staff has occurred in the last year. JUFE is being monitored by the BJBS in Faculty Plan AS/72.

AS/102 Offshore Third Parties - Economic and Finance Institute Responsibility: Exec Dean BJBS Focus: Enrolments

Economics and Finance Institute (Cambodia) 27 students in 2019 - down from 64 in 2014. The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences is addressing the low enrolments with increased marketing in-country and it is already having a positive impact. This will need to be assessed and monitored year to year.

August 2021: Enrolments in 2020 increased to 35 students, which is a 29.6 pp increase on 2019.

Increased marketing in-country has been undertaken to address declining enrolments. This action will be monitored with 2021/2022 enrolments before being closed.

In progress

Estimated close Jan 2022

AS/103 Offshore Third Parties - Economic and Finance Institute. Responsibility: Exec Dean BJBS Focus: Progress EFI; Progress 58.6% in 2019, down in 31% in 5 years. The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences has increased teacher support and resources have been developed to address attrition and progression rates, monitoring improvements will occur.

May 2021 Data from OPA on student progression at EFI saw a large improvement in 2020. The progress rate of 83.56% in 2020 was significantly better than in the past 5 years. There are several possible contributing factors to this result, including the change of teaching delivery and assessment responsibilities to Charles Sturt and the shift to online delivery due to COVID-19. Monitoring report presented to AMC 17/02/2021. Now BAU to monitor all Student Performance metrics. September 2021: Student Performance metrics are now regularly monitored as a standing work plan item at EFI Academic Management Committee meetings. Reporting has identified

Completed

166



where improvements are required, such as in FIN531. Student Performance monitoring is now BAU. 2020 data shows progress is up 25.6pp, from a low of 58.6% in 2019 to 84.2% in 2020.

AS/104 University - Offshore Third Parties - SPACE, University of Hong Kong

Responsibility: Exec Dean FOAE Focus: Completions

The Faculty of Arts and Education are to investigate the 20% decline over the 5 year period in completion rates for undergraduate and postgraduate students and identify actions to address.

May 2021. Monitoring situation in HK by Head of School and Course Directors in the School of Information and Communication Studies and Head of School of Theology (partner institution). October 2021: Initially closed because of the political situation in Hong Kong - however this had settled by October. This is a small cohort with considerable variance between 2015 and 2018, but there has been increased stability in the last three years. Undergrad completion rates were high at 90% after a 23.3pp increase on 2019 data, and now far exceed the benchmark. Can be completed for undergraduate students. Postgrad completion rates, however, are relatively low despite an increase of 10.6pp in the last year. At 65.1%, the rate remains 20pp down over five years. Actions to be developed by FOAE.

Completed for Undergrad students.

In progress for Postgraduate students.

AS/106 Higher Degree by Research Students Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Reporting improvements. Inclusion of the Higher Degree by Research Cohort in the Student Performance Report.

Completed May 2021 - Added to 2020 and 2021 SPR reports. Now aligned with Research Services who are involved in the annual SPR writing and evaluation process. Item can be closed.

Completed

AS/107 Sector (Aspirational) targets Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Reporting improvements. University targets need to be formally established across the student performance metrics that align to the University strategic direction and aspirational goals. This is noted as a request from Academic Senate in 2019 (AS/43).

In progress – May 2021 Sector (Aspirational) targets set by VC & PVDVCA. Endorsement sought by the Vice-Chancellor’s Leadership Team @ 4 May 2021 meeting. October 2021 – The sector (Aspirational) target approach was endorsed by VCLT in May. The report was submitted to the Academic Senate meeting of 29 September 2021 for noting. The approach was approved. It is anticipated that the aspirational targets will be included in the 2021 – 2022 Student Performance Report.

In progress

Estimated completion date December 2021.

AS/110 Report improvements (Project Q actions) Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements

May 2021 Analysis of Number of Transfer Credit on Student Performance paper submitted to August 2020 Study Centre Academic Management Committee. Investigation underway on CPM Credit Tool can be updated to improve usage. As yet, this oversight is focused on partners, but consideration is being considered for extension across all Charles Sturt programs. with the additional feature relating to recommendations related to TAFE Cert3/4 qualifications. A decision here should depend upon the outcome of the review by the ADAs.

In progress


167




August 2021

Work is underway with the three ADAs to evaluate credit and support for students with VET qualifications, with a specific focus on the crediting of Certificate 4 and Certificate 3 qualifications.

AS/111 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements QUASAR dashboards for School, Faculties and the Institution are to continue to be developed as referred to in Section 8 Grade Distributions: Key Focus Areas for Improvements.

Completed April 2021 Improvements as outlined in Section 8 have been implemented.

Subsequent and further improvements have been identified and are progressing.

The new grade distribution question has been added to QUASAR in the moderation and grades form, which is completed at the time of grade approval. The presiding officers of FAC (i.e., the deputy deans) developed the thresholds for more extreme distributions. The question was used in 202090 session after which feedback was sought. Some display aspects of QUASAR are being modified to be more user friendly before the next session. Item can be closed.

Completed

AS/112 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements University strategic programs and initiatives aimed at improving student performance metrics, such as load, enrolments and teaching quality are to provide evaluation reports against the targeted metric as key milestones are achieved to the Provost and Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) for inclusion in the annual Student Performance Report. Particular attention and consideration should be paid to the Sustainable Futures, Charles Sturt Advantage Model, Optimisation and Organisational Review.

In progress - April 2021 Ensuring alignment to the University Top 8 KPI's VC/VCLT improvement action. Academic Portfolio is drafting proposed Academic Metrics/KPIs & Reporting. The Strategy Office is reinvigorating their project management tracking and reporting documentation and will include this as part of their review and will seek to incorporate the student performance metrics, where appropriate. Initial discussion has occurred with Strategy Office to request student performance metrics.

September 2021

The new University Top 8 KPI’s and Operational Metrics include student performance metrics. The 2030 University Strategy development includes the development of the new performance framework and KPI Trees aligned to the strategy under development. The Education Pillar of the strategy is the main focus areas for student performance metrics; however, other pillars and enablers have identified student performance metrics which the PVO has advise the Strategy Office to enact with the various leads. Item can be closed.

Completed

AS/113 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements Consideration of the inclusion of the newly introduced (Charles Sturt Pathways) non-award program metrics in 2021 reporting.

In progress - April 2021

Investigating the availability of data and considering the impact of broadening the report scope as this will have implication for the TEQSA rectification requirements, resourcing implications to produce data and action development, tracking and reporting. Alternative may be to include in 'sub-metrics' associated to University Top 8 KPI's.

Completed

168



September 2021

The new Charles Sturt Pathways course has been added to the 2020 - 2021 report. The metrics to be examined for the cohort are:

• Commencing enrolments

• Commencing load

• First year progress

• First year attrition

• First year Student Experience Survey – overall satisfaction

• First year Student Experience Survey – teaching quality

• Subject Experience Survey – percentage positive response

• Rate of conversion into another Award course The metrics have been selected to align to TEQSA Risk Indicators related to student load, experience and outcomes. For the Charles Sturt University Pathway course, the segmentations examined are:

• Campus

• Basis of Admission

• Socioeconomic Status

• First Nations Students

• Subjects This item can be closed.

AS/114 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements Net Promoter and SuES – analysis to include a review of Undergraduate Pathways.

In progress - April 2021 Actioning as part of the University Top 8 KPI's VC/VCLT improvement action. Academic Portfolio is drafting proposed Academic Metrics/KPIs & Reporting to assist in resolving. Note: checking with DoS on Net Promoter and DLT on SuES if we can get the data alignment needed.

In Progress – September 2021 Student NPS will remain as a top 8 KPI with a focus on non-academic student support activities. SuES will be a level 2 KPI. Both surveys contain questions related to non-academic support, however the timing will be very different. The Student Experience Committee is the management body coordinating the associated actions to be taken on the Student NPS with representatives from the Academic Portfolio. The membership and terms of reference are currently under review with a decision pending on if the committee will be the Provost or Executive Director, Students. Whilst this representation will partially mitigate the

In Progress

169



potential for duplicate and/or conflicting actions, further discussions are required at a deeper level to ensure the process of creating, tracking and evaluating actions are aligned.

AS/115 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements Revisit the scheduling of the annual course health checks to ensure there is adequate time for deep analysis and development of related actions.

Completed – April 2021 Cycle has been synchronised with the Student Performance Reporting deep dive analysis workshops which allows more time for review and appropriate actions set. Data released to Faculties in June/July rather than August. Item can be closed.

Completed

AS/116 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements Consider the design and delivery of professional development in the QAF and how to report on performance against the QAF. Appropriate funding and resources will need to be allocated to ensure success.

In progress - April 2021 Following the approval of the Organisational Assurance Framework by University Council with an effective date of 2 March 2021. PVDVCA has contacted Director, Risk and Compliance for update on provision of professional development. Awaiting response. Note: may be delivered as part of the Education Quality Framework being developed as part of the Education Quality & Standards concept.

September 2021 – Follow up on PD is required.

In progress

AS/117 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements Load yield figures (and targets) to be included where appropriate given the Sustainable Futures structural financial and efficiency focus, and this can be a measure of effectiveness of this structure and actions.

In progress - April 2021 Office Strategy & Planning possibly developing cost/yield modelling relevant to student cohorts. Timing of this means the application of the data cannot occur for the 2020 - 2021 University Report, however explanation/update will be included in the report.

Complete – September 2021 this has been identified as a large body of work, with work begun. This action is to be aligned to the 2030 University Strategy, Education Pillar, Load Optimisation output. Item can be closed.

Complete

AS/119 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements Investigation of the Good Universities Guide ratings to be included in benchmarking data for 2021 by discipline or Field of Education, where appropriate.

In progress - April 2021 Proposed for inclusion in the metrics to be measured as part of the University Top 8 KPIs improvement action. Timing of this means the application of the data cannot occur for the 2020 -2021 University Report, however high level comparison will be included in the report.

Complete – September 2021 this has been identified as a key metric, with work occurring as part of the 2030 University Strategy, KPI Trees. This action is to be aligned to the 2030 University Strategy. Item can be closed.

Complete

170



AS/120 Future reporting improvements Responsibility: Provost DVC (Academic) Focus: Report improvements

Academic Senate request that the RUN benchmarking data for 2021 be available by discipline or Field of Education, where appropriate.

In progress – April 2021 Investigating the inclusion of this in the University report with VC, PVDVCA & OPA.

September 2021 – Cohort analysis has been completed by Field of Education and benchmarked against RUN where appropriate. University Report to Academic Senate will reflect this in this year’s report. Item can be closed.

Complete

171


Appendix 2. Faculty Student Performance Reports

172

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences

Student Performance Report

Annual Report 2020 - 2021

173

University

Provost & Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic | Student Performance Report Page 2 of 32

Executive Summary

This report summarises the key indices of student performance for the faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences (FoBJBS) for the 2020 academic year. The report primarily addresses student performance at the level of the Field of Education (FoE). For FoBJBS, the relevant FoEs (and the Schools involved in the delivery of relevant courses) are;

• Natural and Physical Sciences (Statistics and Mathematics; School of Computing andMathematics, now Computing, Mathematics and Engineering)

• Information Technology (Computing Sciences; School of Computing and Mathematics, nowComputing, Mathematics and Engineering)

• Engineering and Related Technologies (Fire Investigation; Australian Graduate School of Policingand Security [AGSPS])

• Management and Commerce (Accounting, Finance and Management; School of Accounting andFinance, and School of Marketing and Management)

• Society and Culture (Policing, Security and Psychology. AGSPS, and School of Psychology)

Student performance reporting is based upon reports produced by the Office of Planning and Audit (OPA) separately as “cohort reports” for;

• Students in Pathway Courses (including the University Certificate in Workforce Essentials)

• Undergraduate Bachelor Students

• Postgraduate by Coursework Students

• Higher Degree by Research Students

• Associate Degree in Policing Practice

• Students at Third Party provider Campuses

The scope of the analyses reported here is outlined below.


A significant area of work undertaken in 2020 was the Optimisation project that examined the viability of courses and subjects within the Faculty (and across the university) so as to be able to better target resources to students. Although this project is not reviewed in the current report, it is important to note that this project undertaken in 2020 and 2021 is likely to impact student performance, and that where courses have been moved to phase out that monitoring of students’ enrolment and progression are undertaken at the individual student level as courses and subjects are “taught out”. The following table outlines the number and AQF levels of courses being phased out in FoBJBS.

7

Bachelors

8

Honours

8 Graduate Certificate

8 Graduate Diploma

9

Masters

10

Doctoral TOTAL

Number of Phase Out Courses

6 3 11 3 10 7 40

Relative to previous years, there are a number of significant improvements evident in the 2020 academic year. For example, graduate student satisfaction with on-campus, undergraduate programs has increased substantially over than seen in recent years. Undergraduate on-line attrition has improved for all FoEs, and is the lowest compared to all Faculties. Special entry programs are proving to be highly effective in leading to very high 1st year progression rates for on-campus students. The successful collaboration between the

174

University


School of Policing and TAFE NSW through the Indigenous Police Recruitment Our Way Delivery Program (IPROWD), supports Australian 1st Nations students to prepare for enrolment in, and progress towards, joining the NSW Police Force. There have also been a number of improvements, relative to previous years, in student performance at the Charles Sturt Study Centres, including a 20 pp improvement in on-campus student satisfaction, with a similar improvement in satisfaction with teaching quality. Progress rates at the Study Centres have also risen by at least 13 pp to be over 90%, with all Study Centre campuses showing similar gains and improvements, attesting to the effectiveness of recent interventions by Study Centre and Charles Sturt staff.

Following from work progressed within the Faculty to improve the outcomes for students from low Socio-economic groups, the Faculty has just received confirmation that it has been successful in attaining HEPPP funding for the project “Improving undergraduate student engagement and success through facilitated support”, amounting to $85,000 for additional support to students in the undergraduate areas of Business, Psychology and Law/Justice studies. This continues work that has been the focus of previous Student Performance reporting, and addresses a continuing need identified in the current report.

Charles Sturt has introduced the Charles Sturt University Student Retention and Success Framework. This framework, implemented within the Faculty under the guidance of the Sub-Dean (Learning and Teaching) Stacey Jenkins (and previously Warwick Baines), sets out the principles and focus areas guiding our retention strategy and provides an overview of the interventions, support and curriculum improvements that are contributing to better outcomes for students in terms of progress. The success of this framework is being measured by the following:

• strengthened retention of students through improved subject progress rates

• maintained levels of high student satisfaction - shown in student feedback through the QILT StudentExperience Survey

• high levels of student completion - shown in improved student completion rates

• maintaining sector-leading graduate employment rates.

In previous Student Performance Reports, and in the current one, issues of low progression, poor attrition, and low student satisfaction are identified for specific Fields of Education and courses. The Student Retention and Success Framework, in which Faculties work closely with the Division of Student Success, adopts an integrated approach to address these identified areas for improvement.

Key Focus Areas for Improvements

Some areas identified for improvement in the current report are;

• Undergraduate attrition rates

• On-Campus student overall satisfaction and teaching quality satisfaction.

• Online completion rates for some courses in the Management and Commerce FoE.

• Progression and attrition for students from low SES groups.

• Enrolment and Progress rates for Australian First Nations students, both at the undergraduate andpostgraduate levels.

• Transition from the UCWE into the ADPP for low SES students, and First Nations students.

• Attrition rates amongst China JCP partners, but in particular at the Jilin University of Economics andFinance

• Increases in attrition in Cambodia at EFI.

• Attrition rates for both Undergraduate and Postgraduate students at the Charles Sturt Study Centres.

2019 – 2020 Completed Actions

See Table, P. 8 below.

175

University


Contents

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 2

Key Achievements and Highlights ................................................................................................................. 2

Key Focus Areas for Improvements ............................................................................................................... 3

2019 – 2020 Completed Actions .................................................................................................................... 3

Background Information ................................................................................................................................. 5

Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 5

Segmentations to be examined throughout the report: .................................................................................. 5

Methodology .................................................................................................................................................... 6

Benchmarks ................................................................................................................................................... 6

2020 to 2025 Benchmarking Group ............................................................................................................... 7

Benchmarking approach ................................................................................................................................ 7

Progress on Actions from 2019 – 2020 report ............................................................................................... 8

Pathway Courses ........................................................................................................................................... 14

Undergraduate ............................................................................................................................................... 16



Postgraduate .................................................................................................................................................. 19

Key Themes / Issues .................................................................................................................................... 20


Higher Degree by Research .......................................................................................................................... 21

Key Achievements and Highlights ................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Focus Areas for Improvement ........................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Associate Diploma of Policing Practice ...................................................................................................... 22

Third Party Providers .................................................................................................................................... 24

China Joint Cooperation Program (JCP) ..................................................................................................... 24

Economic and Finance Institute (EFI), Cambodia ....................................................................................... 25

Charles Sturt University Study Centres ....................................................................................................... 26

2020 -2021 Actions ........................................................................................................................................ 30

176

University


Background Information

This section will be removed when combined with the Institution level Report

Scope of Analysis

The metrics selected for the Student Performance Reporting process align to TEQSA Risk Indicators related to student load, experience and outcomes.

The metrics to be examined for each cohort (if applicable) are:


• Commencing load





• Completions

• Graduate Outcomes Survey – Course Experience Questionnaire overall satisfaction

• Graduate Outcomes Survey – full-time employment

• Graduate Outcomes Survey – full-time study

Segmentations to be examined throughout the report:

• Mode

• Faculty


• Field of Education

• Campus Type


• Indigeneity

• Domesticity

• Student Home Location

• Credit PackagesAgents

This report will focus upon the student cohorts enrolled in the following programs in the Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences

• Sub-Degree (University Certificate in Workforce Essentials)

• Undergraduate (Bachelor level degrees)

• Postgraduate (Postgraduate Coursework degrees)

• Higher Degree Research

• Associate Diploma of Policing Practice (in partnership with NSW Police)

• Courses delivered by Third Party Providers (TPPs)

177

University


Methodology

This section will be removed when combined with the Institution level Report

Benchmarks

Benchmarking is a best practice methodology utilised to measure and monitor the efficacy of processes and practices. It can be used to provide both thresholds and targets in comparison to groups with similar characteristics, enabling identification of poor or superior performance. When combined with lead indicators, benchmarking may result in early indication of emerging issues, particularly when benchmarked to groups with superior performance. It is helpful in informing targets, or the quantification of improvement objectives, and enables measurement and evaluation of the progress and effectiveness of changes designed to achieve such objectives.

The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) also utilises benchmarking in its standards and risk-based approach to quality assurance. The risk dimension of the framework includes the calculation and analysis of indicators related to students and financial viability. The analysis of these indicators includes, but is not restricted to, comparison to thresholds. Furthermore, TEQSA expects that all higher education providers regularly analyse institutional data to identify and remediate emerging issues, and that these analyses include comparison to other institutions.

A suite of threshold benchmarks has been adopted by Charles Sturt for inclusion in the Student Performing Reporting going forward.

• Associate Degree in Policing Practice (ADPP) students are reported separately for the first-yearattrition benchmarking measure.

• First year attrition benchmarking measures to be reported by study mode.

• Charles Sturt will continue to use the Commonwealth metric for benchmarking purposes as six yearsfor completions.

• The benchmark for each metric is the average value of the metric from the benchmark group, withthe addition of ‘commencing’ and ‘continuing’ cohorts, where applicable.

• When representing Charles Sturt cohorts in the context of the benchmarking group, cohorts must bematched to provide appropriate context.

• When the Benchmark group shows a strong deviation from sector norms, the deviation is noted inany analysis which utilises the affected benchmark.

• Benchmark group metrics should be updated each year to ensure that Charles Sturt is aware ofchanges within the sector. Conversely, target benchmarks should remain static so that the impact ofchange can be measured over time.

• The Regional Universities Network (RUN) to be used to benchmark expected levels of studentperformance for the 2020 to 2025 period (Below for more information).

Review and planning workshops were held with the Schools and Centres within the Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences (FoBJBS). These workshops addressed student progression data, as well as course and subject optimisation progress and course health-check data. Representatives for Schools and Centres included Heads of School and/or Centre Director, as well as Course Directors for courses delivered by the School of Centre, and Faculty staff, including the Executive Dean, Associate Dean (Academic), Faculty Executive Officer, Faculty Administration Manager, FoBJBS Strategic Projects Officer, and Deputy Dean. The purpose of the meetings was to examine all relevant data related to course performance, and to determine actions for improvements to course delivery, or recommendations for course review, course modifications, course suspensions/phase out, or new course developments.

178

University


2020 to 2025 Benchmarking Group

The group with the greatest similarity to Charles Sturt is the Regional Universities Network (RUN).

RUN is comprised of universities with predominantly regional catchments and many transformed from technical or colleges of advanced education during the Dawkin’s era reforms. These universities also tend to have large teaching and nursing cohorts as well as a large number of online students as an ongoing consequence of these origins.

The full membership of RUN is:

• Central Queensland University

• Charles Sturt University.

• Federation University Australia

• Southern Cross University

• University of New England

• University of Southern Queensland

• University of the Sunshine Coast

Benchmarking approach

For all cohorts except Third Party Provider and Pathways programs:

• Top level cohort results will be compared to overall RUN metric values, split on only by mode.

• Segmentation results will be contextualised to match as closely as possible the segmentations beingexamined. For instance, Charles Sturt University Bachelor Commencing Health On-Campus will becompared to RUN Bachelor Commencing Health On-Campus.

• Ehen the RUN Benchmark group shows a strong deviation from sector norms, the deviation will benoted in any analysis which utilises the affected benchmark.

• Some segmentation will not be supported by easily attainable benchmarks – this includes country ofbirth and credit packages.

For the Third-Party Provider cohort:

• Top level cohort results will be compared to overall sector metric values for International students,split only by mode.

• Segmentation results will be contextualised to match as closely as possible the segmentations beingexamined.

• Progress, attrition and completions - no sector level benchmarks available at a course level, fields ofeducation have been used as a proxy

179

University


Progress on Actions from 2019 – 2020 report

Evaluation and progress against actions from 2019 - 2020 report on student performance is shown in the following Table.

Action (include action number/ref) Progress/Evaluation STATUS

AS/110 Report improvements (Project Q actions). Focus: Report improvements


May 2021 Analysis of Number of Transfer Credit on Student Performance paper submitted to August 2020 Study Centre Academic Management Committee. Investigation underway on CPM Credit Tool can be updated to improve usage. As yet, this oversight is focused on partners, but consideration is being considered for extension across all Charles Sturt programs. with the additional feature relating to recommendations related to TAFE Cert3/4 qualifications. A decision here should depend upon the outcome of the review by the ADAs.

August 2021 Work is underway with the three ADAs to evaluate credit and support for students with VET qualifications, with a specific focus on the crediting of Certificate 4 and Certificate 3 qualifications.

In progress


AS/103 Offshore Third Parties - Economic and Finance Institute Focus: Progress and attrition

EFI; Progress 34.6% in 2019, down in 31% in 5 years. The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences has increased teacher support and resources have been developed to address attrition and progression rates, monitoring improvements will occur.

May 2021

Completed Data from OPA on student progression at EFI saw a large improvement in 2020. The progress rate of 83.56% in 2020 was significantly better than in the past 5 years. There are several possible contributing factors to this result, including the change of teaching delivery and assessment responsibilities to Charles Sturt and the shift to online delivery due to COVID-19. Monitoring report presented to AMC 17/02/2021

Complete

BAU

AS/102 Offshore Third Parties - Economic and Finance Institute Focus: Enrolments

EFI: 27 students in 2019 - down from 64 in 2014.

May 2021

The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences is addressing the low enrolments with increased marketing in-country and it is already having a positive impact. This will need to be assessed and monitored with 2021/2022 enrolments.

In progress

Complete December 2021

180

University


AS/101 Offshore Third Parties - China Partners Focus: Progress

JUFE: Decline 30% in 5 years to 64.4%. Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences to review low progress and completion rates at JUFE. Consideration to be given to offering on-line enrolment into non-completed subjects (beyond the COVID-19 adjustments).

May 2021

In progress Communication has been sent to all China JCP institutions offering an online subject to students requiring one subject to graduate from the Charles Sturt course. EOIs from students to be received by 30 June 2021 to determine interest.

August 2021

Complete in that the offer of subjects to China partners has been undertaken. Take-up by students has not occurred. Discussions are continuing to refine the selection of subjects, or to determine alternative strategies.

Complete

(alternative strategies being explored).

AS/98 Onshore Third Parties - Charles Sturt Study Centres Focus: Progress and attrition.

Study Centre: Progress rates declined from 73% in 2016 to 60% in 2019. Review English Language requirements ensure there is parity across the different assessments that are used and their relationship to high attrition and poor progress.

May 2021

In progress Analysis of English Proficiency Level on Student Performance for Study Group paper was submitted to November 2020 BJBS Faculty Board. Work is continuing with International Admissions (Vishal Parmar) to review equivalences in admission criteria between assessments. PTE has been increased for some courses.

August 2021

Complete Further analysis undertaken of all advertised academic and language entry criteria for courses offered by Charles Sturt Study Centres and regional campuses undertaken by Angelo Bellas and presented to AMC (23-8-2021) and endorsed for submission to Steering Committee. This report included an examination of all entry criteria language tests, and advertised concordances between them, with recommendations for changes to advertised admissions criteria to ensure consistency for international students.

Complete

AS/97 Onshore Third Parties - Charles Sturt Study Centres Focus: Progress and attrition

Progress rates have been decreasing for students from India (65% in 2018 to 50% in 2019). Attrition rates among Sri Lankan students were 60% in 2019. Review the recruitment of students in the Study Centres with a particular focus on students recruited from specific geographic locations and via specific agents.

May 2021

Complete. Study Centre Risk and Integrity Business Practices Progress Report paper tabled at February 2020 Study Centre Academic Management Committee included the Paper: Analysis of Education Agent influence on student performance.

Complete

181

University


AS/80 Undergraduate Pathways - The School of Policing (BJBS) Focus: Satisfaction

The School of Policing, after analysing the results of the student experience survey, has acknowledged that students are seeking further interaction with their peers. The school will implement weekly live online student tutorial sessions which are specifically designed to enable opportunities to interact with their peers. In addition to this, for the 202072 session, there will be tutorial sessions with students grouped for learning content discussions designed to enable collaborative learning experiences. Follow up on survey results in 2021.

May 2021

Complete Live online weekly tutorials and peer-to-peer learning discussion sessions were implemented in 202072 and continue. A peer-to-peer learning discussion forum was also introduced. The live online sessions are recorded and a link provided to students to enable them to replay the sessions for learning/revision purposes and to enable students unable to attend the live sessions, the ability to access the tutorials and participate in the discussion board peer-to-peer learning forum.

Complete

AS/79 Undergraduate Pathways - The School of Policing (BJBS) Focus: Progress and attrition

Indigenous Students progress rates 12.9% lower than non-indigenous students. The School of Policing need to explore the appropriate delivery of the University Certificate in Workforce Essentials (UCWE) for Australian Indigenous students, as although progress has improved, an increased gap between Australian Indigenous students, and non-Australian Indigenous students has widened.

May 2021

Reconsidered Following consideration with the TAFE NSW IPROWD Project Co-ordinator and IPROWD Steering Committee, it has been concluded that on campus delivery offerings is not a desirable option for enhancing the students’ progress. On campus may well in fact further restrict the viability for students to engage in the program due to the time they would be required to be away from their home environment to complete an on campus offering. A minimum of three on-line offerings are available for IPROWD students, scheduled for 2021 as planned. Non-IPROWD indigenous students will be provided with the Indigenous Academic Success Program (IASP) tutoring in the scheduled UCWE sessions.

Complete

AS/77 Institution - Phased out subjects Focus: Satisfaction and progress

Some courses that are no longer offered but have students in phase-out/teach-out have been excluded from any analysis and it is recommended monitoring is completed for 2021 reporting. This

May 2021

In progress - As courses are identified for "phase out" as a part of the Course and Subject Optimization Project, phase out/teach out plans are developed at the time of proposed phase out, and Schools undertake appropriate staff planning, including the employment of session staff, as required. Monitoring of this, including student satisfaction and completion should be a component of the Student Performance Review. Engagement of OPA required.

In progress.

182

University


will also include international students to assure Academic Senate students in phase-out/teach-out are supported given the increase in phase-out and teach-out from Sustainable Futures: Optimisation Project course decisions.

August 2021

In progress. Meetings held with all Schools and course directors considered courses and subjects in phase-out, as well as other relevant student progression concerns. Phase-out to be considered in the current reporting.

AS/72 Institution - Partnerships Focus: Progress and attrition Focus: Progress and attrition

The Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences (FoBJBS) is funding the major project (September 2019 to August 2021). It will take a holistic approach to educational change, and thus focuses on teachers, student resources and compliance to the HESF standards. Firstly, a design component will adapt and contextualise resources to better suit the needs of the Partners and their teaching staff. Secondly, a teaching component will support those teaching staff through improved teaching skills to be able to implement the designs and be recognised for their achievements. The student component aims to prepare students for new pedagogical and learning strategies so that they are ready for learning in an Australian context. This will be undertaken in a collaboration between both Charles Sturt and the Partners.

May 2021

Multiple actions are considered here.

1. Complete. Significant work has been completed to improve lesson plans andresources for the China lecturers in the “pathway subjects. Following a review in2019, BJBS Schools with significant partner delivery commenced a project of improvingteaching resourses provided to partners. For example, SAF has completed the blendedlearning project in the MPA at Study Centre. The project focused on resource provisionand training of partner staff to better utilise the resource pack in their face-to-faceteaching. This greatly helped student success during 2020 when all teaching movedOnline due to COVID. Partner lecturers were able to work confidently with the Onlineresources to support student learning. The impact of this project resulted in enhancedstudent outcomes in 2020 for the MPA subjects. The project also addressed theprovision of resources for use in class teaching in the China pathways subjects at thestart of each session. This followed an analysis of accessibility of recourse's givenrestriction in China to internet resources, and textbook limitations. Resources for thesubjects taught by CSU (the "final eight") have been fully adapted to be best practiseOnline resources to support face to face learning. These initiatives greatly assisted in2020 in the transition when all teaching was conducted Online due to COVID issues,continued in 2021. Initial analyses have confirmed that student use of resourcesincreased, and progression rates improved over this year. SCM and SMM (now theSchool of Business) also provided additional support for partner staff as all teachingmoved from on-campus to on-line, such as the production of brief, targeted videos thatcould be used by partner staff.

2. Completed (BAU). Partner teaching staff are acknowledged for teaching excellencethrough Charles Sturt recognised teaching awards specific to Study Centre andawarded by the Executive Dean in public "gala" events (conducted on-line in2020/2021), and, in the case of SCM, school specific awards. Promotion andrecognition, and more importantly, the sharing of teaching excellence is an ongoinggoal of the Scholarly Environment Model, which has been piloted at the Study Centres,and which is in the process of being mainstreamed at Charles Sturt.

In progress

183

University


3. In progress. This action was related to the strategic goal of there being a transition forChina students from the Bus into postgraduate courses at CSU, and the concept of a"campus within campus" on the Port Macquarie campus. This latter project has notprogressed, however, the goal of China graduates progressing to on-shore study atPort Macquarie is still a goal supported by in-country marketing within the Chinapartners.

August 2021

In progress (iii above). Preparing students for learning in the Australian context. Charles Sturt staff currently teach the “final 8” subjects in China (currently on-line due to COVID travel restrictions), and will commence teaching 8 of the 16 pathway subjects commencing in 202175. This increased course teaching will assist students to become more familiar with Australian pedagogical models. However, COVID restrictions have not enabled planned in-country Profession Development sessions to occur with China academic staff (they occur regularly with Study Centre staff) within the partner universities.

FOBJBS-3 (2019)

Improve teaching quality and HESF compliance in partner delivery through (i) re-designing teaching resources to better suit the needs of the Partners and their teaching staff, (ii) supporting partner teaching staff through improved teaching skills to be able to implement the designs and be recognised for their achievements, and (iii) preparing students for new pedagogical and learning strategies so that they are ready for learning in an Australian context.

May 2021

See Action AS/72

FOBJBS-4 2019

Identify courses needing interventions to improve progression, reduce attrition and improve student satisfaction.

May 2021

This action related to specific Schools addressing attrition, progression and student satisfaction results, as needed. Specific rectifications were not specified, but improvements will be tracked by the 2021 Student Performance Report. Schools have applied individual strategies. For example, the Master of Professional Accounting introduced a project to introduce blended learning to increase student outcomes. Initial indications are that this strategy was effective. To be tested in the 2021 Student Performance Report. Additionally, in 2021 the Faculty is working with the HEPPP retention team in first year subjects with large numbers of low SES students

BAU

184

University


and poor progression/student satisfaction (such as ACC129, MGT100, PSY101, ITC106) to provide embedded one on one and small group tutorial support.

FOBJBS-5 2019

Improve access and support to Australian Indigenous students, and students from low SES groups.

In progress May 2021 See actions undertaken by School of Policing (AS79/AS80) above. Additional work needs to be undertaken in collaboration with the Division of Student Success.

Complete

FOBJBS-9 - 2019

Implement course revitalisations of the Bachelor of Information Technology and Bachelor of Business (with Specialisations) and review courses for future revitalisation planning.

May 2021

Complete. The Bachelor of Information Technology and Bachelor of Business (with Specialisations) were introduced from 202130. Key features include: a common first year with the opportunity to specialise in subsequent years; and work practice opportunities in each year of study aligned with the study of key industry-identified employability skills. All first-year subjects have been revitalised with attention on the alignment of learning outcomes and assessment; and the restructuring of subject sites to ensure they are logically presented, engaging and easily navigable by students to enhance their learning experiences.

Complete

185

University


Pathway Courses

University Certificate in Workforce Essentials

The School of Policing Studies offers the University Certificate in Workforce Essentials (UCWE), an enabling course which is a mandatory pre-entry level requirement for seeking a career in the NSW Police Force and provides a pathway into the Associate Degree in Policing Practice (ADPP). It is the only enabling course offered by FOBJBS. The UCWE is a single subject, non-award course, and accounts for around 300 EFTSL a year.

Metric 2015 2019 2020 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

Commencing Enrols 271 2211 2527 +14.3% +832.5%

Commencing Load 33.9 279.9 320.9 +14.6% +847.2%

Commencing Progress 85.2% 82.6% 86.5% +3.9 +1.3

Conversion Rate - 39.8% 38.4% -1.4 -

Subject Experience Survey 70.0% 79.2% 85.7% +6.5 +15.7

Progress rates have increased by 3.9 pp over 2019 rates, and remain high at 86.5%, although the conversion to the ADPP has dropped slightly by 1.4 pp to 38.4%. Enrolment in the ADPP is dependent upon NSW Police Force recruitment procedures.

Overall positive Subject Experience Survey (SuES) evaluations started at 70% and are currently up around 15

pp since the inception of the course to around 85%, indicating strong student endorsement.

Conversion into Award courses has been relatively steady since the introduction of the course. While a handful

of students enrol in Bachelor level courses upon completion of the UCWE, conversion is almost entirely into

the Associate Degree in Policing Practice (ADPP). Overall, around 1 in 3 students enrolling in the UCWE will

subsequently enrol in the ADPP, and work is currently being undertaken to improve this rate.

Commencing Progress Rates by Socioeconomic Status

Year High SES Med SES Low SES

2015 83.3% 86.0% 84.8%

2019 86.9% 83.3% 78.4%

2020 90.7% 87.09% 82.3%

Low SES students make up between 25-30% of this cohort, with High SES around 20%. Relative proportions

have remained stable throughout the lifespan of the course. Progress rates overall are variable, decreasing

between 2015 and 2017 but improving steadily for the last three years. Despite the variability in the overall

result, a clear difference is consistently observed between SES cohorts, with High SES around 8 pp higher

than Low SES for the last two years.

Conversion into the ADPP shows a similar trend to progress, with the High SES cohort conversion typically

around 10 pp higher than the Low SES cohort. Notably, this difference has increased in 2020 with the Low

SES conversion rate falling to 29.6% compared to the High SES cohort at 44.4%.

186

University


Percentage Enrolment and Commencing Progress Rates by 1st Nations Status

Year Enrolments Australian First Nations Not Australian First Nations

2015 1.9% 40.0% 86.1%

2019 4.6% 70.9% 83.1%

2020 4.0% 75.0% 87.0%

First Nations students make up 4% of the UCWE cohort, which is higher than the average participation rate

across the University.

Progress rates for this cohort continue to sit well below the rate for the non-First Nations cohort with results of

75% and 87% respectively. The First Nations rate increased 4.1 pp in the last year, slightly narrowing the gap

to 12pp.

Prior to 2020 the differences in conversion had reduced to show similar conversion rates into the ADPP

between the First Nations and non-First Nations cohorts. However, in 2020 First Nations students were far

less likely to enrol in the ADPP (27.4%) compared to figures from the previous year (down 10 pp) and

conversion rates for their counterparts in 2020 (38.9%).


The School of Policing and TAFE NSW have continued to strengthen the Indigenous Police Recruitment Our Way Delivery Program (IPROWD) which supports Australian 1st Nations students to prepare for enrolment in, and progress through the UCWE (as well as the ADPP), and thus, to join the NSW Police Force. The UCWE Manager is currently working with the TAFE Coordinator on issues of attrition within the UCWE program. This involves collating the details of students leaving the program within a spreadsheet to highlight the reason for leaving. All students who leave the program are interviewed about their reasons for discontinuing.

The School of Policing also has a dedicated Indigenous Student Support Officer located on campus to assist Australian 1st Nations students with progress.

Focus Areas for Improvement (Actions)

The closer examination of reasons for Australian 1st Nations student attritions has indicated that one potential factor is anxiety about meeting the health requirements for employment by the NSW Police Force. To ensure that students are aware of this requirement early, the following steps have been undertaken;

1. Ensured that the information around health, fitness, and eligibility to join NSWPF is highlighted onthe NSWPF and UCWE respective web sites.

2. Highlighted all information around health, fitness, and eligibility to join NSWPF in the UCWE Offerletters.

3. Included all information around health, fitness, and eligibility to join NSWPF in the UCWE StudentWelcome Booklet.

The impact of this initiative will be reviewed in 2022.

Furthermore, UCWE Indigenous students are also allocated 10 hours of IASP support.

In order to improve general progression rates, and to address the differential progression rates due to SES, SOPS study skills coordinator has worked with the UCWE team to develop new study skill resources. The links to these resources have been added to the subject site and included in the UCWE Welcome Booklet. The effectiveness of this intervention on progress rates will be evaluated in 2022.

187

University


Undergraduate

FoBJBS had a total undergraduate enrolment of 6406 (2678 on-campus; 3728 online). Of the on-campus enrolments, 69% were Charles Sturt students taught via third-party providers, which are considered separately in this report. The data reported here, therefore, excludes third-party providers.


Total Enrols 829 -10.9% -33.2% 100.0% 3728 +5.3% -0.7% 100.0%

Commencing 326 -19.5% -37.4% 39.3% 1204 +9.2% -2.0% 32.3%

Continuing 503 -4.2% -30.1% 60.7% 2524 +3.6% -0.1% 67.7%

Total Load 459.8 -20.0% -35.9% 100.0% 1924.8 +5.9% +9.2% 100.0%

Commencing 244.6 -19.5% -33.5% 53.2% 589.3 -0.4% +11.0% 30.6%

Continuing 215.2 -20.5% -38.4% 46.8% 1335.6 +9.0% +8.4% 69.4%


Commencing Progress 82.6% +6.2 +1.9 79.1% 78.6% +3.7 +6.9 73.0%

First Year Attrition 25.2% +6.4 +1.3 26.2% 29.5% -3.8 -3.6 34.1%

Completions 54.7% +4.6 -0.2 59.6% 35.8% +3.2 +1.6 40.3%

StES Overall Satisfaction 72.3% -14.3 -10.8 73.1% 83.6% +5.2 +5.8 81.7%

StES Teaching Quality 76.9% -8.1 -9.4 82.8% 84.7% +4.0 +2.2 85.6%


GOS - CEQ Overall Satisfaction 86.2% +8.4 +0.5 79.8% 87.2% +4.5 +5.1 84.5%

GOS - Full Time Employment 75.0% +5.8 +10.9 66.5% 88.6% -0.6 -3.4 81.4%

GOS -Further Full Time Study 17.9% -14.1 +1.2 12.9% 9.2% +1.1 +1.3 9.9%

Once Third-Party Partnerships are excluded, 82% of Bachelor level students study in the on-line mode. Change patterns show a consistent decline in on-campus enrolments, and a 10% increase in online enrolments compared to 2019.

On-Campus

• Progress rates have risen substantially with a 6.2 pp improvement reported for the On-Campus cohort in

2020 (82.6%) after the lowest result in recent years was recorded in 2019 (76.4%). The rate continues to

sit below the other faculties but is now above the benchmark. All Field of Education (FoE) progress

scores for Society and Culture, Management and Commerce, Information Technology and Engineering

and related technologies were above benchmark.

• Attrition rates have risen sharply in 2020 to 25.2% (up 6.4 pp) and are the highest of the faculties, but

with all FoEs below benchmark (that is, lower attrition rates than benchmark).

• Completion rates have risen in the last year with the On-Campus rate now at 54.7% (up 4.6pp).

However, average FoE remains below both the Charles Sturt average and the RUN benchmark. This

result is due to the Information and Technology FOE having a completion rate of 45.1% compared to a

benchmark of 48% and Management and Marketing with a completion rate of 59.3% compared to a

benchmark of 64.5%. Completion is not yet relevant for Engineering, and Society and Culture marginally

exceeded the benchmark.

• Student Satisfaction: Commencing student satisfaction shows a considerable drop in both overall

satisfaction and teaching quality satisfaction for On-Campus students (at 72.3% and 76.9% respectively)

with teaching quality in particular, well below both the university average and RUN benchmark. Part of

188

University


this is likely to be due to the strong negative impact of COVID-19 on the overall satisfaction ratings for

On-Campus students from all faculties, with the average satisfaction rating for teaching quality across all

faculties dropping marginally (down 1.5 pp in the last year). However, with a drop of 8.1 pp for BJBS, this

is an issue that needs further understanding and intervention.

• Graduate Satisfaction: satisfaction with course experience is high at 86.2% in 2020, up 8.4 pp in the last

year and returning to the rate seen five years ago after several years of lower results. The rate is above

the other faculties and the RUN benchmark overall, but lower for the Information Technology FoE.

• Graduate Full-Time Employment: employment is typically lower than other faculties, however an

improvement in 2020 has lifted the rate to 75%, exceeding the RUN benchmark by almost 10 pp. A

greater proportion of graduates from the On-Campus cohort are also pursuing further full-time study, with

the rate remaining high at 17.9% despite a decrease in 2020 (down 14.1 pp).

Online

• Overall progress rates have risen considerably in 2020, up 3.7 pp in the last year to 79.4% (and up 6.9

pp over five years). The rate continues to sit below the other faculties but is now above the benchmark,

and well above the benchmark for Information Technology (81.4% vs 68.8%).

• Attrition has also improved in the last year (down 3.8 pp to 29.5%) and is the lowest amongst the

faculties with all relevant FoEs below benchmark.

• Completions rates have risen in the last year, up 3.8 pp to 35.8%. The rate is above the Charles Sturt

average but below the RUN benchmark of 40%. Individual FoEs within BJBS are close to comparable

courses in the RUN network with Information Technology at 28.8% (benchmark = 29.7%), Society and

Culture at 38.2% (benchmark = 38.6%), but Management and Commerce requires further examination at

27.4% (benchmark = 39.9%).

• Student Satisfaction rates have improved in the last year across both overall satisfaction (83.6%, up 5.2

pp) and teaching quality (84.7%, up 4 pp). Both rates have also increased over the five-year period. The

overall satisfaction result is the highest of the faculties and compares favourably to the benchmark.

• Graduate Satisfaction: satisfaction with course experience is high at 87.2% in 2020, up 4.5 pp in both the

last year and over the five-year period (after some fluctuation). The rate is above the other faculties and

the RUN benchmark.

• Graduate Full-Time Employment: the full-time employment rate has remained consistently high for

Online students at 88.6%, the highest of the three faculties and well above the benchmark.

Socio-Economic Status (SES)

At Bachelor level study there is an impact of Socio-Economic Status (SES). Commencing progress and attrition show a linear increase with SES (from low to high), for both on-campus and online enrolments. Completions show a similar pattern, although medium SES is lower than the other categories for on-campus students, but higher for on-line. However when compared to RUN benchmarks, across FoBJBS, whether online or on-campus, students in each SES category (low, medium, high) are performing better than their RUN benchmarks on commencing progress, and better, or comparable, for attrition and completions.

In relation to Student Satisfaction, high SES on-campus students show higher overall satisfaction compared to low and medium SES students (with little difference between them), but all SES groups show similar, or much better, student satisfaction compared to the RUN benchmark. For online students, all Charles Sturt SES groups rate overall satisfaction higher than the RUN benchmark, with the medium SES group having the lowest ratings. Ratings of teaching quality are lower for on-campus students than on-line students, and, across the board, lower for low SES students, and lower than the RUN benchmarks.

Australian First Nations Status

In 2020, Australian First Nations students represented 1.5% of total Bachelor-level enrolments, and although a 46.7 pp increase on 2019, is significantly below the expected proportion relative to the population, and

189

University


much lower than the proportion of First Nations on-line enrolments, which was 5.1% for 2020 (an increase of 8.8 pp over 2019).

The following Table shows commencing progress, attritions and (6-year) completions for Australian First nations students, and non-First Nations students, by on-campus and online enrolments. Comparisons with appropriate RUN benchmarks are also indicated.

On-Campus Australian First Nations Non-Australian First Nations

Commencing Progress 63.2% * 89.7%

Attrition 33.3% * 27.3% *

Completions ** 33.3% * 67.2%

Online

Commencing Progress 67.0% 79.1%

Attrition 38.6% * 29.0%

Completions ** 13.5% * 36.8% * * Below RUN benchmark ** Refers to within 6 years of commencement.

Due to small enrolments across programs, student satisfaction scores are only available for the online cohort, where overall satisfaction was lower than for non-First nations students (63.6% vs 84.8%), ratings of teaching quality was also lower (81.8% vs 84.1%), the former being lower than the RUN benchmark, and the latter higher.

This data shows that First Nations students consistently perform poorer than non-First Nations students and are more likely to fall below their equivalent RUN cohorts, and also to rate their student experience as being lower. Although First Nations students are enrolled in a number of bachelor level programs (16) in FoBJBS, the majority of First Nations students are enrolled in the Bachelor of Criminal Justice (26.6%), Psychology (20.2%) and LLB (11.4%). Although support for First Nations students’ needs to be addressed across the whole Faculty, specific support in these programs needs to be addressed.

Basis of Admission

Across on-campus Bachelor-level programs in FoBJBS, first year progress is better than RUN benchmarks for all admission pathways, except for the “other” category, which includes highly specified criteria set by specific programs (e.g., interviews), which are difficult to categorise here, but will need to be examined, where applied. Most notably, “special entry” bases of admissions showed a 98.0% progress rate for on-campus students (compared to a RUN benchmark of 80.6%), providing strong endorsement for school principal endorsement programs, and Charles Sturt Advantage. First year progress also exceeded RUN benchmarks for all basis of admissions pathways for online students.


A key highlight for the undergraduate programs is the high 1st year progression rates for student entering via special entry programs. Due to issues related to COVID-19, and the impact that this has had on students who were enrolled in Year 11 in 2020 and will be completing their Higher School Certificate (or equivalent) in 2021, when school attendance was again affected by COVID-19, this result provides some confidence in the effectiveness of special entry programs for student selection.


Differences due to SES are difficult to address specifically, other than by systemic interventions aimed at improving teaching quality. However, collaboration with DSS to identify specific supports, particularly through HEPPP funded programs will be a priority. In particular, the “Improving undergraduate student engagement

190

University


and success through facilitated support” project will target this need. Additionally, similar support for First Nations students is a high priority.

Postgraduate

FoBJBS has the largest share of Postgraduate Coursework enrolments within Charles Sturt. However, the analysis reported here excludes Charles Sturt students who undertake their studies with third-party providers (considered separately in this report). In the domain of postgraduate coursework teaching there is a clear demarcation with the majority of on-campus teaching within FoBJBS being delivered via third party providers (4646 enrolments compared to just 93 with regional campuses, that is, 98%), and the majority of online teaching being delivered to students enrolled directly with Charles Sturt (3842 compared to only 6 with third-party providers, that is, 98.4%). The analysis here will, therefore, focus only on the postgraduate online students studying directly with Charles Sturt University. FoBJBS, therefore, has a strong commitment to teaching domestic and international students through third-party teaching partnerships, and this is not fully reflected in the Undergraduate and Postgraduate analyses presented in this or the previous section.

Metric Online 1 Yr Chg 5 Yr Chg % Course Profile

Total Enrols 3842 +9.0% -10.6% 100.0%

Commencing 1946 +18.7% -2.8% 50.7%

Continuing 1896 +0.6% -17.3% 49.3%

Total Load 1231.8 +15.3% -6.1% 100.0%

Commencing 662.5 +25.3% +7.5% 53.8%

Continuing 569.3 +5.5% -18.1% 46.2%

Metric Online 1 Yr Chg 5 Yr Chg vs Benchmark

Commencing Progress 89.4% +3.2 +3.1 84.0%

First Year Attrition 22.8% -2.0 +1.3 28.9%

Completions 66.4% -1.3 0.0 65.6%

StES Overall Satisfaction 79.4% -1.4 - 79.1%

StES Teaching Quality 86.3% +1.0 - 84.6%

Metric Online 1 Yr Chg 4 Yr Chg vs Benchmark

GOS - CEQ Overall Satisfaction 84.7% -2.5 -2.1 85.5%

GOS - Full Time Employment 91.2% -1.4 -1.6 88.1%

GOS -Further Full Time Study 5.1% -1.1 -0.4 6.2%

Online

• Progress: rates have risen in 2020, up 3.2 pp in the last year to 89.4% (and up 3.1 pp over five years).

The rate increase is in line with the increase in other faculties and is above the overall RUN benchmark.

All relevant FoE progress rates are above comparable RUN benchmarks.

• Attrition rates have improved in the last year (down 2 pp to 22.8%), and has an overall rate that is the

lowest of the faculties and well below the overall RUN benchmark. All attrition rates are also below

relevant RUN benchmarks for all relevant FoEs.

• Completion rates have dropped slightly in the last year (down 1.3 pp to 66.4%). Despite this decrease

the rate is just above both the Charles Sturt average and the overall RUN benchmark. Completion rates

191

University


for the individual FoEs of Management and Commerce and Information Technology are marginally lower

than their comparable RUN rates, and although probably not significantly different, at least not higher.

• Student Satisfaction: overall satisfaction decreased only marginally in the last year and the rate is on par

with other faculties and the benchmark. Satisfaction with teaching quality improved slightly in the last

year and again, compares favourably to other faculty results and the RUN group. This is a significant

achievement, given the challenges of adapting to COVID-19, where, although the impact may have been

lower on teaching delivery for the majority of online students, many courses also included residential

schools, all of which we moved to an online delivery.

• Graduate Satisfaction: satisfaction with course experience is down by 2.5 pp to 84.7% and while the

highest of the faculties the rate remains below the RUN benchmark, although only marginally in most

cases.

• Graduate Full-Time Employment: the full-time employment rate has remained consistently high for

Online students at 91.2%, is on par with the other faculties and higher than the benchmark. No rates for

any FoE fell below the FoE relevant-, or overall RUN, benchmarks.

Socio-Economic Status (SES)

At Postgraduate level, FoBJBS students show little differences across low, medium and high SES categories for first year progression (86.9%, 89.5% and 89.2% respectively), attrition (24.7%, 22.0%, 22.9% respectively) and completions (62.4%, 67.4%, 65.3% respectively). All outcomes are better compared to the relevant RUN benchmark.

Australian First Nations Status

In 2020, First Nations students represented 2.0% of commencing FoBJBS online postgraduate enrolments (39 students in total), and 1.8% of total enrolments, which given Charles Sturt’s focus on engaging First Nations students, and contributing to their representation in the professions, is lower than would be desired, and suggests that specific targets should be explored, with assistance from DSS. For existing students, first year progress (62.1) was lower in 2020 for First Nations students than both the RUN benchmark (73.5%), and that for non-First Nations students (89.9%). Although attrition (31.0%) was marginally better than the RUN benchmark (32.2%), it was lower than for non-First Nations students (28.8%). Completions (6-years) for First Nations students (52.0%) was lower than for both FoBJBS non-First nations students (67.2%) and the RUN benchmark (61.9%). Student evaluation and graduate outcome data was not available for First Nations students due to the small number of enrolments overall.

Basis of Admission

Admission to Postgraduate programs in FoBJBS (excluding third party delivery) is primarily via completion of another (usually undergraduate at Bachelor level) higher education tertiary qualification (74.5% in 2020), with a further 25.0% meeting other specified entry criteria, and 0.5% based on TAFE qualifications. Progress rates exceed RUN benchmarks for all admission categories, with progress rates for higher education and TAFE admissions (about 90%) being higher than students admitted by other criteria (84.9%). Attrition was also lower for all admission categories, compared to RUN benchmarks, with TAFE (25%) and Other (26%) being higher than Higher Education (21.5%). Six-year completions were higher for the small number of students admitted on the basis of TAFE qualifications (78%), than for the “Other” category (70.2%), which was, in turn, higher than for those admitted on the basis of tertiary qualifications (65.9%). Only the “other” category was lower than the respective RUN benchmark.

Key Themes / Issues

As would be expected for a Faculty that is focused mainly on postgraduate teaching online, FoBJBS shows strong performance in most indices relative to other Faculties, and in comparison, to the RUN benchmarks.

192

University


Over 91% of graduates are in fulltime employment, and over 5% are undertaking further study.


The representation and progress rates of First Nations students continues to be a concern in postgraduate courses offered by FoBJBS.

Higher Degree by Research

Metric Full Time 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % Course

Profile Part Time 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

% Course Profile

Commencing Enrols 12 +33.3% -14.3% 23.5% 16 -42.9% -27.3% 36.4%

Commencing Load 10.3 +28.1% -18.8% 24.0% 6.0 -47.8% -35.1% 34.8%

Metric Full Time 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs On-campus

Benchmark Part Time 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

vs Online Benchmark

First Year Attrition 11.1% +4.8 -1.4 6.5% 17.9% -8.2 +2.9 N/A

6 Year Completion Rate 71.4% +21.4 +12.6 54.9% 27.3% -27.7 +21.4 N/A

Timely Completions 88.9% -2.0 +44.5 15.3% 81.8% -3.9 +24.7 N/A

Metric Rate 1 Yr chg 4 Yr chg vs Benchmark

GOS - PREQ Overall Satisfaction 87.5% -4.8 -12.5 91.1%

GOS - Full Time Employment 62.5% -26.4 -37.5 72.0%

GOS -Further Full Time Study 12.5% 12.5 12.5 7.1%

The following trends have been observed in FoBJBS for HDR students between 2018 and 2021.

• Doctor of Public Safety (DPS) enrolments grew by 75 per cent

• PhD enrolments grew by 16 per cent

• Although since 2015, HDR growth has not been uniform across disciplines, enrolments in Policing,Information Technology, and Business have grown substantially.

• As total HDR student numbers have slightly increased, so too has the diversity of students.Enrolment growth has been especially marked among domestic students. While domestic studentenrolments increased across all disciplines, there is considerable variation between disciplines.

• The COVID-19 global pandemic and associated travel restrictions had a substantial impact on themovement of international students in 2020 and this is continuing in 2021. In the 20 months from 1January 2020 to 31 August 2021, there were many enrolment deferments made by HDR students,over one third of whom were outside Australia. In 2021, the number of HDR students studying part-time is 89%. This factor may also have the high 2020 attrition rates, which were higher than thebenchmark, and the highest of the three Faculties.

• In contrast, completion rates were strong for FoBJBS HDR students compared to both the RUNbenchmark and the other Faculties.


Under Optimization FoBJBS has recently rationalised its offerings of PhD courses (reducing from 7 to 3), merged subjects in its Professional Doctorates, and developed a new Honours program, all of which has been aimed at ensuring viable enrolments, focusing resources, and providing pathways into HDRs from a

193

University


range of disciplines. The impact of these changes is yet to be assessed and will be addressed in future evaluations. In addition, the Faculty is considering options for the development of a 128 pt Master of Research program that may provide an alternative path into a HDR.

Associate Degree of Policing Practice

The School of Policing Studies and the NSW Police Force (NSWPF) collaborate to deliver the Associate Degree in Policing Practice (ADPP), a comprehensive education program for potential recruits in the NSWPF. This is a significant partnership for FoBJBS and Charles Sturt University. Enrolments in the ADPP have risen significantly since 2015, driven by large recent recruitment initiatives of the NSW Police Force such that over the last five years, total enrolments in the ADPP have more than doubled, with commencing enrolments three times the 2015 figure. Commencing enrolments increased almost 20% in the last year while load grew by nearly 30%. Commencing progress has been relatively stable and very high across the period. With a slight increase in 2020, the rate currently sits at 96.7%. First year attrition for the ADPP cohort has increased for the second year in a row but at 4.8% remains very low relative to Charles Sturt averages, or RUN benchmarks. Over the five-year period the rate has reached a high of just 6.8% and with consistently low attrition, completion rates are high and stable with a current rate of 90%.

Since Session 90 in 2015, the University Certificate in Workforce Essentials (UCWE) has been a compulsory pathway into the ADPP. As such, enrolments into the ADPP will be influenced by completion of UCWE and subsequent NSWPF recruitment processes.

Metric 2015 2019 2020 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % Course Profile

Total Enrols 1227 2284 2707 +18.5% +120.6% 100.0%

Commencing 403 1022 1208 +18.2% +199.8% 44.6%

Continuing 824 1262 1499 +18.8% +81.9% 55.4%

Total Load 911.7 1723.7 2184.4 +26.7% +139.6% 100.0%

Commencing 407.6 966.2 1251.8 +29.6% +207.1% 57.3%

Continuing 504.1 757.5 932.6 +23.1% +85.0% 42.7%

Metric 2015 2019 2020 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark

Commencing Progress 97.5% 96.4% 96.7% +0.3 -0.8 -

First Year Attrition 6.8% 3.9% 4.8% +0.9 -2.0 -

Completions 82.8% 90.0% 90.1% +0.1 +7.3 -

StES Overall Satisfaction 66.7% 71.1% 75.2% +4.1 +8.5 -

StES Teaching Quality 70.8% 73.7% 84.4% +10.7 +13.6 -

Metric 2016 2018 2020 1 Yr chg 4 Yr chg vs Benchmark

GOS - CEQ Overall Satisfaction 64.3% 61.4% 71.4% +10.0 +7.1 -

GOS - Full Time Employment 100.0% 100.0% 98.7% -1.3 -1.3 -

GOS -Further Full Time Study 3.4% 1.2% 2.9% +1.7 -0.5 -

Overall student satisfaction has been trending upwards. Currently overall satisfaction is high at 75.2% (up 4.1

pp in the last year) and considerably higher than the low satisfaction rating recorded in 2017 (about 56%).

Satisfaction with teaching quality has generally been higher than overall satisfaction and after relatively low

results in 2017 and 2018, has climbed 14 pp in the last two years to 84.4% positive ratings.

Graduate satisfaction with course experience has been improving since 2017 and is up almost 30 pp in the last three years. At 71.4%, this is now the highest graduate satisfaction rating reported since the inception of the current survey. While reported full-time employment rates generally sit at 100%, this figure dropped to 98.7% in 2020. The very high rates here relate to the fact that the ADPP is a dedicated course for the training of NSW serving police officers, and that recruitment into the course is determined by NSWPF.

Commencing Progress Rates by Socioeconomic Status

194

University


Year High SES Med SES Low SES

2015 97.3% 97.7% 97.3%

2019 97.3% 96.1% 96.3%

2020 97.4% 96.7% 95.8%

In 2020, Medium SES students formed the majority of the ADPP cohort (over 55%), with High and Low SES

each comprising around 22%. Relative proportions have not changed dramatically over the five year period.

Commencing progress rates have remained consistent and high, although a small decrease was observed

for low SES students, which will be monitored in future cohorts, there is minimal impact of SES on student

progression.

Student Experience Survey results by socio-economic status are available from 2017 onwards and during this

period response numbers have almost tripled and overall satisfaction has increased from 55.6% to 75.2%.

Student satisfaction with teaching quality has improved across the board with combined results increasing

from 71.3% in 2017 to the current rate of 84.4%.

Percentage Enrolment and Commencing Progress Rates by 1st Nations Status

Year Australian 1st Nations % Enrolment Australian First Nations Not Australian First Nations

2015 4.2% 100.0% 97.4%

2019 4.4% 91.7% 97.6%

2020 2.7% 98.1% 96.6%

In 2020, First Nations students made up 2.7% of the ADPP cohort, down from 4.4% in 2019. Commencing

progression for First Nations students is generally high, and are, in 2020, slightly higher than for non-First

Nations students.

The First Nations completion rate is up by 2pp in the last year and is now on par with the non-First Nations

rate at 90%.


The ADPP shows strong performance across most indices across the whole cohort, such as increasing and strong enrolments, tied to NSW Government recruitment initiatives), strong student progression, high completion rate, and low attrition. Student satisfaction has increased, with very high ratings of teaching quality.


A significant decline in enrolments of Australian First Nations students was observed in 2020. As enrolment in the ADPP is dependent upon completions in the UCWE, specific actions are being undertaken to address the attrition (non-completion) in this program by Australian First Nations students. A working group related to “Attracting and Retaining Police Recruits” has been formed and currently meets on a weekly basis, including representatives from the School of Policing with a goal of increasing applications, increasing retention, and supporting the diverse representation of people in the police recruitment program.

195

University


Third Party Providers

Third Party Provider campuses are predominantly partnered with FoBJBS, which had 95% of the commencing enrolments through Partners in 2020, with most of these involving International students. The partners are considered separately.

China Joint Cooperation Program (JCP)

The Joint Cooperation Program (JCP) is a cooperative program between Charles Sturt University and four universities in China: Jilin University of Finance and Economics (JUFE), Tianjin University of Commerce (TUC), Yangzhou University of Commerce (YZU), and Yunnan University of Finance and Economics (YUFE). In 2020, the JCP has operated for 21 years. Students in the JCP are enrolled as Charles Sturt University students in the Bachelor of Business Studies course and complete the final eight subjects of the degree, with credit for previous subjects. From late 2021 Charles Sturt will teach an additional 8 subjects in-country (COVID restrictions allowing).

Key Benchmarks

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % of UG Offshore Cohort

Commencing Enrols 938 +6.2% -9.4% 98.5%

JUFE 441 11.1% -24.6%

TUC 227 3.7% 35.1%

YZU 83 1.2% -4.6%

YUFE 187 1.1% -4.1%

Commencing Load 820.5 +6.7% -9.2% 99.6%

JUFE 327.0 13.7% -28.6%

TUC 225.5 3.4% 35.0%

YZU 81.5 0.0% -4.1%

YUFE 186.5 2.6% -3.6%

Metric Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark*


JUFE 89.5% +25.1 -2.1

TUC 95.3% -3.8 -3.7

YZU 98.2% +0.9 +1.6

YUFE 99.0% +3.5 +8.2

First Year Attrition 15.5% +4.7 +5.1 9.8%

JUFE 31.2% +7.0 +12.9

TUC 0.0% 0.0 -0.5

YZU 11.0% +3.9 +9.9

YUFE 2.2% +1.7 +1.2

Completions 79.4% -4.3 -14.0 79.8%

JUFE 68.2% -4.6 -15.7

TUC 97.0% -1.6 -2.1

YZU 89.7% -9.2 -8.1

196

University


YUFE 93.3% -1.3 -4.6

*Benchmarking for China Partners is based on On-Campus, international, undergraduate, sector-wide results.

The JCP partnership accounts for the largest segment of Offshore students, consisting of 99% of commencing Offshore load. Enrolments have varied significantly over the five years examined, with 938 commencing last year after previously declining from approximately 1,100 to approximately 600. Students all study the Bachelor of Business Studies, On-Campus at four different sites. The largest site, JUFE, accounts for around half the commencing enrolments and nearly all of the variability observed across the five-year period. Enrolments have been consistent at Yangzhou, Tianjin and YUFE. Benchmarks in this section refer to On-Campus, International, Undergraduate results for the sector.


• Progress rates have risen substantially in 2020, up 8.4 pp to 94.1% and exceed the benchmark overall.Results vary by campus however, with JUFE largely accounting for the improvement, with a 25.1 ppincrease in the last year. In 2020, JUFE reported a commencing progress rate of 89.5% while all othersites were above 95%.

• Attrition rates show a similar pattern to progress with JUFE recording far higher and more variable rates.JUFE reported a rate of to 31.2% in 2020. Tianjin and YUFE have relatively low and consistent rates,however, Yangzhou has steadily increased since 2017 and is currently sitting at 11%, just above thebenchmark of 9.8%.

• Completion rates are typically very high, generally over 90% with the exception of the JUFE cohort.Completion rates appear to closely reflect first year attrition for the corresponding cohort. JUFE has seena continued decline in completion rates last year, corresponding to increased attrition for that cohort.

Summary of completed and evaluated actions

The following actions were undertaken in 2020 to support student performance:

• Student Performance Data is regularly monitored as a standing work plan item at JCP AcademicManagement Committee meetings. This includes presentation of student performance data to the JCPpartner institution at least once a year at each Charles Sturt University and China-based UniversityAcademic Management Committee meeting.

• Curriculum reviewed to provide extra resources, as part of a broader review of optimisation of subjects.

• Due to concerns with attrition and completion rates at JUFE, it was identified that offering single subjectsas an on-line offering will allow students to return and complete their course requirements.Communications were sent to all China JCP students who required only one subject to graduate fromtheir Charles Sturt University course. If taken up, this offering will help reduce attrition rates and increasecompletions rates. To date, take-up rates are low.


• Attrition remains high and variable at JUFE.

• Attrition is increasing at Yangzhou

Economics and Finance Institute (EFI), Cambodia

Charles Sturt University and the Economics and Finance Institute (EFI) have been in a partnership since 2005. This partnership delivers the Master of Commerce course for students in Cambodia.

Key Benchmarks

Metric Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % of PG Offshore Cohort

Commencing Enrols 35 +29.6% +66.7% 48.6%

Commencing Load 14.3 +0.9% +65.2% 62.3%

Metric Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs Benchmark*

197

University



First Year Attrition 40.7% +6.1 +28.2 13.2%

Completions 76.2% -8.2 -0.1 84.9%

*Benchmarking for Economic and Finance Institute is based on On-Campus, international, postgraduate, sector-wide results.

Due to the small student size of this partnership which represents less than 2% of the total Offshore load for FoBJBS, a small change in load will result in large percentage fluctuations in reporting against key benchmarks. The large percentage change in enrolments over five years is due to large fluctuations occurring in enrolments between 2014 and 2016.

In 2020 the student performance metrics remain below benchmark. Commencing progress has seen significant improvement in 2020. There has been a decline in the completion rate in 2020 but this is due to higher attrition in previous years. As completion rates are closely aligned with first year attrition, it is expected that the completion rate will continue to decline as first year attrition increased in years following 2016.


• Commencing progress has increased sharply, up from a low of 58.6% in 2019 to 84.2% in 2020 (25.6pp).Despite improvement, the rate remains below the benchmark of 90.3%. The rate of improvement is higherthan the improvement seen at other Third-Party partners.

• Attrition increased for the third year in a row to a high of 40.7%. At just 12.5% in 2015, the rate has risen28.2pp over the five-year period and sits more than 25pp above the benchmark result.

• Completion rates fell 8.2 pp in 2020, corresponding to the increase in attrition rates from 2016. Ascompletion rates correlate closely with first year attrition, a steep decline in completions is likely to occurin the next few years.


Student Performance Data is regularly monitored as a standing work plan item at EFI Academic Management Committee meetings. Reporting has identified where improvements are required, such as FIN531.

• Learning materials for pathway subjects MKT501, ECO501 and FIN 156 were updated to support thetransition to online delivery required due to COVID-19 restrictions.

• Face-to-Face exams changed to an online electronic submission to accommodate for onlineeducation due to the impacts of Covid.

Charles Sturt University Study Centres

The Charles Sturt Study Centres are operated by Study Group Australia. The partnership between Study Group Australia and Charles Sturt University has successfully operated for 25 years providing education to international students onshore on metropolitan campuses in Melbourne and Sydney, and more recently, Brisbane.

Composition of Charles Sturt Study Centre 2020 commencing enrolments:

• Undergraduate students account for approximately 15%

• Postgraduate students account for over 85%

Across all students studying at Study Centres, the three largest groups of students by home country are from India (47%), Nepal (22%) and Sri Lanka (12%), which account for over 80% of Study Centre enrolments.

Key Benchmarks


Onshore Cohort Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

% of PG Onshore Cohort


198

University


Commencing Load 100.6 -69.3% -43.3% 75.0% 576.0 -67.6% -46.7% 100.0%



First Year Attrition 49.9% +8.0 +29.1 9.8% 24.7% +10.6 +17.8 13.2%

Completions 45.5% -1.6 -13.3 79.8% 75.1% -2.7 +4.2 84.9%

StES Overall Satisfaction 81.8% +19.8 +18.8 62.2% 69.4% -7.8 - 60.5%

StES Teaching Quality 83.3% +6.7 -1.9 75.4% 79.5% -2.2 - 74.1%



GOS - Full Time Employment 28.6% -17.8 -22.9 42.9% 36.3% -1.0 -7.3 44.7%


*Benchmarking for CSU Study Centres is based on On-Campus, international, sector-wide results contextualised by course level.

Progress rates have increased in 2020 from 2019 across both Undergraduate and Postgraduate cohorts, and across all campuses. Commencing progress for the undergraduate cohort has risen to 66.4% which represents an improvement over the last year but a decline over a five-year period, and still below the benchmark.

Attrition rates have increased for both Undergraduate and Postgraduate cohorts. Attrition rates increased in 2020 across all three Study Centre campuses, likely to be due to the impacts of Covid-19. The largest attrition rate is in Sydney at 34.97%. The significant increase in attrition at Sydney and Brisbane follows a large decline in attrition in 2019.

Completions are low and continue to decline for both Undergraduate and Postgraduate. The rate is below the benchmark.

BASIS OF ADMISSION

• Undergraduate students are admitted to CSU Study Centres on the basis of Higher Education, SecondaryEducation and VET study. Postgraduate students are admitted almost entirely on the basis of HigherEducation and as such will not be discussed in the summary below.

• Forty-five percent of all Undergraduate students are admitted on the basis of Higher Education. Thiscohort has the lowest progress rate at 56% and, despite an uplift in 2020, is down 16.7 pp over the five-year period and well below the benchmark. Attrition is the highest amongst all basis of admission cohortsat 60.1% (up over 40 pp in the last five years).

• The Secondary Education basis of admission accounts for 26% of all Undergraduate enrolments withstudent performance metrics generally better than for Higher Education. Progress rates are on par withthe CSU Study Centre average at 66% but lag well behind the benchmark.

• Undergraduate students admitted via the VET basis of admission account for just over 28% of allenrolments. Metrics for this cohort are generally better than for students admitted via both HigherEducation and Secondary Education. The progress rate has continued to rise and with a 15.7 pp increaseover the five-year period to 88.6% is higher than the benchmark.

EDUCATION AGENTS

• In 2020, PRISMS records indicate 1,007 commencing students at the Study Centres were assisted by224 education agents.

• The nine education agents with most students, representing 38% of all Charles Sturt University StudyCentre enrolments, are:

– Expert Education & Visa Services

– Endeavour Education Consultants– Study Path Consultants

199

University


– Viv's International Education Centre– AEMC Consultants– New Edge Consultancy Services– UNIKEY GLOBAL PTY LTD.– Grace International– Bluesky Consultancy Services

• Expert Education & Visa Services, the largest agent, had mixed progression results. Undergraduatestudents had a stable progression rate at 76.8%, although below the benchmark. Postgraduate studentshad an increase in progress rate to 94.9%, above the benchmark.

• Postgraduate progress rates increased for seven of the nine largest agents, the only decrease was withUnikey Global Pty Ltd (-0.6%) and Bluesky Consultancy Services (-1.1%).

• However, attrition results were mixed with significant increase for Viv’s International Education Centre(+27.8% for Undergraduate students), and AEMC Consultants (+16.4% for Undergraduate students).Attrition decreased for Expert Education & Visa Services (-2.8% for Undergraduates), and BlueskyConsultancy Services (-3.3% for Undergraduate, -1.6% Undergraduates).

Due to the recent decision by Charles Sturt University to not extend the agreement with Study Group Australia beyond December 2022, and the subsequent decision by Study Group Australia to cease intakes at the Study Centres after September 2021, actions aimed at improving enrolment decisions will not be considered in this report. Teaching quality, and improving outcomes for currently enrolled students, however, remains a key concern.


• Most cohorts have shown an improvement in progression rates.

• Progression rate improved for most of the largest education agents.

UNDERGRADUATE

• Commencing progress for the On-Campus Undergraduate cohort has risen moderately in the last year to66.4% (up 5.9 pp) but remains well below the benchmark of 86.1%. Improvement in the progress ratecame after three years of continual decline and the rate remains 3.8 pp down over the five-year period.

• On-Campus student satisfaction has increased by 19.8 pp to 81.8% in 2020, returning to the level of 2017and placing the rate well above the benchmark. Similarly, satisfaction with teaching quality improved andat 83.3% is also above the benchmark.

POSTGRADUATE

• Progress rates are high at 91.6% and have risen sharply in the last year (up 13 pp). Prior to 2020 rateswere fairly stable and averaged at around 80%. The improvement now places the rate just above thebenchmark for international students. The disparity in progress rates previously seen between campusesin 2019 has largely been resolved with both Sydney and Melbourne now at 92% (up 18.6 pp and 10. 3 pprespectively) and Brisbane at 85.4% (up 19.4 pp).

• In contrast to undergraduate students, both overall and teaching quality satisfaction rates decreased.Despite overall satisfaction dropping to 69.4%, the rate remains above the benchmark. Results varyconsiderably by campus. Melbourne rates are high and steady at 80.3%; Brisbane rates are currentlyabove the benchmark but fluctuate due to smaller response numbers; and Sydney rates are low after aconsiderable decline in 2020 (down 22pp to 52.8%). Satisfaction with teaching quality rates follow asimilar trend.

• Graduate Outcome Survey Further full-time study rates for this cohort are high, increasing and sit abovethe benchmark.


• Student Performance Data is regularly monitored as a standing work plan item at Study Centre AcademicManagement Committee meetings.

200

University


• Evaluation and benchmarking of English Proficiency requirements for admissions has been completed.

• Stronger monitoring of education agents, and the requirement that they enter directly into an agreementwith Charles Sturt between 2019-2020 has led to an increase in progression rates for most agents.

• Attrition needs to be monitored but may be impacted by Covid-19.


• Progression rate still remains below benchmark for the Undergraduate cohort.

• Increasing attrition and falling completion rates for the Undergraduate cohort

• Poor progress, attrition and completion for the Higher Ed cohort

• High attrition rates for Undergraduate students in Information Technology

• Low progress, high attrition and low completions for Management and Commerce students (UG and PG)

• Postgraduate performance at Sydney campus

• Student Satisfaction metrics at Sydney campus

201

University


2020 -2021 Actions

The following Action items will be implemented in 2021 and 2022, and monitored by the Faculty Board and the Provost’s Office.

Action No Action Item Owner Target Completion

AS-110

(2020)


Associate Deans (Academic) May 2022

AS-102 (2020)

EFI: Increased marketing in-country has been undertaken to address decreasing enrolments. This action requires that this be monitored with 2021/2022 enrolments before being closed.

EFI AMC December 2021

AS-77

(Modified 2021)

Courses identified for "phase out" under the Course and Subject Optimization Project, phase out/teach out plans are developed at the time of proposed phase out, and Schools undertake appropriate staff planning, including the employment of sessional staff, as required. Monitoring of this, including student satisfaction and completion will be undertaken and reported as a part of Student Performance Review.

Study Centre cohorts to be added to this action in order to manage and monitor phase out prior to, and after, the end of the SGA-Charles Sturt service-level agreement.

Study Centre AMC

School Boards, Faculty Board

December 2022

AS-72

(Modified 2021)

Preparing China students for learning in the Australian context. Charles Sturt staff are about to commence teaching 8 of the 16 JCP pathway subjects commencing in 202175, bringing the total number of subjects taught to 16. This will increased teaching will assist students to become more familiar with Australian pedagogical models.

ACTIONS:

JCP AMC

School of Business

July 2022

202

University


• COVID restrictions allowing, this will be supported by Professional Developmentsessions with China academic staff aimed at increasing awareness of postgraduatestudy opportunities for China students at Charles Sturt on the Port Macquarie campus.

• Ongoing reviews of the contents of subject taught in China, commenced in 2018,continues to improve content and resources.

• Progression and attrition will continue to be monitored, especially at JUFE

FoBJBS-1

(2021)

Regular peer reviews of teaching of Study Centre staff: First report completed by Bec Acheson and Warwick Baines – and presented to SGA at their 202160 staff induction. Needs to be ongoing and incorporated in staff Scholarly Activities.

Sub Dean L&T (SDLT) DLT - Bec Acheson SGA - Azeem Mohammad

December 2021

FoBJBS-2

(2021)

Actions to increase progression of low SES students and Australian First Nations students in the UCWE;

• Increase awareness of NSWPF eligibility requirements, including health andfitness requirements, in online course information and orientation materials.

• Development of new study skills resources to improve progression rates andaddress disparity in progression rates to socio-economic status.

• Allocation of 10 hours of IASP Support for First Nations students

SOPS Study skills Coordinator

Indigenous Support Officer

August 2022

FOBJBS-3 (2021)

Increase enrolments in the ADPP;

• Improve transition from UCWE to the ADPP. Includes undertaking analysis ofstudent data, market research, and focus groups of current ADPP students.

• Monitor and encourage increased diversity of enrolments into ADPP, including SESbut significantly First Nations students. Engage with NSWPF to review recruitmentpractices and formulate actions to increase diversity through recruitment andretention strategies.

Manager UCWE (NSWPF)

August 2022

FoBJBS-4 (2021)

Implement the Student retention and success framework as evidenced by:

• strengthened retention of students through improved subject progress rates

• maintained levels of high student satisfaction - shown in student feedback throughthe QILT Student Experience Survey

• high levels of student completion - shown in improved student completion rates

• maintaining sector-leading graduate employment rates.

Sub Dean L&T (SDLT) August 2022

FoBJBS-5

(2021)

Collaborate with DSS to identify specific supports, particularly through HEPP funded programs, to address disparities in progression and attrition due to SES and Australian

DSS

Executive Dean

August 2020

203

University


First Nations status. Implement the recently HEPPP funded program “Improving undergraduate student engagement and success through facilitated support”.

Associate Dean (Academic)

204




205

University


Executive Summary

This report provides a summary of the key indicators of student performance for the Faculty of Arts and Education. The Faculty of Arts and Education has a great-many things to celebrate considering the significant upheaval of the sector through these initial, and troubling stages of the global COVID19 pandemic. It is tribute to the dedication of the staff to retain a student-centred approach to delivery, and to work with our learner cohorts as-best-as-possible through difficult times. Far from an equalising effect, this pandemic has created greater wealth disparity and inequity. Differing governments offering different programs of support (or not) on a state-by-state basis, with radically different experiences in different states, and local government areas, and across different industries will no doubt have contributed significantly to an environment of uncertainty feeding into learner choices. It also effects outcomes (not always choices) which undoubtedly have had impact in some areas more than others - this is particularly true (and evident below) of industries which have not been extended any significant level of governmental support, indicating clear governmental workforce preferences by exclusion. These external factors and their lingering effects will require reflection and analysis through future reporting.


Key achievements and highlights are indicated throughout the depth of the report under their specific sub-sections. I won’t repeat those here for the sake of brevity. Worth elevating above all else however this year is the necessity to reflect on and celebrate the sheer magnitude of resilience, creativity and humanity displayed by the staff of the faculty with learners who are often struggling/hurting in different ways (often while we are living under great uncertainty ourselves) as a result of living in troubling pandemic times.

Key Focus Areas for Improvements

The Faculty has assessed the information and has decided to focus on five (5) core areas for improvement. These items ensure that metrics of concern are being targeted through faculty led projects as they align with emergent and broader university strategies.

• (Orion) A deeper dive to understand the metrics of concern across the whole education suite, ratherthan focussing on individual education courses separately to look for new solutions through co-design.

• (Stratosphere) An opportunity to explore our position between our postgraduate offerings andemergent areas of university strategic need in research to ensure alignment and prioritised support.

• Increase on-campus experience to arrest metrics of concern through audit of equipment/spaces andsubsequent implementation of faculty-based planning aligned to campus-based plans and futures.

• Maintenance of the very real and positive effects evidenced through the Revitalisation process forour faculty, specifically in the Bachelor of Arts.

• Exploration of further options in foregrounding the new Communications Degree as it rolls outpursuant to strategic planning.


2019 No of Actions Evaluated (New 2021 SPR Action) Evaluated (Closed)

8 2 6 (noting that 5 of these are now absorbed into other University / Faculty actions outside of SPR)

206

University


Contents








Methodology .................................................................................................................................................... 5

Benchmarks ................................................................................................................................................... 5

2020 to 2025 Benchmarking Group ............................................................................................................... 5

Benchmarking approach ................................................................................................................................ 6

Progress on Actions from 2019 – 2020 report ............................................................................................... 7

Bachelor ......................................................................................................................................................... 10



Notes ............................................................................................................................................................ 11

Postgraduate .................................................................................................................................................. 20



Notes ............................................................................................................................................................ 21




Notes ............................................................................................................................................................ 27

Third Party Providers .................................................................................................................................... 29

North Sydney Institute of TAFE (onshore) ................................................................................................... 29

Ming Hua Theological College, Hong Kong (offshore) ................................................................................ 29

HKU Space (offshore) .................................................................................................................................. 29

2020 -2021 Actions ........................................................................................................................................ 31

207

University



Scope of Analysis




• Commencing load





• Completions





• Mode

• Faculty



• Campus Type


• Indigeneity

• Domesticity


• Credit Packages Agents

This report will focus upon the student cohorts enrolled in the following programs in the Faculty of Arts and Education




• Courses delivered by Third Party Providers (TPPs)

208

University


Methodology

Benchmarks


The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) also utilises benchmarking in its standards and risk based approach to quality assurance. The risk dimension of the framework includes the calculation and analysis of indicators related to students and financial viability. The analysis of these indicators includes, but is not restricted to, comparison to thresholds. Furthermore, TEQSA expects that all higher education providers regularly analyse institutional data to identify and remediate emerging issues, and that these analyses include comparison to other institutions.

A suite of threshold benchmarks have been adopted by Charles Sturt for inclusion in the Student Performing Reporting going forward.

• Associate Degree in Policing Practice (ADPP) students are reported separately for the first yearattrition benchmarking measure.



















209

University








For the Third Party Provider cohort:



• Progress, attrition and completions - no sector level benchmarks available at a course level, fields ofeducation have been used as a proxy

Faculty approach

• The Faculty held a dedicated load planning workshop with the Faculty Leadership Team and CourseDirectors on 8 June 2021 to capture current course insights and issues. This was considered whenpreparing this report.

• HOS were invited to review the draft SPR prepared by the Associate Dean Academic, to providefurther insights and commentary.

• Note that the Faculty has been implementing School changes and mergers since June that resultedfrom the Faculty Leadership and School Redesign Final Change Plan and the Faculty AdministrationTeams Final Change Plan, including recruitment into leadership positions. This has limited thecapacity of the Faculty to engage with the data more broadly.

• The ADA is focused on leading a specific Faculty project “ORION” to explore opportunities emerging

from the new School of Education and the Education suite of courses, that over the course of the

project will draw on Student Performance Report data and inform the next Student Performance

Report.

210

University


Progress on Actions from 2019-2020 report

Evaluation and progress against actions from 2019-2020 report on student performance is shown in the following Table, as reported to APLT on 2 September 2021. Note that the “Institution” actions are not included.

Action Progress/Evaluation STATUS

FOAE 1: Student Retention and Progression

Lift student retention and progression to above benchmark standards for our 20 largest, poorest performing subjects by the end of 2021.

May 2021 - Total re-design and re-write of SOC101 (one our largest poor performing subjects) has been completed. This was an important investment by the School as this subject service teaches into multiple courses within and across Faculties.

Given the reduction in resources/support available to the Faculty and in DLT as result of OR1 and OR2, we are reducing this list to the 10 poorest performing subjects in the Faculty.

August 2021

Work being undertaken commensurate with broader strategic needs in revitalised courses with partner divisions in line with internal and divisional resource capability.

Strategic decisions on service capacity with divisions will need to be considered to prioritise this work, or other enabling work. Current focus on revitalisation. Closure

In progress

Estimated completion date – December 2021

FOAE 2: Student Satisfaction

Lift student satisfaction ratings to above comparator benchmark standards within

the top 5 nationally.

May 2021 - Need to complete data analysis as this has only recently become available for Bachelor and Postgrad levels and yet to be provided for third party, research and sub-bachelor cohorts.

August 2021

Deeper data analysis has not taken place while the transition in leadership occurred. Analysis will be completed as part of the next-reporting-period of student performance reporting work. Action close

aligned to SPR2021.

In progress

Estimated completion date

– August 2022

FOAE 3: PG Completion Rates

Understanding the reasons for declining completion rates, deteriorating progress and attrition metrics in some

postgraduate cohorts

May 2021 Our postgraduate students are predominantly mature age, working full-time and with caring responsibilities (children, parents or both). Significant increase in Leave of Absence (LoA) requests and approvals during 2020 with commonly cited reasons as inability to also manage study while needing to work from home/care for children at home or workload had increased significantly due to needing to move fully online. Over 70% of our faculty profile sits in education and social work – professions that required significant adjustments to accommodate working fully online.

August 2021

Work continues to understand how best to support completion in these uncertain times, noting that what may have been cause factor on previous years may be exacerbated in future periods by current global events. Close aligned to start of FOAE Research Transformation Program.

In progress

Estimated completion date – end Q4 2021.

211

University



FOAE 4: StES Participation

Improving participation in StES amongst all cohorts

May 2021- Similar response to FOAE2 – we only just received some initial data (not due until Q4).

August 2021

Deeper data analysis has not taken place while a transition in leadership occurred. Action close to be aligned to SPR2021 in 2022.

In progress


– August 2022

FOAE 5: Student Experience

Work with DLT and DSS to continue to improve student experience for FOAE

cohorts

May 2021 - Both divisions impacted by OR1 which has meant reduction in the support available. We are working with colleagues in these divisions to be more strategic about what is focused on and where our energy is expended.

August 2021

Work ongoing to review in line with internal and divisional capability and resource limitations. Action close

expected to align to Strategy 2030 and Campus Futures.

In progress


– August 2022

FOAE 6: Implementation of the courses and subjects policy and related procedures

Implement the courses and subjects policies and procedures, in particular the establishment of student consultative

committees in 2022

May 2021 - On-going. Faculty staff have also been involved in consultations around policy updates and revisions. Working with CDs to operationalise student consultative committees for 2022.

August 2021

Faculty Leadership engaged with CDAP project with view to ensuring the role of these consultative committees are meaningfully integrated into our standard business practices. Action close aligned with CDAP Delivery.

In progress

Estimated completion date Q2 2022.

FOAE 7: HDR progression and enrolment

Improve student metrics in HDR, postgraduate and third party provider cohorts in relation to progression and enrolment metrics

May 2021 - Sub-Dean, GS particularly committed to improvement in this space and has been active in promoting our new courses re-configured through the optimisation process. As part of optimisation, we consolidated our profile in the HDR space and introduced a Bachelor of Arts and Education (Honours) to allow for honours level study for students from any School within our Faculty. It is also being used as a pathway into doctoral studies. We have already seen increased interest from potential candidates in undertaking doctoral studies with us, however the Faculty currently has issues around supervision

capacity/capability in some disciplines.

August 2021

The faculty has initiated a multi-year project of Research Transformation led by the Associate Dean (Research) portfolio. This project will include improvement in student metrics including completion and retention based on the necessary skilling of our researcher workforce in line with the university’s strategic direction 2030. This project will launch in Q4 2021 and mature in alignment with strategic developments. Action close aligned to start of FOAE Research Transformation Program .

In progress

Estimated completion date end Q4 2021.

212

University



FOAE 8: Optimisation

Implement outcomes of the FOAE optimisation project

May 2021 - This work is on-going. We have a final VCLT meeting within the week for the final optimisation business cases, so this work is progressing.

August 2021

Optimisation work will begin to transition to a business as usual function as remaining profile is optimised.

Completed

213

University


Bachelor


• FOAE performed better than benchmark for several metrics:─ Student Satisfaction: FOAE StES satisfaction (for students in 1st year of study) performed

better than benchmark (82.6% compared to online benchmark of 81.7) ─ Graduate Employment (Full Time Employment): FOAE performed better than the benchmark

for on campus (70.5% compared to benchmark of 66.5%) and online (82.5% compared to benchmark of 81.4%).

─ Progress (commencing): FOAE performed better than the benchmark for on campus (83.7% compared to benchmark of 79.1%) and online (79.5% compared to benchmark of 73.0%).

─ Graduate Satisfaction (GOS – CEQ Overall Satisfaction): FOAE performed better than benchmark for on campus (84.8% compared to benchmark of 79.8%) and online (85.3% compared to benchmark of 79.8%).

• FOAE saw growth in online load compared to previous year of +3.3%.

• Full 5-year reaccreditation of our Bachelor of Social Work by the Australian Association of SocialWorkers. “The programs under the sustained leadership of the senior staff are well established andhighly regarded within the university and nationally. The commitment to developing professionalsocial work education via distance education online has enabled access and successful entry intothe profession by many cohorts of students across Australia who may have difficulty attending oncampus programs due to distance or competing work and family commitments. The ongoingcommitment to building the regional professional social work workforce is commendable.”

• Revitalisation of Bachelor of Communication degree: Bachelor and master’s degrees in

Communication have been revitalised through co-design with industry and have been launched for

commencing intake in 2022. Our aim is to reclaim national leadership for Charles Sturt’s

Communication courses. Prominent alumni have been engaged to promote the course and deliver

masterclasses.

• CISAC has implemented the Target90 project for the last 12 months. The aim of the project was toreach 90% in positive response rates in the SES surveys. The team is getting close to the target with88% achieved.

• Establishment of the Virtual Study Visits during the COVID pandemic for the main InformationStudies courses, including the Bachelor of Information Studies, has proven popular and effective,with positive student feedback and high take-up rates.

• All Initial Teacher Education (ITE) programs were reviewed, and new versions commenced in 2020.Most [6/8] have now completed the reaccreditation process with NESA.

• First year progress, attrition, completions: introduced in-subject draft consultations for large, first yearcompulsory Indigenous Australian studies subjects based on analytics data showing successfulcompletion of task that led to successful ongoing engagement and completion of subjects.

• Maintaining consistent SuES results at 70% or above for IKC101 over 2020-2021 sessions.Previously PPR were cohort and session specific and very variable.

• Partnership with First Nations Student Success team for Indigenous student recruitment andIndigenous student engagement in compulsory Indigenous studies foundation subjects (202190).

• Used CSU Advantage Model to respond / rethink / redesign / remodel SOC101 to improve studentperformance including flexible and relevant assessments and flexible focus on professional contextsof students.

214

University



Based on the assessment in the table below the following have been identified as focus areas for improvement:

• Education courses – an overall review that will include exploring opportunities to simplify entrance points and pathways, simplify transfer between courses, and streamline course structures. This is a significant body of work and is a primary focus of the Faculty and School of Education.

• Progress rate reports to be a scheduled focus of the Faculty Leadership Team agenda.

• Consider rescheduling the residential school for the Bachelor of Information Studies to the beginning of the intake session, rather than half-way through it.

• ESC407 appears problematic for numerous students so is being reviewed.

• Compulsory MTH subjects are challenging for many education students, so we continue to work with the colleagues in BJBS who offer these subjects to seek improvements.

• In the graduate entry Initial Teacher Education space across all four degrees, establish a Course Director presence with students by: increasing availability - 'zoom drop-in sessions' with Course Director; increasing timely and easy communication through 'Weekly Wednesday' Course Announcements; and work closely with Course Administration Officer, ensuring students are 'looked after'.

• Created (cloned) the Teacher Education Literacy and Numeracy site for 2020 (New Course Code for graduate entry programs) students to access preparation for LANTITE. Embedded BKSB into EPT460 (first placement) as an assessment item that puts LANTITE on the student agenda, to better support and help students have time to prepare for LANTITE.

• Specific students on Learning Plans to support progression (generally students who have issues with LANTITE).

• Graduate Entry Course Directors working out a way to engage with education students at the end of their first session and second session, maybe through a target survey emailed to students to gain feedback of Charles Sturt experience.

• HEPPP Pilot Research project: Strengthening post-census student retention in first year foundational compulsory online Indigenous studies subjects (2020-2021) to understand intersectional effects of factors affecting engagement (e.g. wellbeing, family commitments, outside work, academic skills development, course integration of Indigenous studies content).

• Bachelor of Human Services (with specialisations): 41.2% First Nations online progress rate: working with IBS to improve Indigenous perspectives in subject content in key subjects.

Notes

The following observations should also be noted when reviewing the assessment of areas “warranting attention” in the table below:

• FOAE total First Nations course enrolments: ─ 4% of total FOAE course enrolments ─ On campus 99 ─ Online 197 ─ Highest numbers in Education courses and Bachelor of Social Work

• FOAE International course enrolments: ─ 1.3% of total FOAE course enrolments ─ On campus 38 ─ Online 57 ─ Highest number in Bachelor of Information Studies and Bachelor of Theology

• Low student responses related to First Nations students and International students, so difficult to assess the Student Satisfaction and Graduate Satisfaction metrics.

• Cohorts in Social Work and Islamic Studies courses include part-time and/or mature age students trying to balance work and family commitments alongside their study

• The Bachelor of Social Work is offered at the Dubbo Campus and Port Macquarie Campus (with 47 course enrolments in 2020) as an innovative integrated Charles Sturt/TAFE pathway.

215

University


• The Bachelor of Human Services (with specialisations) is no longer offered face-to-face at Port Macquarie.

• Courses associated with FoE 10 Creative Arts are now in teach out (Bachelor of Communication, Bachelor of Creative Industries) and replaced by revitalised Bachelor of Communication and two new specialisations in the Bachelor of Arts (Performing Arts and Creative Arts).

• The Faculty has identified the following as factors contributing to student attrition in the Bachelor of Social Work (BSW): the accreditation requirement of 1000 hours of placement impacts on the ability of some students to complete the course. However note that we produced the first University medallist from the TAFE-integrated program in 2019. Course Director reports these actions to address this issue of retention with the integrated students:

─ We have moved SPE211 back to second year in the integrated program as feedback informed us that it was too difficult in first year, especially for students entering the program in Session 2.

─ TAFE has introduced substantial increases in their assessments which have impacted on students in the integrated program, causing a very high workload in the first 2 years of the program (much student feedback to CD about this). The CD had high level talks with TAFE and reassurances that other partners had the same feedback and promises things would change. Feedback from TAFE staff at Dubbo and Port Macquarie is that things have improved from the TAFE side of things in 2021. Also, our evidence is that students who leave the Cert IV are coming to the online BSW rather than leaving altogether.

─ The CD has also changed the requirements from CSU side so that students no longer have to enrol in the Cert IV automatically, but from 2023 can enrol in a part time Diploma with TAFE which will reduce their overall workload while still equating to a fulltime study pattern across the two years, when paired with eight CSU subjects. This is an important change, especially with a big jump in our integrated numbers for 2022 through the CSU Advantage program. This work has taken hours and hours of CD time negotiating with TAFE and we believe will be address the issue.

• For cohorts in the Bachelor of Human Services (BHS), the transition from the Diploma to university study is challenging leading to high failure rates in first year, HCS103 has been scaffolded in 2021 and will be in 2022 with assistance from HEPP retention program to support these students. The demands of work and study impact significantly on this cohort. HEPP projects to build academic skills over the past three years has increased retention in first year subjects in both the BSW and BHS. The faculty has identified the reasons for student attrition as 46% stress and health related issues 34%.

• Revitalised Bachelor of Arts has commenced its first year of operation with promising intake for 2022.

• Additional expectations are now placed on students enrolled in an Initial Teacher Education courses who are required to sit and pass the Literacy and Numeracy Test for Initial Teacher Education (LANTITE). These additional expectations can impede a student’s completion of teaching courses.

• Complex decision tree used to facilitate choice of degree for Education courses.

• The Faculty has ceased the offering of the face-to-face Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood & Primary) and the Bachelor of Educational Studies degrees from the Dubbo campus because of chronically low enrolments and poor student performance metrics.

• Bachelor of Education (Secondary) Industry Entry has a completion rate below benchmark of 32.8% due to a myriad of reasons including:

─ LANTITE has waylaid a couple of completions. ─ Some students have advised gaining better jobs while completing their degrees, so they

cancel their enrolment. ─ The COVID pandemic has affected some students’ circumstances greatly and they have

decided to withdraw. ─ Bad experiences in a couple of subjects have cost a couple of student enrolments. ─ Other students withdraw and don’t communicate a reason.

• Unsure of what is meant by the student load (special entry) having decreased by 92%. Our only special entry pathway for Education courses is the early entry one (Charles Sturt Advantage), which still requires students to have a minimum raw ATAR of 55. Many students are offered ‘slip-back’ into Bachelor of Education Studies or Diploma of General Studies after failing to achieve that minimum.

• Differentiation between ‘on-campus’ versus ‘online’ for the Bachelor of Education (K-12) course is problematic, as it is neither fully on campus nor fully online. Students are required to attend some

216

University


classes in f2f mode over the first two years. They can continue to do this for years 3 & 4 if they wish or can move to an online study program.

• Bachelor of Education (K-12) low employment from Port Macquarie contingent is based on quite lownumbers. This cohort has been growing strongly in recent times.

• A major issue for education courses has been the time taken for applications to enrol in our coursesto be processed. Charles Sturt has now ceased UAC White Label. Rebuilding Charles Sturt capacityonce again.

• Bachelor of Education (Birth to 5 Years) – 51.2% completion - assume this is the TAFE offeredprogram as this was on campus – it is in teach out, due to finish end of this session 202160.Students who have not completed the degree are being transitioned to online study with CharlesSturt. A lot of students already transitioned to online study with us when the original announcementto cease the TAFE offering at NSI was made at the end of 2019. The enrolment numbers in theTAFE cohort are very low compared to the online degree.

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) - 53.4% completion rate - not sure why thiscompletion rate is worse than benchmark but more students applying for LOAs when on campusclasses moved to online – they found dealing with COVID, needing to move off campus, disruption toplacements and/or the transition to online learning difficult.

• Bachelor of Education (Birth to 5 Years) – 45.9% completion rate - this cohort of students arepredominantly mature age, working fulltime and with caring responsibilities (children, parents orboth) and typically complete the course part-time, sometimes only studying one subject per sessionand often taking a session/s of LOA’s in times of increased personal or work responsibilities.

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) on campus – 26.2% attrition (an increase of7.2pp compared to 5 year ago) – some attrition would be due to course transfers into the K-12degree; difficulty with first year maths subjects (LANTITE-related concerns), first year experience inthe early childhood sector may deter students who wanted a primary only teaching degree but hadno other option at Charles Sturt (and preferred Early Childhood to secondary on admission), andCOVID related factors such as moving teaching online, particularly for first years who were expectingto study on campus.

217

University


Assessment of FOAE courses against areas “warranting attention” by metric as per 2021 UG Cohort Report.

METRIC Warranting Attention – collated from all segments in 2020 Cohort Report

FOAE Courses contributing to “worse than benchmark” results

UG Completions

(inc Third Party)

On campus Benchmark 59.6%

FOAE 55.2%

Online benchmark 40.3%

FOAE 38.5%

• FOAE Overall: sharp decline for On-Campus last year(-8.0pp)

• FOAE Overall: Online decline over five year (-9.5pp)

• Basis of Admission> Higher Ed: Completions: low for both On-Campus and

Online> Secondary Ed: On-Campus results have improved but

Online continue to decline> VET: On-Campus Completions are below the

benchmark

• Field of Education> 07 Education: declining completion rates for both On-

Campus and Online students

• Campus type> Other Campus declining Completions

• Socio-economic status> High SES Online Completions: in decline and lower

than the Medium SES cohort rate

• First Nations> Online completions; slightly improved but below the

benchmark

• Domesticity (International)> Online completions: substantial decline over five

years

FOAE on campus course completion “any course” rates >70%

• Bachelor of Communication (Theatre/Media), (Journalism), (Public Relations),(Advertising), (Radio) (in teach out)

• Bachelor of Communication (Advertising)/Bachelor of Business (Marketing) (in teachout)

• Bachelor of Education (TAS)

• Bachelor of Teaching (Secondary)

FOAE online course completion “any course” rates >70%

• Nil

FOAE on campus courses with worse than benchmark completion “any course” rate

• Bachelor of Arts – 36.2%

• Bachelor of Communication (Media Practice) – 20% (in teach out)

• Bachelor of Creative Arts and Design (with specialisations) – 43.8% (in teach out)

• Bachelor of Education (Birth to 5 Years) – 51.2%

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) - 53.4%

• Bachelor of Education (K-12) – 48.6%

• Bachelor of Educational Studies – 38.9%

• Bachelor of Liberal Studies (Arts) – 33.3%

• Bachelor of Social Science (Social Welfare) – 50% - in teach out

• Bachelor of Social Work – 45.8%

• Bachelor of Theology - 53.1%

• Bachelor of Outdoor Education – 25.0% (in teach out)

FOAE on campus course cohorts with biggest drop in completion “any course” rate compared to previous year

• Bachelor of Arts

• Bachelor of Education (Birth to 5 Years)

• Bachelor of Educational Studies


FOAE online course cohorts with worse than benchmark completion “any course” rate

218

University




• Bachelor of Adult and Vocational Education (with specialisations) – 41.4%

• Bachelor of Arts - 10.9%

• Bachelor of communication (Media Practice) – 45.9% (in teach out)

• Bachelor of Creative Arts and Design (with specialisations) – 20.3% (in teach out)



• Bachelor of Education (Secondary) – 32.8%

• Bachelor of Educational Studies – 23.0%

• Bachelor of Information Studies (with specialisations) – 33.3%

• Bachelor of Islamic Studies – 21.3%

• Bachelor of Liberal Studies (Arts) – 23.3%

• Bachelor of Social Science (Gerontology) – 50% (in teach out)

• Bachelor of Social Science (Social Welfare) – 53.3% (in teach out)


• Bachelor of Teaching (Primary) – 52.1%

• Bachelor of Teaching (Secondary) – 43.1%

• Bachelor of Theology – 36.7%

Online courses with biggest drop in completion “any course” rate compared to 5 yrs ago

• Bachelor of Arts

• Bachelor of Education (Birth to 5 Years)

• Bachelor of Educational Studies

• Bachelor of Liberal Studies (Arts)

• Bachelor of Social Science (Social Welfare) - in teach out


UG Student Satisfaction (for students in 1st year of study)

StES Overall Satisfaction On campus benchmark: 73.1%

FOAE: 72.6%

StES Overall Satisfaction Online benchmark: 81.7%

FOAE: 82.6%

StES Teaching Quality Satisfaction On campus benchmark: 82.8%

• Basis of Admission > Higher Ed Online Student Satisfaction: low result and

lower than other BoA cohorts; VET On-Campus Student Satisfaction: large drop in overall satisfaction and continuing decline in teaching quality. Other On-Campus Student Satisfaction: particularly impacted in 2020, greatest decline, lowest rate

• Field of Education > 09 On-Campus Student Satisfaction: particularly large

decrease in both overall satisfaction and teaching quality, more than most other FoEs; below the benchmark.

On campus course cohort StES overall satisfaction >75% (where responses >10)


• Bachelor of Theology – 84.6%

Online course cohort StES overall satisfaction >75% (where responses >10)


• Bachelor of Information Studies (with specialisations) – 90.0%

• Bachelor of Islamic Studies – 100%


219

University




FOAE: 82.0%

StES Teaching Quality Satisfaction Online benchmark: 85.6%

FOAE: 86.7%

• Campus> Main campus Dubbo – Poor student satisfaction rates.

• Socio-economic status> Medium SES Student Satisfaction: greater decline for

On-Campus students than other SES cohorts; belowthe benchmark. Low for both overall satisfaction andteaching quality. Online rates also low.

• First Nations> Student Satisfaction: sharp decline in both overall

satisfaction and teaching quality across both studymodes. Increased disparity in experience compared tonon First Nations students.

• Domesticity (International)> On-Campus Student Satisfaction: rate plummeted in

2020 and continues downward trend for third year in arow.

On campus courses with StES overall satisfaction <60% (where responses >10)

• Nil

Online courses with StES overall satisfaction <60% (where responses >10)

• Nil

On campus courses with StES overall satisfaction with biggest declines compared to previous year or compared to last 5 years (where responses >10)

• Bachelor of Educational Studies 63.6%: -16.4pp compared to 5 years ago

• Bachelor of Social Work 69.2%: -17.2pp compared to previous year, -23.9pp comparedto 5 years ago

Online courses with StES overall satisfaction with biggest declines compared to previous year or compared to last 5 years (where responses >10)

• Bachelor of Teaching (Secondary) 69.2%: -16.5pp compared to previous year

UG Student Load

(inc Third Party)

Total on campus load: 6123.3

1 yr change: -7.8%

5 yr change: -26.3%

Total online load: 7119.3

1 yr change: +6.3%

5 yr change: +9.3%

FOAE on campus load: 905.5

1 yr change: -16.2%

5 yr change: -25.8%

FOAE online load: 2956.4

1 yr change: +3.3%

• Basis of Admission> Special Entry, this cohort performs strongly on most

metrics but is showing a sharp decline in student load

• Socio-economic status:> High SES: Why are On-Campus enrolments from this

group declining?

FOAE overall decline in commencing on campus subject load -49%

FOAE overall decline in continuing on campus subject load -60%

Basis of Admission

FOAE Special Entry decline in commencing on campus subject load -95%

FOAE Special Entry decline in commencing online subject load -91%

• Bachelor of Arts on campus and online (-100%)

• Bachelor of Communication on campus and online (-97%) in teach out

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) on campus and online (-97%)

• Bachelor of Education (K-12) on campus and online (-92%)

• Bachelor of Social Work on campus and online (-100%)

Socio-economic status

FOAE High SES decline in commencing on campus subject load -72%

• Bachelor of Communication (-78%) – courses in teach out

• Bachelor of Education (Birth to 5 Years) (TAFE Northern Sydney) (-100%) –course in teach out at this Third Party campus

220

University




5 yr change: -6.8%

UG Attrition

On campus benchmark: 26.2%

On campus benchmark 07: 20.9%



FOAE on campus: 23.4%

Online benchmark: 34.1%

Online benchmark 07: 32%

Online benchmark 09: 33.7%

Online benchmark 10: 32.1%

FOAE online: 31.7%

• Field of Education> 07 On-Campus Attrition (26.6%): substantial increase

(+13.3pp) and one of the highest rates and above thebenchmark;

> 10 Online Attrition (40.6%): continues to climb(+6.5pp); is the highest for all FoEs; above thebenchmark

• Campus> Other: Increasing Attrition

07 Education courses on campus courses with attrition worse than benchmark:

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) on campus – 26.2% (anincrease of 7.2pp compared to 5 year ago)

• Bachelor of Education (Health and Physical Education) on campus – 26.7% (nowin teach out)

• Bachelor of Education (K-12) on campus – 26.1%

• Bachelor of Educational Studies on campus – 33.3% and online – 34.3%

• Bachelor of Outdoor Education on campus – 25% (now in teach out)

• Bachelor of Teaching (Primary) online – 3.2%

09 Society and Culture courses with attrition worse than benchmark

• Bachelor of Arts online – 38.8% (although reduced by 8.7pp compared to 5 yearsago)

• Bachelor of Islamic Studies online – 35.4%

• Bachelor of Liberal Studies (Arts) – 48.1% (increase of 11.4pp compared to 5years ago)

• Bachelor of Social Work online – 33.8%

• Bachelor of Theology (exc Ming Hua) – 33.3%

10 Creative Arts courses online with attrition worse than benchmark:

• Bachelor of Communication (with specialisations) – 35.6% (now in teach out)

• Bachelor of Creative Industries (with specialisations) – 45.8% (now in teach out)

Campus Other

• Bachelor of Islamic Studies online – 35.4%

Graduate Employment (Full Time Employment)



• Field of Education> 10 graduate Full-Time Employment: lowest rate of all

FoEs at 33%; far greater loss than for Creative Artsgrads in RUN and the sector.

• Campus:> Main campus Graduate employment at Port

Macquarie and Dubbo

FOAE courses in FoE 10 with low Graduate Employment rate:

• Bachelor of Communication (with specialisations) on campus: 40% (in teach out)

• Bachelor of Creative Arts and Design (with specialisations) on campus: 0% (inteach out)

• Bachelor of Stage and Screen (with specialisations) on campus: 55.6% (in teachout)

221

University





FOAE online: 82.5%

• Socio-economic status: > High SES Graduate Full-Time employment:

considerable decline for the Online cohort and low rate of employment compared to Low and Medium SES cohorts.

FOAE courses offered at Dubbo campus with low Graduate Employment rate:

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary): 33.3% (in teach out)

FOAE courses offered at Port Macquarie campus with low Graduate Employment rate:

• Bachelor of Creative Arts and Design (with Specialisations): 0% (in teach out)

• Bachelor of Education (K-12): 50%

• Bachelor of Social Work: 0%

Progress (commencing)




FOAE online: 79.5%

• Campus: > Main campus Dubbo – Poor progress rates

• First Nations Status: > First Nations student progress lower than the overall

sector benchmark

No FOAE courses significantly contributing to Dubbo result – Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary) 73.3% and Bachelor of Educational Studies 55.5% are below benchmark but are now in teach out.

FOAE First Nations progress on campus: 70.1%

FOAE First Nations progress online: 65.7%

FOAE courses with lower than benchmark First Nations on campus progress rate:

• Bachelor of Communication (with specialisations) (in teach out): 40.0%

• Bachelor of Creative Industries (with specialisations) (in teach out): 56.8%

• Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood and Primary): 73.5%

FOAE courses with lower than benchmark First Nations online progress rate:

• Bachelor of Communication (with specialisations) (in teach out): 62.5%

• Bachelor of Creative Industries (with specialisations) (in teach out): 57.1%

• Bachelor of Human Services (with specialisations): 41.2% • Bachelor of Social Work: 60.9%

Graduate Satisfaction (GOS – CEQ Overall Satisfaction)

Benchmark on campus: 79.8%

Benchmark online: 84.5%

• Campus: > Main campus: Graduate Satisfaction at Orange and

Wagga Wagga

• Socio-Economic Status:

No FOAE courses offered at Orange

No FOAE courses significantly contributing to Wagga Wagga result

222

University





FOAE online: 85.3%

> High SES: On-Campus Graduate Satisfaction: remains relatively low

No FOAE courses significantly contributing to High SES result

223

University


Postgraduate


• FOAE performed better than benchmark for several metrics:─ Completions: FOAE overall completion rate (any course with 9 yrs completion timeframe)

73.3% on campus compared to benchmark of 72.8% and 67.5% online compared to benchmark of 65.6% with the following stand out courses: > Graduate Certificate in Wiradjuri Language, Culture and Heritage – 75.7%

> Master of Inclusive Education – 67% (5yrs), 82.5% (9yrs)

> Master of International Education (School Leadership) – 82.1% (5yrs), 81.8% (9yrs)

> Master of Social Work Advanced Practice – 71.4% (5yrs), 83.3% (9yrs)

> Master of Theology – 76.9%

─ Progress (commencing): FOAE overall progress (commencing) result 98.9% on campus

compared to benchmark of 81.7%, and 88.2% online compared to benchmark of 84.0%.

─ Attrition (first year): FOAE overall attrition (first year) 27% online compared to benchmark of

31.7%

─ Graduate Employment (full time employment): FOAE overall Graduate Employment of

91.6% online compared to benchmark of 88.1%

─ Student Satisfaction (for students in first year of study): FOAE overall Student Satisfaction

(for students in first year of study) result of 100% on campus (Theology courses) compared

to benchmark of 72.7%; and 80.9% online compared to benchmark of 79.1%

• Full 5-year reaccreditation of our Master of Social Work (Professional Qualifying) by the Australian

Association of Social Workers: “The programs under the sustained leadership of the senior staff are

well established and highly regarded within the university and nationally. The commitment to

developing professional social work education via distance education online has enabled access and

successful entry into the profession by many cohorts of students across Australia who may have

difficulty attending on campus programs due to distance or competing work and family commitments.

The ongoing commitment to building the regional professional social work workforce is

commendable.”

• Revitalisation of Master of Communication degree and introduction of Graduate Certificate in DigitalCommunication: Bachelor and Master’s degrees in Communication have been revitalised throughco-design with industry and have been launched for commencing intake in 2022. Our aim is toreclaim national leadership for CSU’s Communication courses.

• CISAC has implemented the Target90 project for the last 12 months. The aim of the project was toreach 90% in positive response rats in the SES surveys. The team is getting close to the target with88% achieved.

• Establishment of the Virtual Study Visits during the COVID pandemic for the main InformationStudies courses, including the Master of Information Studies and Master of Education (TeacherLibrarianship), has proven popular and effective, with positive student feedback and high take-uprates.

• Development of online learning to support language immersion for Graduate Certificate in WiradjuriLanguage, Culture and Heritage students in 2020 and ongoing in 2021.

224

University



Based on the assessment in the table below the following have been identified as focus areas for improvement:

• Education courses – an overall review that will include exploring opportunities to simplify entrance points and pathways, simplify transfer between courses, and streamline course structures. This is a significant body of work and is a primary focus of the Faculty and School of Education.

• The revised ASCED codes for various subjects need to be registered for translation into corresponding fees from 202230 onwards.

• The Information Studies curriculum needs to be reviewed and its alignment with industry confirmed through a program of research that is presently in train, in order to respond to concerns about the job readiness of LIS postgraduate education in Australia expressed by the main accrediting body.

• Master Ageing and Health will have revised codes.

Notes


• Only Theology PG courses offered on campus.

• Small numbers of valid responses make it difficult to make an assessment against Graduate Satisfaction and Student Satisfaction.

• FOAE First Nations PG enrolments – 93 (28.438 EFTSL)

• The PG Gerontology courses have been renamed “Ageing and Health”.

• The Graduate Certificate and Graduate Diploma of Theology courses have been renamed Graduate Certificate and Graduate Diploma in “Theological Studies”.

• Graduate Certificate in Gerontology - 52.4% (5yrs), 53.6% (9yrs) completion rate: in this course many students study less than standard part-time load at some point in their course due to workload and family commitments, so take longer to complete.

• Graduate Certificate in Gerontology – 75% commencing progress rate (0.5 EFTSL): many students commence with only one subject per session which reduces progress rates. COVID has stressed this cohort considerably due to many being nurses in residential care with additional responsibilities and stress regarding infection control, managing family contact safely, dealing with restrictions etc.

225

University


Assessment of FOAE courses against areas “warranting attention” by metric as per 202 PG Cohort Report.


Courses contributing to “worse than benchmark” results

PG-Completions (any course)

(inc Third Party)

(9 yrs completion timeframe)

On campus Benchmark: 72.8%

FOAE: 73.3%


FOAE: 67.5%

• FoAE Overall > Completions (any course): continued decline for

Online completions over five years (-7.5pp)

• Field of Education > Completion rates: low online completion rates for

10 Creative Arts.

• Campus > Main campus: Completions – low at Albury-

Wodonga (n/a for FOAE)

> Other Campus: Completions – low at UTC (CISAC online)

• Socio Economic Status > Low SES: Online Completions – low and declining

rates > High SES: Completions: low and declining rates;

below the benchmark

• First Nations > Completions: low and declining rate; below

benchmark.

FOAE online courses with worse than benchmark completion “any course” rate where cohort >10

• Graduate Certificate in Educational Research – 57.1% (5yrs), 10% (9 yrs) – course in teach out

• Graduate Certificate in Indigenous Education – 50% (5yrs), 73.3% (9yrs)

• Graduate Diploma of Adult Language, Literacy and Numeracy – 42.1%

• Graduate Diploma of Inclusive Education – 22.7% (5 yrs); 47.1% (9yrs) – course in teach out

• Master of Teaching (Primary) – 45.9%

• Master of Teaching (Secondary) – 40.5%

• Master of TESOL – 55.3% (5yrs), 59.5% (9yrs)

• Graduate Certificate in Communication (with specialisations) – 57.1% (5yrs and 9yrs)

• Master of Communication – 38.1%

• Graduate Certificate in Gerontology – 52.4% (5yrs), 53.6% (9yrs) • Master of Gerontology – 51.7% (5yrs); 70.8% (9yrs)

• Master of Child and Adolescent Welfare – 32.4% (5yrs), 51.5% (9yrs)

• Master of Social Work (Professional Qualifying) – 46.2% (5yrs), 60.9% (9yrs)

• Master of Education (Knowledge Networks and Digital Innovation) – 62.8% – course in teach out

• Master of Education (Teacher Librarianship) – 57% (5yrs), 54.7% (9yrs)

• Master of Information Studies – 55.7% (5yrs), 70.7% (9yrs)

• Master of Arts (Classical Arabic) – 29.4%

• Master of Islamic Studies – 55.6% (5yrs), 61.5% (9yrs)

The above courses cut across Low to High SES results – no obvious courses significantly contributing to completion result based on Socio-Economic Status

FOAE online courses with worse than benchmark completion “any course” rate where cohort >10 for First Nation Status:

• Nil

226

University




FOAE online courses with worse than benchmark completion “any course” rate where cohort <10 for First Nation Status:

• Graduate Diploma of Adult Language, Literacy, and Numeracy – 0% (5yrs), 100%(9yrs)

• Master of Teaching (Primary) – 0% (5yrs)

• Master of Teaching (Secondary) – 50% (5yrs)

• Master of Inclusive Education – 0% (5yrs), 0% (9yrs)

• Master of Education (Teacher Librarianship) – 33.3% (5yrs)

• Master of Child Adolescent Welfare – 0% (5yrs), 100% (9yrs) - in teach out

• Master of Communication – 0% (5yrs)

• Master of Information Studies – 0% (5yrs), 50% (9yrs)

PG-Progress (commencing)

(inc Third Party)




FOAE online: 88.2%


> Progress rates: strong increase in rates forAgriculture, Environmental and Related Studies;Creative Arts.

• First Nations> Progress: increasing disparity with non-First

Nations rates

FOAE online courses with <80% commencing progress rate:

• Graduate Certificate in Contemporary Islamic Studies – 33.3% (0.375 EFTSL)

• Graduate Certificate in Gerontology – 75% (0.5 EFTSL)

• Graduate Certificate in Indigenous Cultural Competency – 70% (2.5 EFTSL)

• Graduate Certificate in Theological Studies – 76.9% (3.25 EFTSL)

• Graduate Diploma of Theological Studies – 78.9% (2.375 EFTSL)

• Master of Human Services – 59.4% (4 EFTSL)

FOAE online courses commencing progress for First Nations: 80.5%

FOAE online courses commencing progress for Not Australian First Nations: 88.7%

FOAE online courses with <80% commencing progress rate for First Nations:

• Graduate Certificate in Education – 33.3% (0.750 EFTSL)

• Graduate Certificate in Indigenous Cultural Competency – 50% (0.750 EFTSL)

• Master of Education (Teacher Librarianship) – 68.4% (2.375 EFTSL)

• Master of Social Work (Professional Qualifying) – 69% (3.625 EFTSL)

PG-Attrition (first year)

(inc Third Party)



• Campus> Main campus – consistently high at Albury-

Wodonga, Port Macquarie

• Domesticity (International)> Decrease in On-Campus rate masking increase in

largest course; above benchmark.

FOAE on campus courses with first year attrition worse than benchmark:

• Graduate Certificate in Ministry – 40% (cohort of 5)

• Graduate Certificate in Theology – 25% (cohort of 4) – in teach out, replaced byGraduate Certificate in Theological Studies

• Graduate Diplomas of Theology – 42.1% (cohort of 19) – in teach out, replaced byGraduate Diploma in Theological Studies

227

University





FOAE online: 27%

• First Nations Status> increasing disparity with non-First Nations rates

FOAE online courses with first year attrition worse than benchmark where cohort >10:

• Graduate Certificate in Education – 32.1% (cohort of 28)

• Graduate Certificate in Gerontology – 54.5% (cohort of 11)

• Graduate Certificate in Human Services (Child and Adolescent Welfare) – 38.9%(cohort of 18)

• Graduate Diploma of Theology – 30.8% (cohort of 13) See note above

• Master of Communication – 37.5% (cohort of 16)

• Master of Education (Knowledge Networks & Digital Innovation) – 50% (cohort of 14)– course in teach out

• Master of Education (Teacher Librarianship) – 31.4% (cohort of 159)

• Master of Gerontology – 37.5% (cohort of 24)

• Master of Teaching (Primary) – 31.7% (cohort of 101)

• Master of Teaching (Secondary) – 29% (cohort of 100)

PG- Graduate Employment (Full Time Employment)



FOAE on campus: n/a

FOAE online: 91.6%

• Campus> Main campus: decrease in employment rate at

Albury-Wodonga

No FOAE courses applicable

PG-Graduate Satisfaction (GOS – CEQ Overall Satisfaction)



FOAE on campus: 50%

FOAE online: 82.4%

• Socio Economic Status> Low SES: low and declining rates

• First Nations Status:

> Graduate Satisfaction: sharp decline; well belowbenchmark.

FOAE Low SES graduate satisfaction online – 82.1% (-11.9pp compared to 4yrs ago)

FOAE online courses with graduate satisfaction worse than benchmark for Low SES:

• Graduate Certificate in Inclusive Education – 66.7% (cohort of 3)

• Graduate Certificate in TESOL – 33.3% (cohort of 3)

• Master of Social Work (Professional Qualifying – 66.7 (cohort of 6)

• Master of Teaching (Primary) – 66.7% (cohort of 3)

• Master of Teaching (Secondary) – 75% (cohort of 4)

FOAE First Nations graduate satisfaction online 71.4% (-14.3pp compared to 4yrs ago) (14 valid responses)

FOAE Not Australian Indigenous graduate satisfaction online 82.8% (-3.5pp compared to 4yrs ago)

228

University




FOAE online courses with graduate satisfaction worse than benchmark for First Nations:

• Graduate Certificate in Inclusive Education – 66.7% (3 valid responses)

• Graduate Certificate in Theology – 0% (1 valid response)

• Master of Human Service – 0% (1 valid response)

• Master of Information Leadership – 0% (1 valid response)

PG-Student Satisfaction (for students in 1st year of study)

StES Overall Satisfaction On campus benchmark: 72.7%

FOAE: 100%

StES Overall Satisfaction Online benchmark: 79.1%

FOAE: 80.9%

StES Teaching Quality Satisfaction On campus benchmark: 81.7%

FOAE: 100%

StES Teaching Quality Satisfaction Online benchmark: 84.6%

FOAE: 87.2%

• Socio Economic Status> Medium SES: Student Overall Satisfaction: only

cohort to report a drop in satisfaction; below thebenchmark.

• First Nations Status

> Student Satisfaction: sharp decline in both overallsatisfaction and teaching quality. Increaseddisparity in experience compared to non-FirstNations students.

• Domesticity (International)> Student Satisfaction: On-Campus rate plummeted

in 2020.

FOAE online overall satisfaction for Medium SES better than benchmark

FOAE online overall satisfaction for First Nations 72%

FOAE online courses with overall satisfaction better than benchmark for First Nations:

• Graduate Certificate in Wiradjuri Language, Culture and Heritage – 81.3% (16 validresponses)

FOAE online courses with overall satisfaction worse than benchmark for First Nations:

• Master of Social Work (Professional Qualifying) – 66.7% (3 valid responses)

• Master of Teaching Secondary – 66.7% (3 valid responses)

229

University




• The Faculty developed a HDR Growth Plan (2021-2022) to address falling enrolments, increasingfirst year attrition and poor completion rates with the following priority areas:

1. Maximising new Faculty of Arts and Education coursework HDR pathways.─ This objective has been comprehensively implemented.

2. Developing recruitment considerations for PhD by prior-publication candidates.─ Good progress has been made on this objective. .

3. Developing industry partnerships to help subsidise scholarships for HDR candidates.

• Recent successes of our HDR students:─ FOAE University Medallist for HDR: Anna Cronin (Education). ─ University 3MT winner: Mark Layson (Theology). ─ University 3MT People’s Choice Award: Van Tran (Education). ─ Katharine G. Butler Trailblazer Award: An International Editor’s Award in the Q1 journal

“Topics in Language Disorders” for paper on evaluating children with a speech sound disorder (with co-authors; PhD by Prior Publication candidate/education, Principal Supervisor Professor Sharynne McLeod).

• Upcoming HDR resources and development opportunities:─ Tri-Faculty HDR support fund: current round (2) open until 11 October 2021; $20,000

available to FOAE HDR candidates. ─ Tri-Faculty HDR conference - Resilience and Reinvention in Research - 3 & 4 November,

2021: coordinated by Sub-Dean Graduate Studies BJBS, in association with SDGS/FOAE and SDGS/FOSH. Day 1 will have a generic research focus, of interest to HDR candidates and supervisors across the University; day 2 will focus on HDR candidates' presentations/FBJBS only. FOAE Executive Dean, Associate Dean (Research), Sub-Dean Graduate Studies and FOAE HDR recent graduate to deliver brief presentations on day 1.

─ HDR DocFest - Beyond the Doctoral Degree - 23-27 May 2022 - planning commenced.

• Completion of Doctor of Social Work course review and revitalisation project (Associate ProfessorKaren Bell), January 2021.

• HDR pathways (Graduate Certificate and Honours)─ Appointment of Course Director (Dr Rahul Ganguly, SOE), July 2021. ─ Delivery of a video resource for ASH510 (Coordinator – Dr Sheena Elwick) - Applying for a

PhD: Application process and writing an effective research proposal (Mr Paul Shaw and Associate Professor Karen Bell), September 2021.

• Development of the PhD by Prior Publication─ Refined documentation for PhD Prior Publication recruitment, assessment/pre-admission

phase; further development of communication and marketing strategies, and documentation of workflow in consultation with Graduate Studies team as part of transition planning for 2022.

─ August – September 2021 – several expressions of interest in PhD Prior Publication, two currently in external assessment/pre-admission phase (both SSWA); one admission 202130 (SOE).


• Additional review of exit survey data at the end of 2021 noting that the recent review identifiedfamily/work issues as major issues impacting on withdrawal.

• Review of Research and Graduate Studies in-progress, URC considering results of review ofminimum resource requirements.

• Continued implementation of the Faculty’s HDR Growth Plan (2021-2022) including development ofindustry partnerships:

230

University


─ Potential for industry partnerships to be a more significant component of Professional Doctorate/s.

─ Initial discussions with SDGS in FBJBS and FOSH regarding Doctor of Philosophy with Industry Partners (model similar to current CSU professional doctorate structure – 4 foundation 16 point coursework subjects followed by dissertation/research phase and strategic exit points).

As reported by Paul Shaw, Manager Graduate Studies the following activities that have been undertaken will also impact on the HDR commencing, completion and attrition metrics:

• Detailed discussion with Marketing to commence development of a Marketing Strategy for HDR Candidates.

• Engagement with Marketing Expos, to present information to potential HDR candidates on several occasions.

• Re-invigorating the Doc Fest event, ran in May this year, to provide training and information sessions to HDR candidates and supervisors.

• Implementation of an annual Graduate Research Experience Survey, ran for the first time in November 2020.

• Recently implemented (Sept 2021) a pilot Peer to Peer HDR mentoring program in FoAE, to run over the next 6 months.

• Engagement with students who are withdrawing, to encourage them to complete exit survey, so we can obtain data on reasons why they are leaving.

• Graduate Studies team moved into CRM in July 2020, to enable collection of student engagement data, to show trends and to be used to identify areas of enhancement

Notes


• Scarcity of scholarship support noted as major factor related to low enrolments. New strategy under consideration VCLT.

• Some decline in supervisory capacity also a contributing factor to low enrolments.

• Completions - reviewed 2021, no clear trends/Faculty.

Summary of areas “warranting attention” by metric for FOAE as per 2021 PG Cohort Report.


Commencing enrolments

Total Cohort

> Declining commencing enrolments

FOAE

> Declining commencing enrolments

Campus

> Main campus: falling Full-Time enrolments at Bathurst campus > Other campus: decreasing commencing enrolments

Completion Total Cohort

> Declining completion rates for Full-Time students FOAE

> Low Full-Time completion rates Campus

> Main campus: large disparity in completion rates between main campuses

231

University



> Other: highly variable completion rates across the period and between campuses

Domesticity (International)

> Declining international completion rate lower than the benchmark rate.

Attrition FOAE

> Highly variable attrition for Part-Time cohort

Campus

> Other campus: highly variable, and at times very high first year attrition for the Part-Time cohort

232

University



North Sydney Institute of TAFE (onshore)

Ming Hua Theological College, Hong Kong (offshore)

HKU Space (offshore)


• n/a


• No specific areas warranting attention for FOAE Third Party partners.

• Note that:─ North Sydney Institute of TAFE teach out completed 202160, with any remaining students to

transfer to Charles Sturt’s online offering of the Bachelor of Education (Birth to Five) years. ─ Agreement with Ming Hua Theological College due for renewal and currently being

reviewed. Performance metrics will be considered during the review. ─ Agreement with HKU Space due for renewal and currently being reviewed. Performance

metrics will be considered during the review.

233

University


Assessment of FOAE courses against areas “warranting attention” by metric as per 2021 Third Party Cohort Report.

Partner Warranting Attention – collated from all segments in 2020 Cohort Report

Courses

No specific areas warranting attention for FOAE Third Party partners:

(Onshore) North Sydney Institute of TAFE

TAFE NSW NS: in teach out Bachelor of Education (Birth to Five Years)

(Offshore) Ming Hua Theological College, Hong Kong.

Ming Hua - Attrition for the Undergrad cohort was 12.5% in 2020 (n=8), down from 25% in 2019 (n=4) and below benchmark (9.8%)

Bachelor of Theology

Master of Theology

(Offshore) HKU Space Postgrad completion rates, however, are relatively low despite an increase of 10.6pp in the last year. At 65.1%, the rate remains more than 20pp down over five years and sits more than 10pp below the benchmark (76.7%)

Bachelor of Information Studies

Master of Information Studies

234

University


2020 -2021 Actions

The following Actions items will be implemented in 2021 and 2022 and monitored by the FOAE Faculty Board.

Action No Action item Owner Target completion

FOAE-1 (2020 -2021)

Launch faculty pilot-project ‘Orion’ to explore opportunities emerging from the new School of Education through an entrepreneurial co-design approach.

Specific Action: Conduct Journey Mapping exercise (during Discovery & Define Phase) as a deep-dive to explore the underlying causes of undergraduate and postgraduate Education SPR data with a view to exploring possibilities in Prototype/Test Q3 2022.

ADA, FOAE

HoS SOE, FOAE

Q3 2022.

FOAE-2 (2020 -2021)

Launch of multi-year faculty project ‘Stratosphere’ focussed on research transformation within the faculty. Project to explore opportunities emerging out of researcher groupings, and emergent university strategy decisions to build postgraduate capability, and, enhanced research cultures in strategically aligned areas.

Specific Action: Ensure alignment of Faculty research with the University strategy. Leveraging the alignment work to build postgraduate (research and coursework) supervision & teaching capabilities to raise understanding and address metrics of concern by understanding the underlying genuine human needs.

ADR, FOAE

SDGS, FOAE

Launch Q4 2021.

Progress alignment post launch with University Strategy.

235

University


Action No Action item Owner Target completion

FOAE-3 (2020 -2021)

Initiate Faculty of Arts and Education ‘Infrastructure and Equipment’ strategic project aligned with Communications Precinct, and broader technical-operational requirements as it aligns with the University Strategy. Using an experience design lens to investigate metrics of concern – specifically Undergraduate Communication. This means exploring and reframing the conversation from metric, to genuine human need.

Specific Action: Generate ‘Capacity and Capability’ documentation for FOAE campus operations with a view to future needs of the faculty course profile as it aligns with addressing Undergraduate Communication metric(s) of concern through an initial audit and experience-design lens.

ADA, FOAE

Faculty Technical Manager, FOAE

Capability Documentation Q1 2022

Progress alignment post capability documentation with University Strategy.

FOAE-4 (2020 -2021)

Undertake significant engagement in ‘Subject Revitalisation’ of Bachelor of Communication to improve metrics of concern – specifically building in high-quality experiences that meet genuine learner needs.

Specific Action: Prioritise and progress 1st year subject revitalisation of the Bachelor of Communication through 2022.

CD Communication, SICS, FOAE

HoS SICS, FOAE

DLT

Q4 2024

FOAE-5 (2020 -2021)

Maintain significant engagement in ‘Subject Revitalisation’ of Bachelor of Arts to continue to improve against metrics of concern, specifically where real and genuine learner needs are identified.

Specific Action: Prioritise and progress 2nd year subject revitalisation of the Bachelor of Arts through 2022.

CD, Bachelor of Arts, SSWA, FOAE

HoS SSWA, FOAE

DLT

Q4 2023

236




237

University


Executive Summary

Overall Summary

The Student Performance Report for the Faculty of Science and Health presents a comprehensive analysis of a broad range of metrics relevant to Bachelor, Postgraduate by Coursework and Higher Degree Research programs. In all three domains, strong performance is evident with a majority of relevant metrics exceeding the RUN benchmarks. This is a notable achievement considering the disruption created by Covid-19 during this period and credit must be paid to the resilience and stamina demonstrated by students and staff. In areas for which performance has declined on the previous year and/or falls short of the RUN benchmark, areas for improvement are identified and aligned to key actions for implementation in 2022-23.

Key Achievements and Highlights – Bachelor

• Growth in load in key areaso 7.3% increase in total commencing enrolments for on-campus study.o 72% increase in on-campus load for the former School of Nursing, Midwifery and

Indigenous Health.o 23.7% growth in First Nations student on-campus load.

• Strong performance in student successo Exceeding the RUN benchmark for overall commencing first-year progress for on-

campus students.o Maintaining first-year student attrition (14.5%) at a level which exceeds the RUN

benchmark (26.2%) for on-campus cohorts.o Exceeding the RUN benchmarks for on-campus (14.5% / RUN 26.2%) and online

(32.7% / RUN 34.1%) student attrition for both First Nations and non-Indigenousstudents.

• Strong performance in graduate outcomeso Maintaining high full-time employment at three years (84% on-campus; 85.4% online)

and exceeding RUN benchmarks (66.5% on-campus; 81.4% online), for all graduates.o Achieving a 14.3% increase in graduate full-time employment at three years for First

Nations graduates who completed online study.

• Strong performance in student satisfactiono Achieving increased overall satisfaction scores (GOS) for both on-campus and online

course experience, with notable improvements reported for First Nations students.

• Meeting requirements for comprehensive course review and developmento Implementation of the revitalised B Environmental Science and Management (with

specialisations), consolidating three courses.

Key Achievements and Highlights – Postgraduate by Coursework

• Growth in online loado 10.6% increase in total commencing enrolments for online studyo 6.3% growth in total online loado 100% increase in commencing online enrolments for First Nations students, comprising

3.4% of commencing load.

• Strong performance in student successo Exceeding the RUN benchmarks for overall commencing first-year progress for on-campus

and online students, across all schools.o Exceeding the RUN benchmark for first-year progress for First Nations students, increasing

over five years by 2.9%.o 18.6% reduction in first-year attrition for on-campus cohorts, exceeding the RUN benchmark.

238

University


o 17.4% increase in on-campus course completions.

• Strong performance in graduate outcomeso Maintaining full-time employment at three years, at a rate which exceeds the RUN

benchmark for graduates who studied on-campus.

• Strong performance in student satisfaction with online learningo Maintaining overall satisfaction with online student experience.o 5.5% increase in overall satisfaction with online teaching quality, which exceeds the RUN

benchmark.

• Meeting requirements for comprehensive course review and developmento Review of the Grad Cert in Agricultural Business Management to meet industry needs.o Commenced revitalisation of the M Agriculture with implementation of micro-credentials.o Course renewal of the Grad Cert in Health Management and Leadership to address industry

requirements.

Key Achievements and Highlights – HDR

• Strong growth in student loado 22.2% increase in commencing part-time enrolments.o 16.1% increase in commencing part-time load.o 46% of the HDR load is contributed by the FoSH.

• Strong performance in student successo 7.7% reduction in first-year attrition for HDR students enrolled full-time.o 33.3% part-time completion rate which exceeds the RUN benchmark.o 21.5% increase in 6-year part-time completion rate which exceeds the RUN benchmark.o 12.1% increase in 6-year full-time completion rate over 5 years.o 4.5% increase in timely completions over 5 years, for students enrolled part-time.o 99% of HDR theses achieved a passing grade in 2020 with no ‘fail’ recommendations.

• Strong performance in graduate outcomeso Growth in full-time employment at three years to 93.8%, which exceeds the RUN

benchmark.

• Strong performance in student satisfactiono 5.4% increase in PREQ overall satisfaction.

Key Focus Areas for Improvements – Bachelor

• Commencing enrolmentsIncrease the opportunity for online enrolments through blended course delivery, with a particularfocus on enabling pathways for First Nations students.

• First year progressInvest in student and staff support for the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health andSchool of Dentistry and Health Sciences, to increase student success online and raise 1st yearcommencing progress rates to meet or exceed the RUN benchmark. There is need for a specificfocus on enabling First Nations student success.

• First year attritionImprove support for First Nations students enrolled online to reduce attrition and increasecommencing 1st year progress, in order to close the gap with non-Indigenous students.

• CompletionsIdentify and address reasons for decline in online course completions, with a particular focus on FirstNations student success.

• First year Student Experience Survey – overall satisfactionIdentify and address reasons for declining overall satisfaction with on-campus and online studentexperience, with a particular focus on First Nations student experience.

• First year Student Experience Survey – teaching qualityIdentify and address reasons for declining student satisfaction with teaching quality both on-campusand online, to meet or exceed RUN benchmarks.


239

University


Enable an increase in the number of graduates returning to full-time study, with a particular focus on First Nations students, to meet or exceed the RUN benchmark.

Focus Areas for Improvement – Postgraduate by Coursework

• Commencing loadUnderstand industry need for flexible postgraduate programs to inform course review anddevelopment, in order to continue the growth in online load.

• First year attritionImprove support for First Nations students enrolled online to reduce attrition and increasecommencing 1st year progress, in order to close the gap with non-Indigenous students.

• CompletionIdentify and address reasons for decline in online course completions, with a particular focus on FirstNations student success.

• First year Student Experience Survey – overall satisfactionIdentify and address reasons for overall satisfaction with online student experience which falls belowthe RUN benchmarks, for First Nations and non-Indigenous students.

• First year Student Experience Survey – teaching qualityIdentify and address reasons for low First Nations student satisfaction with teaching quality online.

• Graduate Outcomes Survey – Course Experience Questionnaire overall satisfaction Identifyand address reasons for declining on-campus course experience.

Focus Areas for Improvement – HDR

• Graduate satisfactionIdentify and address reasons for graduate satisfaction rates which are below benchmarks.

• Commencing enrolmentsExplore opportunities to increase commencing enrolments and grow HDR load.

• Rate of timely completionIdentify and address reasons for low rates of timely completion for both full-time and part-timestudents.

• Provision of minimum resources for commencing studentsInvest in the development of policy, procedures and resources to support commencing students andenable success.

• Academics with capability and capacity to supervise HDR studentsIncrease student supervision capacity through appropriate staff recruitment and mentoring of juniorstaff by senior staff with HDR supervision experience.

240

University



2019 No of Actions Evaluated (New 2021 Action) Evaluated (Closed)

FOS -1 Faculty of Science 2019 Student Performance Report Develop strategies within the HEPPP retention project to target the increase in online undergraduate attrition.

May 2021 Approximately 50% of students who fail an early assessment item do not pass a subject. In response to this analysis, the Retention Team have developed a number of strategies including targeted support for disengaged students pre census. and for those who fail an early assessment item. Tutors have been embedded in a number of large online subjects, including NRS160 and CHM104. Completed by end of 2021. Will be evaluated by analysing of subject progress rates (as a lead indicator of attrition), and the number of FW/FNS grades. August 2021 The HEPPP funded embedded tutor pilot highlights the success of targeted 1:1 student support in engaging 1st year students and improving assessment grades. This project is being rolled out this year across nine (9) large first year FoSH subjects. Additionally, DLT support for subject conveners is focused on improving the quality of i2 sites and subject resources.

First-year attrition for online cohorts is 32.7%, decreasing by 3.4% on the previous year. HEPPP strategies have had a positive influence on undergraduate attrition and the decrease is driven by reduced attrition in environmental sciences, medical sciences, and paramedicine. Faculty will continue to monitor large online courses with high attrition (in particular B Nursing; B Exercise and Sport Science; B Equine Science; and B Vet Tech).

FOS -2 Faculty of Science 2019 Student Performance Report To ensure that commencing progress remains high and 1st-year attrition remains low, the HEPPP funded Retention Program requires ongoing funding.

May 2021 Funding was secured for 2021. Ongoing funding has not yet been achieved. The project has much potential to support the implementation of the Job Ready Graduates package. Completed by end of 2021. Aim is to achieve ongoing funding. August 2021 The HEPPP funded Retention Program is now funded for 3 years.

Integration of the HEPPP team within the Division of Student Services will enable a holistic approach to implementation of the Job Ready Graduates Package. Inclusion of a pre-census, low-stakes assessment item in key 1st year subjects will facilitate early identification of students who are dis-engaged and enable targeted intervention.

FOS -7 Faculty of Science 2019 Student Performance Report

Faculty requests additional training for Faculty and School Leadership (as required for HOS, Assoc HOS, CD) on the Subject

May 2021 FoS and DLT are working together to confirm the timing of these sessions around the implementation of the new Faculty structure. There will likely be a Faculty based Professional Learning session in May and later in the year, School based training. August 2021

Training on the Subject Performance Dashboard (SPD) was provided to the new Chairs of School Assessment Committees, by the Office of Planning and Analytics. Use of the SPD will enhance QUASAR reports and improve

241

University


Performance Dashboard and provision of support for Schools to ensure this data is considered by School and Faculty Boards when Quality Assurance and Reflection (QUASAR) reports are tabled for discussion.

A link to the Subject Performance Dashboard (SPD) is made available to members of the FAC, for review during the meeting. To date no training has been provided on the SPD. Sub Dean L&T has followed up with the Learning Analytics Lead to facilitate professional development, so that the SPD can be used effectively by SAC members to cross-check the QUASAR Reflection and Planning (RAP) forms.

quality assurance of assessment task design and implementation.


The Faculty will closely monitor the Graduate Certificate in Agricultural Business Management for the short-term and investigate other postgraduate coursework courses with high attrition and low progress.

May 2021 This course is currently under revitalisation and is moving to phase out. Components of this degree will be offered in a new Master of Agriculture degree.

The Grad Cert Agricultural Business Management is progressing to phase-out.

FOS-1 Faculty of Science 2018 Student Performance Report

The Faculty requests that future reports should include analysis of Exit Surveys alongside the student performance data.

May 2021 The HEPPP retention team monitors the exit survey and produces a weekly report that is shared with key stakeholders.

Exit survey analysis is incorporated as core business for the HEPPP team.


The Faculty needs to complete a Category 3 (i.e. deep dive) annual course performance review of the Bachelor of General Studies (Science) and Bachelor of Science.

May 2021 The course review was finalised in 2020. The B General Studies Science was discontinued, and the number of majors was streamlined in the B of Science.

B General Studies Science has been phased out.


The Faculty will finalise the review of the Master of Environmental Management (Articulated Set) in early-2020 with specific interrogation of subject level performance

May 2021 The report has only recently been finalised. The course review was finalised and the specialisations removed.

August 2021 Online attrition in the MEM has reduced by 3.5pp to 33.3% in 2020, only 0.3pp above threshold, and commencing progress has increased by 9.7pp to 89.7% in 2020, exceeding thresholds.

Online attrition in the Master of Environmental Management (Articulated Set has reduced by 3.5pp to 33.3% in 2020, only 0.3pp above threshold, and commencing progress has increased by 9.7pp to 89.7% in 2020, exceeding thresholds.

242

University


and quality indicators that might be influencing online attrition rates.

243

University


Contents








Methodology .................................................................................................................................................. 10

Benchmarks ................................................................................................................................................. 10

2020 to 2025 Benchmarking Group ............................................................................................................. 11

Benchmarking approach .............................................................................................................................. 11

Progress on Actions from 2019 – 2020 report ............................................................................................. 12

Undergraduate ............................................................................................................................................... 17



Postgraduate .................................................................................................................................................. 22

Key Themes / Issues .................................................................................................................................... 22





2020 -2021 Actions ........................................................................................................................................ 31

Appendix A: Course health check data

244

University



Scope of Analysis




• Commencing load





• Completions





• Mode

• Faculty

• Indigeneity

This report will focus upon the student cohorts enrolled in the following programs in the Faculty of Science and Health




245

University


Methodology

Benchmarks


The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) also utilises benchmarking in its standards and risk based approach to quality assurance. The risk dimension of the framework includes the calculation and analysis of indicators related to students and financial viability. The analysis of these indicators includes, but is not restricted to, comparison to thresholds. Furthermore, TEQSA expects that all higher education providers regularly analyse institutional data to identify and remediate emerging issues, and that these analyses include comparison to other institutions.

A suite of threshold benchmarks have been adopted by Charles Sturt for inclusion in the Student Performing Reporting going forward.









Information in this report is informed from a range of sources including: Office of Planning and Analytics;

Division of Learning and Teaching; HEPPP team; Research Office; Faculty Executive; Heads of Schools;

Course Directors; and the Indigenous Student Success Team.

246

University



















247

University


Progress on Actions from 2019 – 2020 report

Evaluation and progress against actions from 2019 - 2020 report on student performance is shown in the following Table.



Identify undergraduate subjects with a high proportion of commencing students with low subject evaluation survey scores (particularly the Health FoE) and working with the subject coordinator, Head of School, and Division of Learning and Teaching to develop strategies to improve student satisfaction.

May 2021 OPA have provided the % positive responses and open text comments and The Sub Dean L&T has narrowed down a list of subjects to focus on. DLT will review the subjects. Subject coordinators will be asked to update QUASAR reflections as appropriate. Evaluation will include an increase in SuES % positive responses. To be completed by end of 2022. August 2021 The HEPPP funded embedded tutor pilot implemented in NRS160 highlights the success of targeted 1:1 student support in engaging 1st year students and improving assessment grades. This project is being rolled out this year across nine (9) large first year FoSH subjects. Faculty continues to work with DLT to identify subjects to be reviewed and updated, including a number of undergraduate subjects which fall in the category of low SuES results.

Faculty continues to work with DLT to identify subjects to be reviewed and updated, including a number of undergraduate subjects which fall in the category of low SuES results.

In progress Estimated completion date Feb 2022


Review and Analyse reasons for attrition by monitoring exit surveys. Attrition can be reduced if students who plan on leaving graduate with a lower award. Work with DSA to identify students who are withdrawing and

May 2021 The Sub Dean L&T provides Future Students with a list of exit surveys each week, who then phone students and offer advice. A HEPPP funded position has been advertised to support the project and implement a procedure to streamline graduation with a lower award. Will be completed by the end of 2021. Will be evaluated by the number of re-enrolments and students who graduate with a lower award. Thus far, three students from (40 calls) re-enrolled before the 202130 census as they had withdrawn not knowing their study options. August 2021 A HEPPP funded student re-engagement project is currently focused on this issue of attrition.

In progress Estimated completion June 2022

248

University


could graduate with a lower award.

FOS - 5 Faculty of Science 2019 Student Performance Report

Identify subjects in the Natural and Physical Sciences with a sharp decrease in progress rates or student satisfaction in 2019 and in conjunction with the Division of Learning and Teaching, develop a plan to improve subject quality

May 2021 Priority subjects have been identified and FoS and DLT will work together to develop an action plan and work with the teaching team to implement. Subject coordinators will be asked to update QUASAR reflections as appropriate. The number of re-enrolments and students who graduate with a lower award. Thus far, 3 students from (40 calls) re-enrolled before the 202130 census, as they had withdrawn not knowing their study options. August 2021 Faculty is working in collaboration with the Division of Learning and Teaching, to identify subjects with low progress rates and provide targeted support for subject development. In 202060, only two subjects in the Natural and Physical Sciences had a progression rate < 80%: ASC306; PHY304. In 202130, only three subjects in the Natural and Physical Sciences had a progression rate < 80%: CHM104; CHM115; GEO204.

In progress Estimated completion date Dec 2021


Monitor the new Bachelor of Agricultural Science and Bachelor of Environmental Science courses, particularly for online course completion and On-Campus course experience.

May 2021 Both of these courses underwent Comprehensive Course Review over the previous 2 years, with Bachelor of Environmental Science and Management also participating in the Revitalisation project. The Bachelor of Agricultural Science has a new course progression and is in the second year of implementation. August 2021 The Bachelor of Environmental Science & Management (with specialisations) is in its first year of revised course progression, and is an amalgamation of three previous courses, Bachelor of Environmental Science and Management [on campus only, 4 years], Bachelor of Environmental Science (with specialisations) [online only, 3 years] and Bachelor of Applied Science (Parks, Recreation & Heritage). We continue to monitor course metrics.


249

University


Elements of revitalisation continue to be monitored and evaluated, including exit options at Y1 and Y2 which is a feature of revitalised courses designed to address attrition and completion issues. No data is yet available for online course completions and on-campus course experience.

202230 Admissions data

Note: as there are three intakes each year (30;60;90) this data represents only a proportion of applications for 2022.

The new B Agricultural Science (and B Agriculture/Associate Degree in Farm Production) was implemented in 2020 so no data is available for online course completion and on-campus course experience. Admissions data indicates an increase in applications and offers.

202230 Admissions data


Identify postgraduate coursework subjects with low subject evaluation survey scores (particularly in the Health

May 2021 Subjects will be identified with data that has been supplied by OPA and FoS and DLT will draft an action plan to be implemented after the Faculty restructure. Will be evaluated by monitoring SuES % positive responses. To completed by end of 2022. August 2021 Faculty to liaise with the Senior Educational Designer to establish what is being done currently and what needs to be done. Faculty will work in conjunction with and Division of Learning and Teaching, in order to develop a plan to improve student satisfaction.


250

University


FOE) and work with the subject coordinator, Head of School, and Division of Learning and Teaching to develop strategies to improve student satisfaction.


The Faculty needs to maintain improved commencing progress rates by embedding the outcomes of the HEPPP Retention Project in relevant subjects. This includes mandating an appropriate pre-census assessment item in all undergraduate subjects with a significant number of commencing students.

May 2021 The HEPPP retention team has been working with academics to embed pre census early assessment items into relevant subjects. A large piece of work is investigating what constitutes a 'good' early assessment item. Findings of this project will inform the mandating of appropriate pre census assessment items and also prepare the Faculty for the implementation of the Job Ready Graduates Package. All disengaged commencing undergraduate students are proactively contacted in week 3-4 of each session. August 2021 The HEPPP funded Retention Program is now funded for 3 years. Work will continue between DLT and HoS to target undergraduate subjects with a significant number of commencing students and ensure the inclusion of a pre-census assessment item. The enrolment and assessment policy/procedures will require updating prior to January 2022 to ensure compliance with the Job-ready Graduates legislation https://www.dese.gov.au/job-ready

In progress Estimated completion date Feb 2022


The School of Nursing, Midwifery & Indigenous Health should complete an evaluation of the TAFE transition to University resources developed for the Bachelor of Nursing; and if appropriate, the

May 2021 The Sub Dean Learning and Teaching will assist the School with this analysis. August 2021 The TAFE Diploma of Nursing was evaluated as part of the BN curriculum review, to inform the new credit package. This involved content mapping between the Diploma of Nursing and first-year nursing subjects. Evaluation of the ‘TAFE transition to University resources’ will be planned in collaboration with DLT and DIT https://www.csu.edu.au/studylink/subjects/transition

In progress Estimated completion date July 2022

251

https://www.dese.gov.au/job-ready

https://www.csu.edu.au/studylink/subjects/transition

University


Faculty can assist with expansion to other courses with large numbers of students entering with TAFE as the basis of admission.

252

University


Undergraduate


Context

The Faculty of Science and Health has demonstrated positive performance in achieving an increase in on-campus and online load during 2020-21, with a 44.3% increase in online enrolments over the previous five-years. An increase in First Nations student on-campus and online enrolments are important in contributing to this growth. Strong performance in student success is evident with overall commencing first-year progress for on-campus students exceeding RUN benchmarks. Despite the considerable impact of Covid-19, it is encouraging to note that first-year attrition has generally been maintained at a level which exceeds the RUN benchmarks for on-campus and online student cohorts. Similarly pleasing to note is the overall increased satisfaction with course experience for both on-campus and online cohorts, with notable improvements evident for First Nations students. This is most likely due to focused effort across the Indigenous Student Success and Support teams, with increased attention to ensuring First Nations students’ wellbeing during this challenging year. Strong performance continues in graduate full-time employment which exceeds RUN benchmarks, for all graduates. The Faculty completed a comprehensive review of course offerings as part of Course Optimisation, facilitating a renewal of key courses. Implementation of the revitalised B Environmental Science and Management (with specialisations) has generated a 22% increase in commencing enrolments.

Summary table to illustrate 1-year change (2020-21) and comparison to RUN benchmarks for combined student cohorts (First Nations and non-Indigenous).

On-campus RUN

benchmark Online

RUN benchmark

Comm enrolments 7.3% 0.3%

Comm load 5.9% 1.2%

1st yr progress 0.2% Exceeds 0.8% Exceeds

1st yr attrition 1.9% Exceeds 3.4% Exceeds

Completions 1.2% Exceeds 2.2% Falls short

StES satisfaction 10.6% Falls short 7.7% Falls short

StES teaching quality 0.1% Falls short 3.9% Falls short

GOS satisfaction 0.5% Exceeds 4.8% Falls short

GOS full-time employment

1.6% Exceeds 2.6% Exceeds

GOS – full-time study 2.3% Falls short 1.2% Falls short

Across the Faculty of Science and Health (FoSH), total commencing enrolments increased from the previous year for on-campus study (7.3%) and declined slightly for online study (0.3%). This indicates a reversal on the five-year period 2016-2021, during which on-campus commencing enrolments have declined by 4.9% and commencing online enrolments have increased by 44.3%. Commencing on-campus load increased overall by 5.9% on the previous year, boosted by increased enrolments in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health (+72%); School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health (+15.6%); and the School of

253

University


Agriculture and Wine Sciences (+5.5%). Commencing online load increased overall by 1.2%, resulting primarily from commencing enrolments in the School of Agriculture and Wine Sciences (+27.0%); School of Environmental Sciences (+18.2%); and the School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health (+8.0%).

Strong performance is evident with first year commencing progress for on-campus students at 89.9%, increasing by 0.2% on the previous year. First-year progress rates for on-campus students vary across schools, from 83.3% in the School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health to 93.7% in the School of Biomedical Sciences. Rates for all schools compare well to the RUN benchmark of 79.1%. A small but similar improvement is evident in commencing progress for online students; 79.4% increasing by 0.8% on the previous year (RUN benchmark is 73%). Attrition rates for on-campus cohorts across all schools (range:12.1% - 20.3%: mean 14.5%) are below the RUN benchmark of 26.2%, despite a small increase of 1.9% on the previous year. This increase in student attrition might be explained by the disruption to study resulting from Covid-19. Online cohorts appear to be more resilient to change with first-year attrition decreasing by 3.4% on the previous year. Attrition rates across schools range from 22.9% to 46.7% (mean 32.7%). Schools in which student attrition exceeds the RUN benchmark of 34.1% include: School of Community Health (46.7%); School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences (40.2%); School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health (34.5%). Overall course completions for on-campus study are 66.5%, declining by 1.2% on the previous year. Course completions for on-campus students are variable across the FoSH, ranging from 52.2% in the School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health to 77.2% in the School of Dentistry and Health Sciences. In comparison to the RUN benchmark of 59.6%, only two schools fall below this threshold - School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health (declining over the previous year to 52.2%; School of Environmental Sciences (increasing over the previous year to 55.6%).

Student satisfaction with both on-campus and online course experience increased on the previous year but online cohorts appear to be more highly satisfied. Overall satisfaction with on-campus course experience is 80.5%, increasing by 0.5% on the previous year (RUN benchmark 79.8%). Overall satisfaction with online course experience is 77.8%, increasing by 4.8% on the previous year (RUN benchmark 84.5%). Overall full-time employment is also likely to have been impacted by Covid-19 related disruption to the workforce. For graduates who completed on-campus study, graduate full-time employment decreased by 1.6% on the previous year but the 84% rate is markedly higher than the RUN benchmark of 66.5%. Overall full-time employment for graduates who completed online study is 85.4%, decreasing by 2.6% on the previous year. This is also higher than the RUN benchmark of 81.4%.

First Nations students

It is important to highlight First Nations student performance which can be masked in overall data. Strong performance is evident with a 14.9% increase in commencing on-campus enrolments, which have increased over the previous five years by 87.8%. Growth in commencing on-campus load is similarly strong; 23.7% increase on the previous year and 72.2% increase over the previous five years. This growth in First Nations student numbers is important to note in light of the overall 4.9% decline in total on-campus enrolments and 11% decrease in commencing on-campus load, during the previous five-year period. First year attrition for First Nations students enrolled on-campus is 20.9%, decreasing over five years by 10.7%. This is a positive indicator for student success and is well below the RUN benchmark of 30.5%. However, it is important to compare the attrition rate of 20.9% for First Nations students, to the 14.2% for non-Indigenous students.

First Nations graduates who studied on-campus are 70% satisfied with their course experience as compared to 80.9% of non-Indigenous graduates. RUN benchmarks for these two cohorts are 74.1% and 80% respectively. As compared to the previous year, there has been a 30% improvement in course satisfaction as reported by on-campus First Nations graduates (as compared to a 0.2% improvement for non-Indigenous graduates). The student overall satisfaction data also reflects a difference for First Nations and non-Indigenous graduates who studied online. Satisfaction with their course experience is rated at 83.3% by First Nations graduates and 77.3% by non-Indigenous graduates. RUN benchmarks for these two cohorts are 75.8% and 84.6% respectively. As compared to the previous year, there has been a 23.3% improvement in satisfaction with course experience as reported by online First Nations graduates (as compared to a 3.6% improvement for non-Indigenous graduates). Credit for enabling a positive course experience for First Nations students is due primarily to the Indigenous Student Success and Support teams.

For First Nations graduates who completed on-campus study, 75% reported full-time employment as compared to 84.3% of non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 68.7% and 67% respectively. For First Nations graduates who completed online study, 100% reported full-time employment as compared to 84.7% of non-Indigenous graduates. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 81.3% and 81.9% respectively. As compared to the previous year, there has been a 14.3%

254

University


increase in graduate full-time employment for First Nations graduates who completed online study (as compared to a 3.4% decline for non-Indigenous students). The reason for this is unclear but the data indicates strong employment opportunity for all FoSH graduates.


Context

Evaluation of 2020-21 data reveals several areas for attention, particularly in relation to enabling First Nations student success through improving 1st year progress and reducing attrition. Additionally, focus should be directed to facilitating First Nations student entry to online study. Metrics for overall student satisfaction (SES) and satisfaction with teaching quality (SES) indicate a decline in student satisfaction, which requires closer evaluation. When reviewing collated data from the Student Experience Survey, it is important to acknowledge that pooled data – First Nations students and non-Indigenous students – will mask the relatively poorer experience of the former cohort. The Faculty must also consider mechanisms to increase the number of graduates returning to full-time study, in order to meet or exceed benchmarks.

Commencing enrolments: increase the opportunity for online enrolments through blended course delivery, with a particular focus on enabling pathways for First Nations students.

Across the Faculty of Science and Health (FoSH), total commencing online enrolments have declined slightly (0.3%) with a larger decrease for First Nations students (3.1%) and associated decrease in commencing load (5.1%). This is counter to the previous five-year trend, during which commencing online enrolments increased by 44.3%.

First year progress: invest in student and staff support for the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health and School of Dentistry and Health Sciences, to increase student success online and raise 1st year commencing progress rates to meet or exceed the RUN benchmark. There is need for a specific focus on enabling First Nations student success.

Two schools fall below the RUN benchmark of 79.1%: School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health (72.2%); and School of Dentistry and Health Sciences (51.9%). First year progress rates for First Nations students enrolled on-campus is 76.2%, declining over five years by 7.3%. Whilst this does not exceed the RUN benchmark of 67.7%, it is important to compare the same data for non-Indigenous students - 90.6% with a five-year increase of 3.3%. Similarly, first-year progress for First Nations students enrolled online is 57.2%, declining over five years by 7.7%. This falls short of the RUN benchmark of 57.5%. Also, the same data for non-Indigenous students illustrates a first-year progress rate of 81.5% with a five-year increase of 10.3%. This gap in first-year progress rates requires further attention.

First year attrition: improve support for First Nations students enrolled online to reduce attrition and increase commencing 1st year progress, in order to close the gap with non-Indigenous students.

First year attrition for First Nations students enrolled online is 36.7%, increasing over five years by 3.4%. Whilst this does not exceed the RUN benchmark of 42.9%, it is important to compare the same data for non-Indigenous students – 32.4% with a five-year decrease of 3.6%.

Completions: identify and address reasons for decline in online course completions, with a particular focus on First Nations student success.

Online course completions are 27.2%, declining by 2.2% on the previous year. Only two schools are above the RUN benchmark of 40.3% for online course completions - School of Dentistry and Health Sciences (53.8%); School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health (45.3%).

Course completions for First Nations students enrolled on-campus is 53.7%, decreasing over five years by 13%. This exceeds the RUN benchmark of 39.7%, however, it is important to compare the same data for non-Indigenous students – 66.8% with a five-year increase of 0.6%. Course completions for First Nations students enrolled online is 29.8%, decreasing over five years by 3.5%. This rate of completion falls below the RUN benchmark of 30.3%. Comparative data for non-Indigenous students is similarly weak - 27.1% with a five-year decrease of 7.9% as compared to the RUN benchmark of 40.7%.

255

University


First year Student Experience Survey – overall satisfaction: identify and address reasons for declining overall satisfaction with on-campus and online student experience, with a particular focus on First Nations student experience.

Overall satisfaction with on-campus student experience is 67.9%, declining by 10.6% on the previous year. This is lower than the RUN benchmark of 73.1%. Overall satisfaction with online student experience is 76.2%, declining by 7.7% on the previous year. This is lower than the RUN benchmark of 81.7%. Data indicates that students have an overall satisfaction rate which differs according to First Nations status. For on-campus study, First Nations students are 64.3% satisfied with their university experience as compared to 68% of non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 69.1% and 72.9% respectively. As compared to the previous year, the overall satisfaction of on-campus First Nations students is reduced by 22.1% (as compared to a 10.2% reduction for non-Indigenous students). For students enrolled online, overall satisfaction rates are 69.6% for First Nations students and 76.7% for non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 74.1% and 82.4% respectively. As compared to the previous year, the overall satisfaction of online First Nations students is reduced by 24.8% (as compared to a 6.5% reduction for non-Indigenous students). This discrepant deterioration in student satisfaction over the past year, cannot be explained by the impact of Covid-19 alone.

First year Student Experience Survey – teaching quality: identify and address reasons for declining student satisfaction with teaching quality both on-campus and online, to meet or exceed RUN benchmarks.

Overall satisfaction with on-campus teaching quality is 81.7%, declining by 0.1% on the previous year. This is marginally lower than the RUN benchmark of 82.8%. Overall satisfaction with online teaching quality is 81.6%, declining by 3.9% on the previous year. This is lower than the RUN benchmark of 85.6%.

For students enrolled online, teaching quality is rated at 60.9% by First Nations students and 83.1% by non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 77.4% and 86.1% respectively. As compared to the previous year, there has been a 28% decline in teaching quality as reported by online First Nations students (as compared to a 2.2% decline for non-Indigenous students). In relation to teaching quality for on-campus study, the student experience data presents a similar contrast between First Nations and non-Indigenous students. First Nations students are 67.9% satisfied with teaching quality as compared to 82.3% of non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 74% and 82.9% respectively. As compared to the previous year, there has been a 12.1% decline in teaching quality as reported by on-campus First Nations students (as compared to a 0.5% increase for non-Indigenous students).

Graduate Outcomes Survey – full-time study: enable an increase in the number of graduates returning to full-time study, with a particular focus on First Nations students, to meet or exceed the RUN benchmark.

Overall enrolment in full-time study for graduates who completed on-campus study is 5%, decreasing by 2.3% on the previous year. This is markedly lower than the RUN benchmark of 12.9%.

Overall enrolment in full-time study for graduates who completed online study is 8.5%, increasing by 1.2% on the previous year. This is slightly lower than the RUN benchmark of 9.9%.

In relation to the GOS, enrolment in full-time study is different for First Nations and non-Indigenous graduates. For First Nations graduates who completed on-campus study, 0% reported enrolment in full-time study as compared to 5.2% of non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 12.8% and 12.4% respectively. As compared to the previous year, there has been a 20% decline in enrolment in full-time study for First Nations graduates who completed on-campus study (as compared to a 1.9% decline for non-Indigenous students). For First Nations graduates who completed online study, 25% reported enrolment in full-time study as compared to 7.4% of non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 18% and 9.6% respectively. As compared to the previous year, there has been a 5% increase in enrolment in full-time study for First Nations graduates who completed online study (as compared to a 0.9% increase for non-Indigenous students).

256

University


Course optimisation - Bachelor

The Faculty completed a comprehensive review of course offerings as part of Course Optimisation. Figure 1 illustrates courses which were identified as ‘review’; ‘reconsider’; and review fit and purpose’, to highlight issues for attention in relation to first-year progress and student attrition. All courses included here have a commencing EFTSL > 10.

Figure 1: 1st year progress and attrition for undergraduate courses in each of the three Course

Optimisation categories - renewal, reconsideration, and review of fit and purpose - with commencing

EFTSL > 10.

Course Commencing EFTSL

Total EFTSL

1st year progress

Attrition

Renew

B Nursing 507.8 1249 81.4% 35.1%

B Veterinary Technology 81.6 156 80.10% 34.6%

B Exercise and Sports Science (with specialisations)

73.8 169 82.4% 33.3%

Reconsider

B Animal Science 39.8 128 87.9% 10.6%

B Medical Science (with specialisations) 37.6 121 79% 27.1%

B Pharmacy 14.4 53 90.9% 11.1%

Review fit and purpose

B Podiatric Medicine 11.9 50 82.8% 19.4%

*See Appendix A for relevant course health check data.

Outcomes of Annual Course Health Checks

The Faculty of Science and Health regularly monitors course performance metrics through Annual Course Health Checks (ACHC). Courses reviewed in the most recent ACHC were the Associate Degree in Farm Production; the Bachelor of Exercise Science (Honours); the Bachelor of Geospatial Science; and the Bachelor of Pharmacy. In particular, the Bachelor of Pharmacy requires a deep analysis including full consultations, financial modelling and market demand analysis, to determine whether to proceed with a business case to add an online mode, or whether another course of action should be taken.

257

University


Postgraduate

Key Themes / Issues

Context

The Faculty of Science and Health has demonstrated positive performance in achieving growth in online load during 2020-21, including a 100% increase in enrolments for First Nations students. Strong performance in student success is evident with commencing first-year progress for both on-campus and online cohorts, exceeding RUN benchmarks. Despite the considerable impact of Covid-19, it is encouraging to note that first-year attrition decreased by almost 20% and on-campus course completions increased. It is interesting to consider whether the repeated travel restrictions and lockdowns reduced the impact of competing employment and social commitments, on students’ study time. Strong performance in student satisfaction with teaching quality and online learning, is evidence of the academics’ continuing commitment to student support, in this challenging environment. Strong performance continues in graduate full-time employment which exceeds RUN benchmarks, for graduates who studied on-campus. The Faculty completed a comprehensive review of course offerings as part of Course Optimisation, facilitating review and revitalisation of key courses in Agriculture and Health.

Summary table to illustrate 1-year change (2020-21) and comparison to RUN benchmarks for combined student cohorts (First Nations and non-Indigenous).

On-campus RUN

benchmark Online

RUN benchmark

Comm enrolments 25% 10.6%

Comm load 40% 6.3%

1st yr progress 2.6% Exceeds 1.4% Exceeds

1st yr attrition 18.6% Exceeds 2% Exceeds

Completions 17.4% Exceeds 3.1% Exceeds

StES satisfaction 16.7% Falls short 1% Falls short

StES teaching quality No change Falls short 5.5% Exceeds

GOS satisfaction 4.2% Exceeds 3.4% Falls short

GOS full-time employment

26.2% Exceeds 4.9% Falls short

GOS – full-time study 23.2% Falls short 2.4% Falls short

Across the Faculty of Science and Health (FoSH), total commencing enrolments increased from the previous year for online study (10.6%) and declined considerably for on-campus study (25%). This continues the trend observed over the previous five-year period, during which on-campus commencing enrolments have declined by 47.1% and commencing online enrolments have increased by 1.7%. It is clear that the demand for online study pathways in the postgraduate space is strong, as this mode offers students the flexibility to combine study with continuing employment and other commitments. Commencing online load increased overall by 6.3% on the previous year, driven primarily by increased load in the School of Dentistry and Health Sciences (+78.7%) and the School of Community Health (+78.1%).

Strong performance is evident with first year commencing progress for on-campus students at 91.7%, increasing by 2.6% on the previous year. This compares well to the RUN benchmark of 81.7%. Commencing

258

University


progress for online students is a slightly higher 94%, increasing by 1.4% on the previous year. This compares well to the RUN benchmark of 84%. All schools are well above this benchmark (91.2% - 95.7%). First-year attrition rate is 16.7% for on-campus cohorts, decreasing by 18.6% on the previous year. This rate of attrition is below the RUN benchmark of 22.3%. First-year attrition for online cohorts is 20.3%, decreasing by 2% on the previous year. This reduction in first-year attrition is an excellent achievement but there is variation between schools which is likely accounted for by the difference in competing demands of employment across disciplines; School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health (8.3%); School of Agriculture and Wine Sciences (37.5%). As a comparison, the RUN benchmark is 28.9%. Overall course completions for on-campus study are 82.4%, increasing by 17.4% on the previous year.

Student satisfaction with online teaching quality is 85.6%, increasing by 5.5% on the previous year. This is slightly higher than the RUN benchmark of 84.6%. Overall satisfaction with online course experience is 81.1%, increasing by 3.4% on the previous year. This is lower than the RUN benchmark of 85.5%. This is a very positive outcome considering the Covid-19 related challenges and disruption which students and staff have been coping with during this period.

Covid-19 related disruption to the workforce appears to have impacted overall full-time employment and perhaps also provided people with the opportunity to engage in further study. For graduates who completed on-campus study, graduate full-time employment decreased by 26.2% on the previous year and the 57.1% rate is notably higher than the RUN benchmark of 40.9%. Overall full-time employment for graduates who completed online study is 84.3%, decreasing by 4.9% on the previous year. This is lower than the RUN benchmark of 88.1%. Conversely, overall enrolment in full-time study for graduates who completed online study is 4.8%, increasing by 2.4% on the previous year but this is also lower than the RUN benchmark of 6.2%.

First Nations students

Strong performance is evident with a 100% increase in commencing online enrolments, as compared to an overall increase of 10.6%. Growth in commencing online load is similarly strong; 150%, as compared to an overall increase of 16.8% with First Nations students comprising 3.4% of commencing load.

First-year progress for First Nations students enrolled online is 85.1%, increasing over five years by 2.9%. This exceeds the RUN benchmark of 84% but it is relevant to note that this rate falls short of the same data for non-Indigenous students (94.3%). This gap in first year progress rates warrants further attention.


Context

In the postgraduate space particularly, it is important to understand the needs of employees and employers for flexible postgraduate programs, in order to continue the growth in online load. Evaluation of 2020-21 data reveals several areas for attention, particularly in relation to enabling First Nations student success through improving 1st year progress and reducing attrition. Additionally, focus should be directed to understanding reasons for the decline in course completions and opportunities to facilitate success for all students. Similar to the outcomes for Bachelor courses, metrics for overall student satisfaction (SES) and satisfaction with teaching quality (SES) indicate a decline in student satisfaction, which requires closer evaluation. Whilst online course experience appears to be rated positively by students, the reasons for a decline in the rating of on-campus course experience, requires further exploration.

Commencing load: Understand industry need for flexible postgraduate programs to inform course review and development, in order to continue the growth in online load.

Commencing on-campus load decreased overall by 40.0% on the previous year, driven primarily by reduced load in the Schol of Animal and Veterinary Sciences (-72.7%) and the School of Agriculture and Wine Sciences (-29.7%).

First year attrition: improve support for First Nations students enrolled online to reduce attrition and increase commencing 1st year progress, in order to close the gap with non-Indigenous students.

First year attrition for First Nations students enrolled online is 30%, increasing from the previous year by 12.4%. This exceeds the RUN benchmark of 28.9% and is notably higher as compared to the same data for non-Indigenous students (20.2%).

259

University


Completions: identify and address reasons for decline in online course completions, with a particular focus on First Nations student success.

Online course completions are 65.5%, declining by 3.1% on the previous year. Only three schools are above the RUN benchmark of 65.6% for online course completions - School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health (93.3%); School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health (74.7%); and School of Dentistry and Health Sciences (74.7%). Course completions for First Nations students enrolled online is 62.5%, decreasing from the previous year by 1.1%. This is lower than the RUN benchmark of 65.6%, and also the proportion of course completions for non-Indigenous students (65.6%).

First year Student Experience Survey – overall satisfaction: identify and address reasons for overall satisfaction with online student experience which falls below the RUN benchmarks, for First Nations and non-Indigenous students.

Overall satisfaction with online student experience is 77.4%, increasing by 1% on the previous year. This is lower than the RUN benchmark of 79.1%. Overall satisfaction rates for First Nations students are 66.7% as compared to 78% for non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 69.8% and 79.4% respectively.

First year Student Experience Survey – teaching quality: identify and address reasons for low First Nations student satisfaction with teaching quality online.

In relation to teaching quality, the student experience data presents a much starker contract between First Nations and non-Indigenous students. For students enrolled online, teaching quality is rated at 66.7% by First Nations students and 86.7% by non-Indigenous students. RUN benchmarks for these two student cohorts are 80.6% and 84.6% respectively. When reviewing collated data from the Student Experience Survey, it is important to acknowledge that pooled data – First Nations students and non-Indigenous students – will mask the relatively poorer experience of the former cohort.

Graduate Outcomes Survey – Course Experience Questionnaire overall satisfaction: identify and address reasons for declining on-campus course experience.

Overall satisfaction with on-campus course experience is 83.3%, decreasing by 4.2% on the previous year. This is higher than the RUN benchmark of 80.6%.

Course optimisation - Postgraduate

The Faculty completed a comprehensive review of course offerings as part of Course Optimisation. Figure 2 illustrates the M Medical Science which was identified as ‘review fit and purpose’, to highlight issues for attention in relation to first-year progress and student attrition.

Figure 2: 1st year progress and attrition for M Medical Science (with specialisations) - included in

Course Optimisation category ‘review of fit and purpose’ (commencing EFTSL > 10).

Course Commencing EFTSL

Total EFTSL

1st year progress

Attrition

M Medical Science (with specialisations) 10.3 28 79% 30.8%

260

University


261

University



Context

The Faculty of Science and Health has performed well in relation to first year attrition. Over the past five years attrition for the full-time cohort has been stable; the rate is currently the lowest across the three faculties and is just below the RUN benchmark. The Faculty saw a rise in full-time completions and a considerable rise in part-time completions over this period, and both remain higher than the RUN benchmark. The proportion of passing grades has increased with only 1% of submissions receiving a ‘Resubmit’ and additionally, no ‘Fail’ grades were recorded. Graduate satisfaction has improved over the past three years and currently sits just below the RUN benchmark rate. The reported full-time employment rate has seen a considerable increase over the past two years. The review and implementation of recommendations made in the Review of Higher Degree by Research Training Final Report (Smythe et al., 2018) has been a major activity for the Faculty over the past three years, and a major review of the HDR Policy and Procedure in 2019-2020 may have contributed to achieving these positive outcomes.


• Strong growth in student loado 22.2% increase in commencing part-time enrolments.o 16.1% increase in commencing part-time load.o 46% of the HDR load is contributed by the FoSH.

• Strong performance in student successo 7.7% reduction in first-year attrition for HDR students enrolled full-time.o 33.3% part-time completion rate which exceeds the RUN benchmark.o 21.5% increase in 6-year part-time completion rate which exceeds the RUN benchmark.o 12.1% increase in 6-year full-time completion rate over 5 years.o 4.5% increase in timely completions over 5 years, for students enrolled part-time.o 99% of HDR theses achieved a passing grade in 2020 with no ‘fail’ recommendations.

• Strong performance in graduate outcomeso Growth in full-time employment at three years to 93.8%, which exceeds the RUN

benchmark.

• Strong performance in student satisfactiono 5.4% increase in PREQ overall satisfaction.


Context

Despite the successes, there are still areas requiring attention including the alarming decline in commencing full-time student enrolments over the past five years. The reduction in research income from the government, and the reliance on small numbers of AGRTP scholarships, has been a major contributing factor to this decline. In addition, the rate of timely completion for all cohorts has declined over the past five years and warrants a deeper analysis of data to determine the driving factors.

Graduate satisfaction: identify and address reasons for graduate satisfaction rates which are below benchmarks.

Commencing enrolments: explore opportunities to increase commencing enrolments and grow HDR load.

Rate of timely completion: identify and address reasons for low rates of timely completion for both full-time and part-time students.

Provision of minimum resources for commencing students: invest in the development of policy, procedures and resources to support commencing students and enable success.

262

University


Academics with capability and capacity to supervise HDR students: increase student supervision capacity through appropriate staff recruitment and mentoring of junior staff by senior staff with HDR supervision experience.

Rate of Timely Completion

The rate of timely completion should be a major focus area for improvement in the FOSH as it is the lowest across the faculties for both Full-Time and Part-Time students. The rate of timely completion for Full-Time cohort from 2016 to 2020 has dropped ~15pp to 57.9%. The Part-Time completion has had a slight increase in 2020 to 50% but is still the lowest of the faculties. To determine the reasons for this decrease, further data at a more granular level is required. There are many factors that influence timely completions including extenuating personal circumstances, the research environment, the supervision, the research project, incoming research skills and availability of resources to name a few.

Table 1: Faculty of Science HDR enrolments, load, attrition and completions.

Metric Faculty Full

Time 1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

% Course Profile

Part Time

1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

% Course Profile

Commencing Enrols All 51 -17.7% -23.9% 100.0% 44 -18.5% -21.4% 100.0%

Science 28 -22.2% -3.4% 54.9% 11 +22.2% +83.3% 25.0%

Commencing Load All 42.8 -17.0% -24.0% 100.0% 17.3 -22.9% -22.9% 100.0%

Science 23.0 -19.3% -7.1% 53.8% 4.5 16.1% 140.0% 26.1%

Metric Faculty Full

Time 1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

vs On-campus Benchmark

Part Time

1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

vs Online Benchmark

First Year Attrition All 6.5% -6.8 -6.2 6.5% 13.0% -2.0 -9.8 13.5%

Science 5.6% -7.7 -11.1 N/A 11.1% +11.1 -18.3 N/A

6 Year Completion Rate

All 52.2% -1.8 +5.8 54.9% 28.6% +0.5 +14.1 31.0%

Science 62.1% -0.4 +12.1 N/A 33.3% +21.5 +10.6 N/A

Timely Completions All 75.6% +1.2 +15.3 N/A 73.0% +0.6 +17.1 N/A

Science 57.9% -14.8 -11.3 N/A 50.0% -10.0 +4.5 N/A

Table 2: Graduate outcomes survey (GOS) and postgraduate by research questionnaire (PREQ)

Metric Faculty Rate 1 Yr chg 4 Yr chg vs Benchmark

GOS - PREQ Overall Satisfaction All 87.9% +0.4 -5.3 91.1%

Science 86.7% +5.4 +5.4 N/A

GOS - Full Time Employment All 87.1% -3.2 +5.5 72.0%

Science 93.8% +0.9 +27.1 N/A

GOS -Further Full Time Study All 6.1% +4.0 +6.1 7.1%

Science 0.0% -6.3 0.0 N/A

263

University


Figure 3.1: Commencing Enrolments by Faculty

Figure 3.2: Attrition Rates by Faculty

264

University


Figure 3.3: Completion Rates by Faculty

Figure 3.4: PREQ Satisfaction Rate by Faculty

Figure 3.5: Full-Time Employment Rate by Faculty

Summary of areas “warranting attention” by metric for FOSH as per 2021 HDR Cohort Report.


Commencing enrolments

Total Cohort o Declining commencing enrolments

FOSH o Recent fall in full-time commencing enrolments

Campus o Main campus: falling Full-Time enrolments at Bathurst campuso Other campus: decreasing commencing enrolments

265

University


Completion Total Cohort o Declining completion rates for Full-Time students

FOSH o Low timely completion rates

Campus o Main campus: large disparity in completion rates between main campuseso Other: highly variable completion rates across the period and betweencampuses

Domesticity (International) o Declining international completion rate lower than the benchmark rate.

Attrition FOSH o No specific data presented

Campus o Other campus: highly variable, and at times very high first year attrition for thePart-Time cohort

266

University


2020 - 2021 Actions

The following Actions items will be implemented in 2021 and 2022 and monitored by the FoSH Faculty Board.

Action No Action Item Owner Target Completion

FoSH-1 (2020 -2021)

Identify key points for action during a student’s transition to university study and evaluate support mechanisms to improve 1st year progress rates and reduce attrition for online cohorts, with a particular focus on First Nations student success.

ADA Target completion date 2023

FoSH-2 (2020 -2021)

Improve metrics for Bachelor of Nursing, in particular: first year progress (2020 81.4%, target 84%); online attrition (2020 35.1%, target 33%); and student satisfaction (2020 54.5%, target 81%).


FoSH-3 (2020 -2021)

Monitor revitalised course Bachelor of Environmental Science and Management (with specialisations) against course metrics and in the context of the revitalisation project.


FoSH-4 (2020 -2021)

Improve quality of 1st year teaching to improve student retention, targeting courses with high attrition and low first year progress. Monitor 1st year undergraduate subjects with a high proportion of commencing students to analyse SuES and identify areas for targeted support from the Division of Learning and Teaching.

DD Target completion date 2023

FoSH-5 (2020 -2021)

Ensure targeted improvements in quality by understanding impact of Covid-19 on performance. Evaluate reasons for student dissatisfaction with teaching quality and course experience, to identify specific study areas at risk and gain a deeper understanding of the impact of short and long-term disrupting factors.

DD Target completion date 2022

FoSH-6 (2020 -2021)

Analyse data at a granular level to identify and Identify and address reasons for low rates of timely completion for both full-time and part-time students.

ADR Target completion date 2022

FoSH-7 (2020 -2021)

Undertake a deep analysis of the Bachelor of Pharmacy including full consultations, financial modelling and market demand analysis, to determine whether to proceed with a business case to add online mode, or whether another course of action should be taken.

ADA Early 2022

267

University


Appendix A: Course health check data

B Nursing

268

University


B Veterinary Technology

269

University


B Exercise and Sports Science

270

University


B Animal Science

271

University


B Medical Science with specialisations

272

University


B Pharmacy

273

University


B Podiatric Medicine

274


Appendix 3. Annual Course Reports

Summary Report/Focus Areas

Recommended 2020 - 2021 Actions

275


Appendix 4. Agents

Metric Agent Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg % Course

Profile Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

% Course Profile

Enrols All 167 -66.9% -46.1% 100.0% 947 -69.9% -54.1% 100.0%

Expert Education & Visa Services 33 -68.0% - 19.8% 145 -61.1% - 15.3%

Endeavour Education Consultants 1 - - 0.6% 60 +252.9% - 6.3%

Study Path Consultants 0 -100.0% - 0.0% 50 -40.5% - 5.3%

Viv's International Education Centre 4 -55.6% - 2.4% 19 -67.2% - 2.0%

AEMC Consultants 1 -95.2% - 0.6% 19 -75.3% - 2.0%

New Edge Consultancy Services 0 -100.0% - 0.0% 19 -9.5% - 2.0%

UNIKEY GLOBAL PTY LTD. 2 +100.0% - 1.2% 17 +54.5% - 1.8%

Grace International 3 -40.0% - 1.8% 25 +25.0% - 2.6%

BlueSky Consultancy Services 3 -70.0% - 1.8% 12 -86.5% - 1.3%

Load All 100.6 -69.3% -43.3% 100.0% 576.0 -67.6% -46.7% 100.0%

Expert Education & Visa Services 23.5 -64.1% - 23.4% 92.4 -57.1% - 16.0%

Endeavour Education Consultants 0.4 -40.0% - 0.4% 34.5 375.9% - 6.0%

Study Path Consultants 0.0 -100.0% - 0.0% 28.3 -46.4% - 4.9%

Viv's International Education Centre 2.6 -60.4% - 2.6% 12.6 -60.7% - 2.2%

AEMC Consultants 0.9 -94.0% - 0.9% 12.8 -69.9% - 2.2%

New Edge Consultancy Services 0.0 -100.0% - 0.0% 11.9 -10.4% - 2.1%

UNIKEY GLOBAL PTY LTD. 0.8 +100.0% - 0.7% 13.0 126.1% - 2.3%

Grace International 1.3 -50.0% - 1.2% 14.0 49.3% - 2.4%

BlueSky Consultancy Services 2.3 -63.3% - 2.2% 7.8 -85.0% - 1.3%

Metric Agent Undergrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg vs

benchmark Postgrad 1 Yr chg 5 Yr chg

vs benchmark

Progress All 66.4% +5.9 - 86.1% 91.6% +13.0 - 90.3%

Expert Education & Visa Services 76.8% 0.0 - N/A 94.9% +10.5 - N/A

Endeavour Education Consultants - - - N/A 91.1% +4.1 - N/A

Study Path Consultants - - - N/A 93.5% +6.1 - N/A

Viv's International Education Centre 42.9% -10.9 - N/A 80.2% +7.3 - N/A

AEMC Consultants - - - N/A 90.2% +6.0 - N/A

New Edge Consultancy Services - - - N/A 96.8% +9.9 - N/A

UNIKEY GLOBAL PTY LTD. - - - N/A 97.1% -0.6 - N/A

Grace International 30.0% -22.9 - N/A 94.6% +9.3 - N/A

BlueSky Consultancy Services 72.2% -9.6 - N/A 82.0% -1.1 - N/A

Attrition All 49.9% +8.0 - 9.8% 24.7% +10.6 - 13.2%

Expert Education & Visa Services 24.3% -2.8 - N/A 19.8% +1.7 - N/A

Endeavour Education Consultants - - - N/A 5.9% - - N/A

Study Path Consultants 40.0% - - N/A 13.1% +4.3 - N/A

Viv's International Education Centre 77.8% +27.8 - N/A 29.3% +4.8 - N/A

AEMC Consultants 57.1% +16.4 - N/A 13.0% 0.0 - N/A

New Edge Consultancy Services - - - N/A 19.0% +11.3 - N/A

UNIKEY GLOBAL PTY LTD. - - - N/A 0.0% 0.0 - N/A

Grace International 60.0% - - N/A 10.0% - - N/A

BlueSky Consultancy Services 30.0% -3.3 - N/A 25.8% -1.6 - N/A

Figure 17: 2020 Postgraduate and Undergraduate Agent Benchmarks

As agent data is only available from 2016, no six-year completion rates are available.

Survey results are also not able to be provided at this point in time and it should be noted that ongoing efforts to improve data quality may cause these figures to be revised in the future.

276


In 2020, PRISMS records indicate 1,007 commencing students were assisted by 224 education agents. A summary of the student progress and attrition rates for the nine leading agents is given below.

• Each of the agents listed below had over 15 commencing enrolments in 2020 and together account for38% of all Charles Sturt Study Centre enrolments. Enrolments were comprehensives negativelyimpacted by COVID-19 with Endeavour being the exception.

• All agents have Undergraduate student progress rates below the benchmark of 86.1%, while half theagents have Postgraduate student progress rates above the benchmark of 90.3%.

• Progress and attrition rates are roughly aligned, where agents with higher progress rates tend to alsohave lower attrition rates.


Endeavour Education Consultants

With 60 mostly Indian Postgraduate students, Endeavour Education Consultants more than tripled enrolments in 2020. Progress rates for these students are up 4.1pp in the last year and now sit just above the benchmark. Attrition rates are one of the lowest for all cohorts at just 5.9% (n=17).

Study Path Consultants

Progress rates are comparatively high at 93.5% with a 6.1pp increase in the last year. Attrition is 13.1% after an increase of 4.3pp in 2020.

Study Path consultants assisted 50 new students in 2020, mostly from India and all at the Postgraduate level, down 40% on the previous year.

AEMC Consultants

Progress rates saw an uplift of 6pp to 90.2% and compare reasonably well the benchmark. The attrition rate has remained stable in 2020 and is relatively low at 13%.

AEMC had 20 enrolments in 2020, mostly from Sri Lanka and at the Postgraduate level, down 75% on the previous year.

UNIKEY GLOBAL

Unikey Global are the highest of all cohorts across both progress and attrition. The average progress rate for students working with this agent is 97.1% and there was no attrition in 2020 based on a cohort of 11 students.

19 commencing students, with the vast majority Postgraduates and originally from Sri Lanka, enrolments are up more than 50% on last year.

Grace International

Progress rates are high at 94.6% after an increase of 9.3pp in 2020 and now sit the benchmark. Attrition was reported for the first year for this agent and is also relatively low at 10%.

28 students commencing mostly at the Postgraduate level and from both India and Nepal, this agent’s enrolments are up 12%.

277



The following has been added to the 2021-2022 University-wide Action Recommendations for actioning by the Office of Global Engagement and Partnerships.

All Agents

All agents have Undergraduate student progress rates below the benchmark of 86.1%.

Expert Education and Visa Services

As the largest agent working with Charles Sturt Study Centres, Expert Education and Visa Services assisted 178 commencing students in 2020, accounting for 20% of Undergraduate students and 15% of Postgraduate students.

While Undergraduate enrolments through this agent have dropped substantially in the last year, progress rates have remained stable. However, at 76.8%, the progress rate is almost 10pp below the benchmark. Attrition has improved marginally, dropping 2.8pp to 24.3%.

While Postgraduate enrolments have dropped over 60% in the last year, progress rates have climbed more than 10pp to 94.9%, sitting comfortably above the benchmark of 90.3%. Attrition rates are on the low side for Charles Sturt Study Centres, with an increase of just 1.7pp to 19.8%.

Viv's International Education Centre

Progress rates are up 7.3pp to 80.2% but continue to be the lowest of all cohorts and sit well below the benchmark. Attrition rates are also the highest of all cohorts at 29.3% after increasing 4.8pp in 2020.

23 commencing students mainly at the Postgraduate level and all from India, down 70% on the previous year.

New Edge Consultancy Services

Progress rates are one of the highest of all cohorts at 96.8% after an almost 10pp increase in 2020. However, attrition has also increased considerably, up 11.3pp to 19%.

19 enrolments in 2020, all from India and at the Postgraduate level, down 10% on the previous year.

BlueSky Immigration and Students Consultancy Services

Progress rates are low at 82% compared to the CSU Study Centre average of 91.6% and are below the benchmark of 90.3%. The attrition rate is also relatively high at 25.8% despite a small decrease in the last year.

Enrolments have dropped from almost 100 in 2019 to just 15 in 2020. The majority of students have typically been from India with most studying at the Postgraduate level.

278


Appendix 5. Grade Distributions

2019 Assurances

Faculty Oversight Update

Charles Sturt University Study Centres

Key Achievements

GOVERNANCE COMMITTEES

BENCHMARKING REPORTING


QUASAR REPORTING

ASSESSMENT BENCHMARKING

279


Appendix 6. Scope of the Student Performance Reporting

Scope of Analysis

The metrics selected for the Student Performance Reporting process align to TEQSA Provider Risk Indicators related to student load, experience and outcomes.



• Commencing load





• Completions




Segmentations Examined

• Mode

• Faculty



• Campus Type


• Indigeneity

• Domesticity


• Credit Packages

• Agents

Undergraduate Pathways

A range of other pathways and non-award courses are important to include, however differing funding arrangements, course level classifications and administration, makes consistent and straightforward analysis of performance problematic.

The sub-degree course level is dominated by the Associate Degree in Policing Practice, whilst the Diploma of General Studies might be better conceived being grouped with other enabling courses.

Enabling courses including University Certificate in Workplace Essentials and the StudyLink program as well as single subject study. Completion and survey metrics are not available for these courses.

Given the intent of the University Certificate in Workplace Essentials and the Diploma of General Studies as ‘pathways’, these courses have been grouped into a separate cohort so that the reporting focusses on ‘conversion’ into other Award courses and Charles Sturt.

The conversion metric aligns to that reported under Operational Measures 3.6 Conversion Performance for Pathway Programs.

Metrics available: enrolments, load, progress and attrition.

Given the dominance of the Associate Degree in Policing Practice in the sub-degree space, it has been considered separately.

Metrics available: all metrics available.

280

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/OPM3_6ConversionPerformanceforPathwayprograms/Summary?:embed=yes

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/OPM3_6ConversionPerformanceforPathwayprograms/Summary?:embed=yes


Undergraduate

While the total undergraduate position will be presented up front in order to establish context, the main report scope is defined as:

• Course level – undergraduate

• Campus type – excluding Third Party Providers

Metrics available: all metrics.

Postgraduate

While the total higher degree coursework and other postgraduate position will be presented up front in order to establish context, the main reporting scope will be defined as:

• Course level – Higher Degree – Coursework and other postgraduate

• Campus type – excluding Third Party Providers

Metrics available: all metrics though there may be some limitations on time-series available for survey metrics.


The reporting scope is defined as:

• Course level – Higher Degree – Research

Metrics available: most metrics though some are less meaningful for this cohort. For example, progress rates will be less meaningful. Some survey metrics may not be available.

Note: For the purpose of this report, standard definitions for metrics will be applied. It is acknowledged that alternate measures may be considered more appropriate for this cohort and are the subject of ongoing discussion with the Research Office.


This analysis has been split into two sections, one for onshore campus results and one for offshore campus results. This will allow for a more useful grouping of Third Party Providers to ensure the results are presented together. There will also be a discussion of each Third Party Provider or groups of partners (based on course offerings and location).

Onshore results:

• Campus type – Third Party Providers

• Domesticity – International

Offshore results:

• Campus type – Third Party Providers

• Domesticity – International

Metrics available: all metrics except survey metrics.

Segmentations discussed include course level, specific Third Party Providers and agenda. Study Group Australia is examined as part of this.

281


Key Reports and Data Referenced

Student Performance Benchmarking Dashboard

This benchmarking tool is being piloted by Office of Planning and Analytics and includes progress rates, attrition rates, completion rates, student experience survey results and graduate outcomes survey (labour force results). It applies comparison rates to the Sector, Regional Universities Network and all NSW institutions excluding the Group of eight.

Link – here.

Progress

2020 Progress Rates - Full Year Highlights

2020 Progress Rates - Full Year Highlights (Third Party Providers)

Attrition

2020 Attrition Rates - Full Year Highlights

2020 Attrition Rates - Full Year Highlights (Third Party Providers)

Completions

2020 Completion Rates - Full Year Highlights

Load and enrols

2020 Load and Enrols Summary - Full Year Highlights

Student Experience

QILT Student Experience Survey 2016-2020 Benchmarking Report

Graduate Outcomes

GOS 2020 Benchmarking Report (QILT)

GOS Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) & Postgraduate by Research Questionnaire (PREQ) Results

282

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/StudentPerformanceReportingBenchmarking_0/Cover?%3Aembed=yes#2

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/ProgressFullYearAnalysis2020-AllFaculties/Title?:embed=yes#1

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/ProgressFullYearHighlights2020-ThirdParty/Title?:embed=yes#2

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/2020Attrition-AllFaculties/Title?:embed=yes#3

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/2020Attrition-ThirdPartyProviders/Title?:embed=yes#4

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/2020CompletionRates-FullYearHighlights/Title?:embed=yes#5

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/2020FullYearLoadandEnrolsSummaryAllFaculties/Title?:embed=yes#6

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/SES_2016-2020_3005_CSU_UA_Tableau/StartPage?:embed=yes#7

https://bi.csu.edu.au/t/plan_published/views/GOS_2016_2020_3005_CSU_UA/GOSStory?:embed=yes#8

https://bi.csu.edu.au/#/site/plan_published/views/GOSCEQPREQResults/CoverPage?:iid=9


Appendix 7. Background Information

Purpose and Focus of the Report

This report addresses the Higher Education Standards Framework (2015) – Monitoring, Review and Improvement Standard 5; and Delivery with Other Parties Standard 5.4 and has been prepared by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) in conjunction with the Office of Planning and Analytics, the three Faculties, Divisions and Offices.

This report provides a University-wide understanding of the themes associated with student performance. This report will provide guidance on key achievements and focus areas for improvements. Summary analyses have been provided to assist in monitoring and evaluating improvement actions. Interventions that are strategic or require an executive/senior management level of coordination, have been identified for Academic Senate’s oversight.

The University analysis compliments the Faculty Student Performance Reports 2021, where each Faculty was provided a summary analysis of data provided by the Office of Planning and Analytics in August. The Faculties considered the data relevant to their courses individually, and prepared commentary and actions as a combined report and associated Action Plans (Appendix 2).

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency

Provider Risk Assessment

Risk assessments are used by Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) to guide its risk-based approach to assuring higher education standards, including the scope of evidence requirements for applications for renewals of registration and course accreditations. Risk assessments do not establish findings in relation to compliance with Higher Education Standards, but rather point to areas where TEQSA may require reassurance that a higher education provider continues to meet the Standards.

The 2019 Provider Risk Assessment identified a moderate overall ‘risk to students’ in relation to concerns raised in TEQSA’s renewal of registration decision on 3 April which led to the imposition of conditions on a shortened registration period. TEQSA will continue to monitor these indicators in future risk assessments and may consider these in future regulatory processes.

The 2020 Provider Risk Assessment is provided in Appendix 9 and reflects the change in ‘Risk to Students’ from ‘moderate’ to ‘low’. However, ‘Risk to Financial Position’ changed from ‘low’ to ‘moderate’. Given this the importance of the new 2030 University Strategy remaining focussed on sustainability remains and the course profile increasing viability. Even though we have been success in reducing overall ‘Risk to Students’ to ‘low’, the attrition rate (including progress rates), remains ‘moderate’ and a primary focus for improvement.

The 2020, current risk assessment cycle, TEQSA have notified that metrics for completions and graduate destination are omitted because of feedback from the sector as a result of COVID-19 impacts and all Universities have been informed that they are reviewing their approach to the risk assessment cycle in consultation with providers. This is proposed for early 2022 and will focus on the currency of information, streamlining of data collection and reduce duplication. The 2022 data will also omit the completions and graduate destinations data.

283



Conditions of Re-registration

On 3 April 2019, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) advised Charles Sturt of conditional registration. The Condition 2 that was imposed requires Academic Senate to provide Council a report on the outcomes of the comprehensive diagnostic analysis of rates and trends in student performance reporting including attrition, progression, minimum course completion times, and variations in the attainment of course learning outcomes and grade distributions. Academic Senate must also ensure the development of comprehensive action plans and undertake periodic monitoring of the effectiveness of any interventions.

Condition 2 specifically states:

By 28 February of each year of registration, CSU must provide TEQSA with a copy of the approved minutes of each meeting of the Academic Senate for the previous 12 months. The meeting minutes must demonstrate that the Academic Senate:

a. Regularly receives a comprehensive diagnostic analysis of rates and trends in student performance includingattrition, progression, minimum course completion times, and variations in the attainment of course learningoutcomes and grade distributions. The diagnostic analysis must include (but is not limited to) calculations forattrition and progression rates as defined in the TEQSA Risk Assessment Framework, and include analysis ofstudent performance by:

i. course of studyii. study periodsiii. entry pathway (comparing students admitted under each entry pathway including through third party

arrangements)iv. study modev. location of study (including sites operated by third parties)vi. education agentvii. country of originviii. student achievement in similar courses at other Australian universities

b. Ensures the development of comprehensive action plans to address any issues identified through the diagnosticanalysis done in accordance with Condition 2a and undertakes periodic monitoring of the effectiveness of anyinterventions.

c. Report’s outcomes of Condition 2a and 2b to the Council for consideration and action.

284


Organisational Assurance Framework

Charles Sturt implemented a new Organisational Assurance Policy (approved University Council March 2021). This Policy established the whole-of-institution framework for continuous improvement and quality enhancement.

Figure xx: Organisational Assurance Framework

This policy that aims to ensure that the University reliably delivers its services – teaching, learning, research, research training and engagement – through regular review of strategic, academic, financial, compliance and operational performance to consistently meet the expectations of its students and wider stakeholders (government, regulators, industry, community, and staff) through reflection on organisational effectiveness. The OAF aims to draw together distinct quality assurance processes within the University, such as governance, risk management, compliance, internal audit, and academic quality assurance.

The OAF is still being adopted and the 2020 suite of student performance reports and action plans demonstrate the PDCA Model (Plan-Do-Check-Act) methodology.

The processes involved in student performance reporting are working to embed a culture of continuous improvement through review of operational and academic performance and analysis and reflection on the effectiveness of institutional plans. It is important to note that the student performance suite of reports and actions are only one of the core components of the monitoring and improvement of operational and academic performance.

The context that the current state of redevelopment presents in meeting Condition 2, demonstrates the interdependencies and complexity that exist between the operational and academic areas of the University. Whilst the OAF and a culture of continuous improvement applies to all functions of the University, it is important to note that academic quality assurance is a distinct subset of organisational quality assurance.

285

Provost & Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) | University Student Performance Report Page 199 OF 205

Charles Sturt Education Framework

The Charles Sturt Education Framework responds to the needs of the university to ensure academic quality assurance and quality improvement is built into everything we do, to articulate a unique value proposition for current and prospective students, and to incorporate and align the strategic and operational needs of the university. The Framework attempts to connect external and internal accreditation and governance requirements with our strategic direction and deliberately positions this alongside our current strengths and success. Most importantly the Framework brings to life our commitment to high quality education and thus delivers on our promise to develop and spread wisdom to make the world a better place.

The Education Framework includes four components (Figure x):

1. University Strategy 2030;

The Education Strategy is one pillar of the overarching 2030 University Strategy. This will set our 2030vision and provide structure and guidance in how we are going to improve and maintain our sectorleading position. The 2030 University Strategy has been approved by University Council and is guidingall other elements of the Charles Sturt Education Framework.

2. Academic Quality Policy;

Charles Sturt University’s objectives and strategies have a key goal of achieving and ensuring thequality of all academic endeavours. This Policy allows the University to formulate strategies for qualityassurance and quality enhancement of its academic activities, within the context of its statutoryobligations and the University's strategic priorities.

The Academic Quality Policy was approved by Academic Senate in August 2021. A new AcademicQuality website and supporting resources is currently under development with the first iteration beingdelivered before the end of the year.

The CDAP Project is also a key enabler of this Policy, with the system going live in February 2022.

3. Charles Sturt Education Principles;

The Education Principles describe our current unique value proposition for students. The Principlesalign our brand and education products in a meaningful way.

These are yet to be formally approved; but they have been utilised by the Brand and Performance Teamto pilot the development of “proof points’ that showcase how these principles are enacted throughCharles Sturt courses.

4. Charles Sturt Curriculum Model.

This Model is the practical “how-to” for professional and academic teams to design, deliver and supportexceptional learning experiences.

The implementation of the curriculum architectures will occur as part of the CDAP Project, with thesystem going live in February 2022. On-going work over the next 3-years will be required to transitionthe curriculum to align with the model.

Figure xx: The Charles Sturt Education Framework and Curriculum Architectures

286

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xI86xokZhedfDF7e8gw2buNuCkISWkOdUX5YdRrGx1U/edit


HIGHER EDUCATION STANDARDS FRAMEWORK COMPLIANCE

As part of the Charles Sturt Education Framework implementation the Division of Learning and Teaching are creating revised guides for management and HES mapping. Current drafts below:

• Academic Quality Governance & Management Roles & Responsibilities

• Academic Standards & Quality Processes

Academic Risk Management

Academic Risks are reviewed by the Risk and Compliance Unit in consultation with stakeholders and

reported as follows as per the below diagram.

Note: revised process is subject to approval by the Academic Risk Management Working Party in October

2021.

287

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1M6Z53jaE8aiefonaA-8x-FxvZI-eOjVIkAgCOywJJ_4/edit#gid=1277600966

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1m7Hbo15FLHx4Xc9U8eH9Wm9EO2jSx6yDWXxygcQB5Ao/edit#gid=75146727


Appendix 8. Methodology

Benchmarks


TEQSA also utilises benchmarking in its standards and risk-based approach to quality assurance. The risk dimension of the framework includes the calculation and analysis of indicators related to students and financial viability. The analysis of these indicators includes, but is not restricted to, comparison to thresholds. Furthermore, TEQSA expects that all higher education providers regularly analyse University-wide data to identify and remediate emerging issues, and that these analyses include comparison to other institutions.

A suite of threshold benchmarks has been adopted by Charles Sturt for inclusion in the Student Performing Reporting going forward.






• When the Benchmark group shows a strong deviation from sector norms, the deviation is noted inany analysis which utilises the affected benchmark. This deviation is noted for the Third PartyProvider section of the report, particularly for international partnerships.


• The Regional Universities Network (RUN) to be used to benchmark expected levels of studentperformance for the 2020 to 2025 period (Below for more information), and for grade distributions for2018.



RUN is comprised of universities with predominantly regional catchments, and many transformed from technical or colleges of advanced education during the Dawkin’s era reforms. These universities also tend to have large teaching and nursing cohorts as well as a large number of online students as an ongoing consequence of these origins.

Charles Sturt is a member of the RUN group. Full membership of RUN below:







The selection of the comparison group and benchmarks required will be reviewed every five years. Consideration of requests for review within the five year period may be made by the Vice-Chancellor and/or the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

288




• Top level cohort results will be compared to overall RUN metric values, split only by mode.

• Segmentation results will be contextualised to match as closely as possible the segmentations beingexamined. For instance, CSU Bachelor Commencing Health On-Campus will be compared to RUNBachelor Commencing Health On-Campus.

• When the RUN Benchmark group shows a strong deviation from sector norms, the deviation will benoted in any analysis which utilises the affected benchmark. This is noted as applying to the ThirdParty Provider section of the report, particularly in discussing international partnerships.


For the Third Party Provider cohort:



Aspirational Sector Targets Approach

The aspiration target benchmark measures were approved and are being introduced in the 2021-2022 report to create awareness. These target benchmarks align to TEQSA student cohort analysis requirements and Performance-Based Funding (PBF) measures, and cover student progress, attrition, completions, overall student satisfaction, teaching quality, and full-time graduate employment. In determining the aspirational target benchmarks, institutional factors that are known to impact outcomes, such as proportion of low SES students, have been considered when identifying the aspirational quartile associated with the highest-ranking institution that has similar institutional features to Charles Sturt. Thus, target benchmarks are proposed as follows (noting that quartile 4 represents the top 25% of the sector):

Depth and Focus of Analysis

Each segmentation will be analysed and presented by attendance mode in order to highlight the impact of this critical factor on results. Mode will be the only further split applied to each segmentation and analysis and commentary will only address these two factors.

For instance:

• Analysis within the Field of Education (FoE) segmentation will only discuss issues and themes at theBroad FoE level by mode; commentary will not include information about specific courses nor NarrowFoE.

• Analysis within the Socio-economic Status (SES) segmentation will only discuss issues and themes atthe SES level by mode.

A more detailed interrogation of courses warranting attention will be the subject of Faculty workshops to be held post reporting.

289


Time-series analysis will focus on changes in the last year as well as changes over the five year period, and any notable shifts within the five year period that may not be highlighted if just focusing on the beginning and end of the period.

Faculties and Research Office have also utilised additional survey data as part of the comprehensive analysis. This includes but is not limited to:

i. Net Promoter Surveys;ii. Charles Sturt Student Experience Survey; andiii. Charles Sturt Exit Survey.

Assumptions and Limitations

Please refer to each of the cohort reports (accompanying reference document) for details on specific assumptions and limitations.

COMPLETION RATE REPORTING

The TEQSA Risk Framework (Version 2.3) identifies Completions as a risk indicator and provides the following definition for measurement of completions:

• Percentage change of total Undergraduate and Postgraduate by Coursework / Higher Degree byResearch student completions in the Reference Year. Absolute level and trend may also be considered.

The Office of Planning & Analytics indicated that the usefulness of the metric as defined is limited as it:

• does not account for changes in cohort size across the years that will impact the number of completingstudents; and

• is not readily benchmarked against sector data.

OPA suggested that a more useful alternative would be to report a completion rate, defined as follows:

Number of students who have completed a course / Cohort total for the course

This alternate measure accounts for changing cohort size and can be benchmarked against sector rates. The Department of Education provides 4-year, 6-year and 9-year completion rates across the sector.

Completion rate benchmarking

National completion rates track students between courses and institutions using their CHESSN ID. Completion is therefore tracked in any course and at any institution.

Charles Sturt completion rates will refer to completion in any course within the institution. Completion in any course will allow tracking of completion in exit point courses, particularly important at the Postgraduate level. The use of completion in any course will more closely align to the sector benchmark definition than the completion in course measure.

Agents

Agent data associated with students has been extracted from the Provider Registration and International Student Management System (PRISMS). There are inconsistencies in the way agent data is linked to students across their enrolment years, some of which may have arisen through valid business processes whilst others could be “mistakes”. Without assurance of data quality and business process rules, OPA has sought to standardize the approach to linking student and agent data. Therefore, each student is linked to the agent that appears on their first course enrolment record, and this agent is applied to the student for the duration of their study. Agent data is not able to be linked with any national survey data at this time.

Issues and Emerging Risks

Credit Data

Only a very small subset of credit package information is available for analysis.

A credit precedence system has recently been developed by the Division of Student Administration to store credit package information; however, this new system is yet to be integrated with Banner. The impact of this is that, when a student is admitted with a credit package, if that package is already in Banner this package is assigned to the student and can be included in reporting, however, if the package has not been loaded into Banner then only the credit amounts are applied to the student and not the credit package. As a result, there

290


is limited credit package information in Banner. Furthermore, many credit packages historically have different names.

In order to produce some meaningful analysis, the credit package records available have been aggregated to each specific course of enrolment, the aim being to compare metrics for those students who received a credit package, against those who didn’t.

Due to the incomplete nature of the data, caution should be taken in drawing any conclusions.

Historic representation of Faculties

Restructuring of Faculties took place in 2016 with a major restructure, and 2014 with a minor school change. Current Faculty structures are applied historically to provide a relevant comparison over time. In some instances, there may be minor discrepancies in the total load and enrolment figures ascribed to the current Faculty structure for years prior to its implementation. In particular, the 2014 change of faculty for the School of Exercise Science may mean some five-year change metrics are affected by these constructs.

The 2020 major restructure impacts will be captured in the report next year.

291


Appendix 9. TEQSA Provider Risk Assessment

292

Item 11: Annual Research Report

PURPOSE

To provide Academic Senate with an annual update on research activity and outcomes.

RECOMMENDATION


1. receive the 2021 Annual Research Report from the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research), and

2. endorse the 2021 Research Report to Academic Senate.

KEY ISSUES

In accordance with the University Research Committee work plan, a report has been prepared by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) detailing activity and results for the period 1 January 2020 to October 2021.

COMPLIANCE


1. Standard 4 of the Higher Education Standards Framework 2021

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with the ‘University Research Committee’ - Membership and Terms of Reference.

RISK ASSESSMENT


Research, Development, Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Charles Sturt University has a High Appetite and willingness to take risks in high impact research and innovation activities that will support the University’s standing in research excellence, develop our strengths in key disciplines, foster significant third-party partnerships that will contribute value to the University industry and the community and contribute to research and innovation leadership at the University.


This decision sits within the current risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

A. Annual Research Report (24 pages)

Prepared by: Prof Michael Friend, Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)Cleared by: Prof Michael Friend, Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)


293


https://policy.csu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=416&version=7

https://policy.csu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=416&version=7



Research Report October 2021

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) Charles Sturt University

294

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) | Research Report October 2021 Page 2 of 24

Contents

Tables ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Appendices ...................................................................................................................................................... 3

Research Strategy ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Sturt Scheme ................................................................................................................................................. 5

Workforce ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Research Staff Profile .................................................................................................................................... 6 Research Productivity Index 2021 ................................................................................................................. 7

Provider Category Standards ....................................................................................................................... 10 Background .................................................................................................................................................. 10 CSU analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 10

FoR Codes – ERA/EI Implications ................................................................................................................ 11 ARC Review ................................................................................................................................................. 11 ERA Outputs and Reference Period ............................................................................................................ 12 Research Quality .......................................................................................................................................... 13

Innovation and Commercialisation .............................................................................................................. 14 Innovation Hubs ........................................................................................................................................... 14 Discovery Translation Fund (DTF) ............................................................................................................... 15 Innovation Framework and IP Policy ........................................................................................................... 15 Cooperative Research Centres .................................................................................................................... 15 Drought Hub ................................................................................................................................................. 16

HDR Programs and Students ....................................................................................................................... 17 Enrolment ..................................................................................................................................................... 17 Completions ................................................................................................................................................. 18 Attrition ......................................................................................................................................................... 19 Scholarships ................................................................................................................................................. 20 Supervision .................................................................................................................................................. 20

Research Funding ......................................................................................................................................... 22 HERDC Income ............................................................................................................................................ 22 Research Block Grants: RTP and RSP ....................................................................................................... 22 Research Infrastructure Levy ....................................................................................................................... 23 Internal Funding ........................................................................................................................................... 23

295


Tables Table 1: FTE Research Focused 2016-2021 .................................................................................................... 6 Table 2: FTE Teaching and Research 2016-2021 ............................................................................................ 7 Table 3: RPI Expectations by Academic level ................................................................................................... 8 Table 4: HDR enrolments by domesticity ........................................................................................................ 17 Table 5: HDR completions ............................................................................................................................... 18 Table 6: AGRTP Scholarships ......................................................................................................................... 20 Table 7: Candidates per HDR supervisor (principal supervision only) and academic level ............................ 21 Table 8: HERDC Income 2016 – 2020 $’000 .................................................................................................. 22 Table 9: RBG Grants 2017 – 2021 .................................................................................................................. 22 Table 10: Internal Research Budget 2020/2021 .............................................................................................. 23

Appendices Research Strategy 2020 .................................................................................................................................. 24

296


Research Strategy The University Council approved the Research Strategy 2030 – refer to Appendix 1. It provides a clear objective:

Grow our applied research in core focus areas through strong industry, government and regional partnerships, expertise in digital and excellence in delivering research outcomes.

and identifies four clear imperatives:

1. THE LEADING AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT UNIVERSITY - A leader in creating impactful, integrated Agriculture, Water and Environment research, grounded in our footprint across the Murray Darling Basin with impact across Australia and globally

2. THE LEADING RURAL HEALTH UNIVERSITY - A leader in digital rural health (data use and translational applications) to improve health trajectories in Indigenous and rural and remote health and benefiting regions and the nation

3. A CYBER SECURITY AND BIG DATA CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE - Focus on agricultural data cybersecurity (large gap at present), environment and water and health data, with growth opportunities in other domains (e.g. defence, data privacy). Also biosecurity data linkage with law enforcement agencies has potential to grow at CSU

4. EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH DELIVERY - Define and embed research delivery support excellence as part of the CSU operating model

These are underpinned by growing strong partnerships with industry, government, First Nations, regional communities and internationally, providing world-class facilities and expertise in digital applications, delivering excellence in research and innovation outcomes and embedding First Nations ways of knowing, being and doing.

Work has commenced in establishing the three focus areas of our research, and the establishment of the Agriculture, Water and the Environment Research Institute was publicly announced on 8 October 2021.

Excellence in research delivery contains many streams of work that will be progressed over the next three years. These include

• Development of a best in class research services support model • Launching an innovation, commercialisation and IP framework • Increasing HDR enrolments, industry placements and improving the student experience • Capability and capacity building including internal support through ECR Scheme, Sturt Scheme,

EDRS objectives and open access support

We will continue to support research areas outside of the Institutes. This is key to ensuring we achieve our goal of 80% of FoEs with world standard research outcomes by 2028. We are supporting this endeavour now through internal funding schemes such as the Sturt Scheme and the ECR Scheme.

297


Sturt Scheme

The purpose of the Sturt Scheme is to

1. build research capacity through supporting new research groups across the University that will enhance our ERA performance.

2. build research capacity through creating additional research FTE 3. facilitate the development of research questions that will attract external funding 4. provide support where government or industry investment is likely

The scheme is funded from the DVC Research Portfolio and is designed to support new groups whose research will not align with the focus areas represented within the Research Institutes, but have the potential to contribute positively to the University’s research performance, particularly in relation to Excellence in Research Australia ratings.

The Sturt Scheme has committed up to $630,000 over three years for each of the successful proposals. The areas supported in this first round, announced in August 2021, were

• Contemporary Threats to Australian Society • Policy & Security Science • Regional Work and Organisational Resilience • Education Research Acceleration Program • Future of the Professions Research Group • Ageing Well in Rural and Regional Australia

We will monitor the contribution of each of these groups to the overall research performance of the University.

298


Workforce Research Staff Profile

The following charts provide FTE data as at 31 March for the period 2016 – 2021.

Research Focussed The total number of research focussed FTE staff increased from 2017 to 2020, but was affected by Sustainable Futures and in 2021 reduced to 48.1.

Research focussed refers to academic staff whose work function is 100% research.

Table 1: FTE Research Focused 2016-2021

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Level E 14.6 10.4 9.5 14.5 11.9 6.0Level D 2.7 3.2 4.0 5.5 7.2 4.3Level C 2.0 4.0 7.2 8.6 10.5 10.8Level B 10.1 9.4 13.0 14.3 13.9 12.0Level A 16.8 15.1 22.2 16.8 19.0 15.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Research Focussed

Level A Level B Level C Level D Level E

299


Teaching and Research An overall decline in teaching and research FTE staff has impacted differently across the academic levels, with the greatest reduction from 2020 being for Level B.

Table 2: FTE Teaching and Research 2016-2021

Research Productivity Index 2021

In 2014 the Academic Senate approved a definition of Research Active status. A research active definition is needed for the purpose of determining whether staff are eligible for being a principal supervisor of higher degree by research students, as required under Commonwealth Government regulations. This was also used for other purposes at CSU, including eligibility for participation in research centres and certain internal funding schemes.

A new definition was needed because of limitations with the previous research definition, including that it rewarded quantity rather than quality of outcomes, it discouraged collaboration and did not sufficiently incentivise and reward a range of important research behaviours and outcomes. There are other important reasons for a new definition. Since 2014 there have been important sectoral changes, such as the Australian Research Council’s Impact and Engagement evaluations, which emphasise the importance of non-traditional research outcomes. The rewarding of a broader range of research outcomes is also important for the achievement of CSU’s strategic goals.

Academic Senate endorsed the Research Productivity Index (RPI) in July 2020.

The minimum research performance expectations, by academic level, are shown in Table 3 below.

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Level E 32.8 33.6 29.9 27.4 30.9 31.6Level D 46.2 52.2 59.6 56.9 53.7 49.7Level C 123.9 127.8 132.7 130.2 146.8 144.0Level B 245.9 227.2 214.0 220.8 210.7 182.3Level A 12.6 14.5 14.4 9.9 12.2 8.5

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

450.0

500.0

Teaching and Research

Level A Level B Level C Level D Level E

300


Table 3: RPI Expectations by Academic level

A Protype has been developed to calculate Category A points and is accessible to all staff here. A minimum of 40 Cat A points is required to be considered as research active for the purposes of principal supervision of HDR students.

The graphs below reflect the RPI data at 23 August 2021, These reflect Category A points, unadjusted by the opportunity weighting.

This graph shows that for all Teaching and Research, and Research Focussed staff, 169 (39%) do not meet the minimum levels of research activity required to be a Principal Supervisor for research training purposes.

39 3521

4

3222 24 19

98

53 55

35

0-39 40-120 121-300 300+ 0-39 40-120 121-300 300+ 0-39 40-120 121-300 300+

Faculty of Arts and Education Faculty of Business, Justice &Behavioural Science


Cat A points by Faculty

301

https://research.csu.edu.au/performance/institutional/charles-sturt-university-research-productivity-index-rpi


The above graph shows that of those staff that have not attained at least 40 Cat A points, the majority are Level A and B academics – 75%.

In order to grow our HDR student numbers, we must increase the number of staff that are qualified to supervise students. This data indicates there are over 40 academic staff with a research function at level C or above who do not qualify to supervise HDR students.

The University Research Committee established a sub-committee led by Professor Morrison to review feedback received on the RPI to ensure its integrity and validity.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

0-39

121-300

0-39

40-120

121-300

300+

0-39

40-120

121-300

300+

0-39

40-120

121-300

300+

40-120

121-300

300+

Acad

emi

c Le

vel A

Acad

emic

Lev

el B

Acad

emic

Lev

el C

Acad

emic

Lev

el D

Acad

emic

Leve

l ECat A points by Academic Level

302


Provider Category Standards Background

In October 2019, the Review of the Higher Education Provider Category Standards, authored by Peter Coaldrake (‘The Coaldrake Review’) was released. Recommendation 5 was:

‘Along with teaching, the undertaking of research is, and should remain, a defining feature of what it means to be a university in Australia; a threshold benchmark of quality and quantity of research should be included in the Higher Education Provider Category Standards. This threshold benchmark for research quality should be augmented over time.’

Coaldrake notes, that under the current requirements, it would be technically possible to achieve ‘Australian University’ status in relation to research requirements, by delivering a single undergraduate and postgraduate course, undertaking a single research project in each of the three required fields of education in a given year, and publishing at least one peer-reviewed paper from each project in any form at any level of quality. As such, Coaldrake proposed two significant changes:

1) that universities be expected to deliver Doctoral Degrees (Research) in at least three, or at least 50 per cent, of the broad (2-digit) fields of education where courses are delivered, whichever is greater.

2) that universities conduct world standard research in at least three, or at least 30 per cent of the broad (2-digit) fields of education where courses are delivered, whichever is greater. Coaldrake recommended this be augmented over time; for example by 2030 all current universities should be required to undertake world standard research in at least three, or at least 50 per cent, of the broad (2-digit) fields of education where courses are delivered, whichever is greater.

Coaldrake suggested that the current ERA ratings (with ERA 3 being ‘at world standard’) be used by TEQSA and provided an example of how Fields of Research (2 digit) could be grouped by Fields of Education (2 digit). TEQSA subsequently released a consultation paper on the draft legislative instrument wording, and while the final conditions of assessment are to be finalised, it is safe to assume that ERA will be a core component. ARC have also recently released their final report on ERA and EI, which recommends a more robust definition of ‘world standard’ (ERA 3), suggesting the bar for ERA 3 will be raised.

CSU analysis

There were a number of assumptions made in this analysis. Firstly, that assessment of research quality at the field of education level would be based on the mean of the ERA ratings for the respective 2 digit FoR codes that map to a field of education. Based on this assumption, on ERA 2018 results, Charles Sturt was at World Standard or above in 4/9 (44%) of FoE. Should the threshold be that all of the FoR mapping to a particular FoE be rated at world standard or above, then Charles Sturt would only be at World Standard or above in 3/9 (30%) of FoE.

A further assumption is that universities will be assessed on Fields of Research as they mapped to Fields of Education as recommended by Coaldrake. It is somewhat odd that Coaldrake mapped the Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences FoR to FoE 01 (Natural and Physical Sciences) rather than FoE 05 (Agriculture, Environmental and Related Studies).

Academic Senate considered a detailed report on provider category Standards at its meeting of 29 September 2021.

303


FoR Codes – ERA/EI Implications The Australian Research Council (ARC) has released the final report from the recent review of Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) and the Engagement and Impact Assessment (EI). The report makes 22 recommendations, summarised below. The ARC has accepted all the recommendations and released an action plan along with the review report.

ARC Review

The ARC launched the review of ERA/EI to re-evaluate both schemes after multiple rounds, to explore opportunities to streamline the evaluation processes, and update definitions and classifications, especially in light of changes to the Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification (ANZSRC), in particular changes to Fields of Research (FoR) codes. The review involved the release of a discussion paper and public consultations. Charles Sturt University lodged a submission in response to the discussion paper.

The review report emphasises that while the evidence indicates that “Australian universities produce excellent research by global standards”, ERA definitions and processes need to be updated as “global standards have evolved over the past decade”. As a result, a key recommendation arising from the review is to develop and apply a more robust definition of ‘world standard’ as the benchmark for ERA ratings.

Other recommendations arising from the review include

• Adopting a new ‘vision’ and objectives for ERA and EI, but each to continue as separate companion exercises for ERA in 2023 and for EI in 2024 (Recommendations 1-3).

• Improving access to ERA and EI data, including metadata (Recommendation 9). • Promoting greater insights from ERA and EI data, especially for government and end-user stakeholders

(Recommendation 10). • Continue to run ERA and EI as separate programs, on three-yearly evaluation cycles, and in consecutive

calendar years (Recommendation 14) • Continue to monitor international and best practice understandings of research excellence and

investigate how they may be incorporated into future rounds of ERA and EI (Recommendation 22)

Actions The ARC has released an action plan to guide adoption of the review recommendations. Some, such as new objectives for ERA and EI, will be adopted immediately. Others – especially those around the use of DESE and other data – will be the basis for consultations with stakeholders.

The action plan includes information for universities on what they need to do in the lead-up to the next ERA and EI assessments, this includes:

• Use updated ANZSRC codes and ensure correct classification of Indigenous research. • Note the ERA rating scale and benchmarking are being reviewed and that an expert working group is

being established. • Note that EI engagement indicators will be optional, chosen by universities as appropriate for each FoR • Strongly encourage the use of ORCID and DOIs. • Note that EI definition of research end-user will now include publicly funded research organisations. • Plan for use of the by-line method post ERA 2023. • Have input into consultation on revision of the EI rating scale, and the development of a calculation

methodology for the number of case studies required in EI. • Plan for input into consultations around definitions for approach to impact, and guidance for impact,

engagement and research end-user.

304

https://www.arc.gov.au/excellence-research-australia/era-ei-review

https://www.arc.gov.au/file/12024/download?token=4WkT_qhT


CSU Response 1. Use updated ANZSRC codes, and ensure correct classification of Indigenous research

A strong awareness campaign has been run around the new codes, and workshops have been conducted across the university to discuss possible implications. Recoding of existing outputs (under old FoR codes) is well underway and will be complete by September 2021. This will include the new Indigenous Studies FoR, and we will work with the ARC on implementing leadership in implementing the new codes for ERA 2023 and EI 2024.

2. Strongly encourage the use of ORCID and DOIs

We have been encouraging staff to use ORCID and DOIs for a number of years. Publications in our Research Output database (CRO) all have DOIs, while a significant percentage of researchers have ORCID profiles. The ARC advice will enable us to more strongly push to have all researchers with an ORCID.

We will need to consider revisions to the Research Authorship Guidelines, the Research Productivity Index and other documents to reflect the ARC’s new requirements.

3. We must focus on improving or ERA ratings.

The developing Research Strategy will see focussed investment in three Institutes – Agriculture, Water and Environment; Rural Health; and Cyber, Data Science Security. This will underpin an uplift in research mapping to the FoEs of Natural and Physical Sciences, Information Technology, Agricultural, Environmental and Related Studies, and Health. Focussed support in these areas will also benefit FoR mapping to Management and Commerce, and to a lesser extent Society and Culture (in particular Studies in Human Society) and Engineering (e.g. water engineering). Investment in research outside the research institutes (for example, through the Sturt Scheme), should target FoR falling outside of those that will receive institute support.

4. Continue development of Impact case studies for 2024 submission

Our involvement with the Carnegie Community Engagement Classification pilot may provide the University with a head start in developing new engagement indicators. This could be accompanied by developing a standardised approach to and format for impact case studies, which could be collected regularly (potentially as part of a standard internal reporting requirement) for use in ERA/EI. In keeping with the findings of the review we should ensure that impact case studies are developed and communicated in a way that makes them accessible and understandable to end-users (which would also allow for their use by the media team and in government relations). We already have a number of impact stories in PURE Research Information Management System, and a program should be run to increase the number of impact stories entered into PURE, so that when it is time to submit there are a large number to choose from already in an appropriate format.

ERA Outputs and Reference Period

As noted from the graphic above, the reference period for ERA 2023 is 2016-2021. This means we have minimal opportunity to effect change to the ERA result for 2023. However, actions we take now to improve the quality of our outputs will be reflected in ERA 2026 and ERA 2029.

In consultation with Faculty, we are carefully reviewing the FoR codes we have submitted to in the past with a view of reducing the number of 4 digit FoR codes where we meet the volume threshold. A consolidation of our research outputs will facilitate a clearer strategic approach to our research activity and better reflect our research strengths.

In referencing to the new FoR codes (refer here), it is likely we will be submitting in 21 two 2 digit FoR codes and 37 four digit FoR codes.

In working with faculties, the large number of outputs in the CRO system without a FoR assignment must also be addressed. As at October 2021, this is more than 2,000.

305




https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/classifications/australian-and-new-zealand-standard-research-classification-anzsrc/latest-release


Research Quality

Our two key KPIs aligning with the research strategy are HERDC Income and Research Quality as measured by Q1 and Q2 journal articles. HERDC income is addressed later in this report.

A count of publications in Q1 and Q2 ranked journals are assessed as a proportion of all journal articles. This information is published by the Office of Planning and Analytics (https://www.csu.edu.au/office/planning-analytics/kpi/key-performance-indicators ) and early indications show a lift in performance in Q1 and Q2 output. Maintaining this left in quality is key to improving our ERA results in the longer term.

306

https://www.csu.edu.au/office/planning-analytics/kpi/key-performance-indicators

https://www.csu.edu.au/office/planning-analytics/kpi/key-performance-indicators


Innovation and Commercialisation Innovation Hubs

Summary of Funding for 2020

• Boosting Business Innovation Program, $125,000. We have received, to date, under BBIP $1.625m (including the $125,000 this year)

• $114,506 in funding from the NSW Government’s Stronger Country Communities Fund to deliver the ‘Emerge: Building Skills for the Future’ program designed to help Wagga Wagga’s young people develop job skills.

• $49,999 funding was received from the Australian Government under the Expert in Residence Incubator Support element of the Entrepreneurs' Programme.

Supporting the regions' innovators for over four years, the Charles Sturt University Innovation Hub offers a range of programs across the University's footprint of regional NSW. These programs develop ground breakers’ ideas to full blown start-up phase. The Innovation Hub offers flagship business pre-accelerator programs, founder events, innovation and entrepreneurship programs for university and high school students.

The Charles Sturt Innovation Hub programs have been designed to be delivered in both online and in-person formats across Charles Sturt University’s footprint.

The University has received funding from the NSW Government under the Boosting Business Innovation Program to support the development of regional entrepreneurship and innovation across Charles Sturt University’s footprint. Total funding received to date: $1.625m *Including $125,000 received in July 2020

Innovation will play a key role in the coming university’s 10-year strategy.

• Flagship program: Ready To Launch Business Incubator 22 emerging entrepreneurs from across regional NSW participated in this program, progressing their business ideas to launch phase pitching their developed ideas to a live online audience including a number of VIPs. To date the Incubator Program has supported close to 100 entrepreneurs.

• Investment NSW Innovation Districts COVID-19 R&D Challenges 1: top three Expressions of Interest submitted by businesses for Challenge 1 were supported by Charles Sturt Innovation Hub in their full application for submission to Investment NSW.

NSW Government sought to identify businesses that intended to accelerate the commercialisation of research products addressing the many disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The government partnered with universities and CSIRO in New South Wales to find solutions in a series of challenges. Charles Sturt University Innovation Hub was proud to have supported businesses based in the Riverina-Murray, Central West and Mid-North Coast areas through these series of challenges.

• Creation of online regional Founders community: The Charles Sturt Innovation Hub Founders Collective a networking forum for regional business owners and content around regional business owner interviews, skills and expert interviews. Over 350 members and 20 online events.

• Coaching and Mentor hours provided to emerging entrepreneurs from across the Charles Sturt footprint: 370

• Approximately 3,000 regional NSW high school and Charles Sturt university students participated in a suite of Innovation programs including Emerge – building skills for the future.

NSW Government’s Stronger Country Communities Fund Received $114,506 in funding from the NSW Government’s Stronger Country Communities Fund to deliver the ‘Emerge: Building Skills for the Future’ program designed to help Wagga Wagga’s young people develop job skills.

307


CSU Expert in Residence Program: Reaching Out In Our Regions $49,999 funding was received from the Australian Government under the Expert in Residence Incubator Support element of the Entrepreneurs' Programme.

• Expert In Residence - Masterclass Series: Smash the Start-up Journey - A Masterclass Series for COE’s (Chiefs of Everything) engaged 291 founders and entrepreneurs from across the Charles Sturt footprint of regional NSW, including Wagga Wagga, Albury, Port Macquarie, Bathurst, Dubbo, Orange, Armidale and Canberra (with some founders from as far afield as London, UK and California, US).

Discovery Translation Fund (DTF)

The goal of the DTF is to help bridge the critical funding gap between discovery research and the commercial development of new technologies or the establishment of new ventures. The Discovery Translation Fund supports research translation from any discipline, not just science, technology and medicine, as long as there is a compelling commercial case.

Currently active Charles Sturt University projects are:

Researcher Project Amount Awarded

Peter Anderson Human vitamin B12 absorption measurement using specifically labelled, Carbon-13 enriched, cobalamin

$50,000

Seyed Ghorashi Development of a rapid molecular method (loop-mediated isothermal amplification or LAMP) for detection of spotty liver disease in chickens

$50,000

Jane Quinn Prototype development of an image analysis system for quantitation of offal health for the red meat processing industry

$49,518

Innovation Framework and IP Policy

The development and implementation of an Innovation Framework Charles Sturt University (CSU) forms a key part of the Research Strategy and will enable the University to maximise the potential of its innovation activities in a strategic and achievable manner. The Framework will provide a way for the University to identify and support its research and activities with the greatest potential to deliver outcomes and impact. Innovation is a complex journey that can include many stakeholders and processes and span several years. The challenge for the University is to capture, support, and maximise the outcome of its capability, resources, and collaborations to develop them into opportunities. Innovation goes beyond invention and includes product, business model, social, organisational and process innovation. To be successful these must be measured and judged through many lenses and a culture developed to tolerate a balance of risk and reward. The implementation of the developing Innovation Framework is fundamental to its unique positioning in the Australian research environment, as well as for its regional stature and global rankings.

As part of the Innovation framework, we are drafting a set of high-level principles that will guide the management and utilisation of intellectual property at Charles Sturt University. These principles will be the “public” presence of IP at the University. These principles will need to align with all policy, procedure and guidelines at the University that deal with IP. These principles can guide discussion with internal and external entities around our approach to IP rather than the policy being the document for this purpose. The IP Policy is currently being reviewed with the express aim of making the University easy to deal with.

Cooperative Research Centres

CRC for High Performance Soils The CRC for High Performance Soils lead researcher for Charles Sturt is Associate Professor Catherine Allan. Total research funding awarded to Charles Sturt under the CRC to date has been $2,570,942. There are a number of higher value approved projects which are awaiting contract finalisation.

308


CRC – Cyber Security The CRC-Cyber Security lead researcher for Charles Sturt is Professor Zahid Islam. Total research funding awarded to Charles Sturt to date has been $2.076,794 including for two Postdoctoral appointments for a under theme ‘In Privacy Preserving Data in a Hyper-connected World’. In addition, Charles Sturt has been successful in obtaining Honours and Higher Degree by Research scholarships.

CRC – Food Agility Professor Niall Blair is CSU’s Food Agility key contact and is leading initiatives to increase Charles Sturt participation in the CRC, including a digital twin of the Wagga Farm. Total research funding awarded to Charles Sturt to date has been $3,834,216 including the Cool Soil Initiative.

CRC- Marine Biproducts Charles Sturt is a partner institution in the recently approved CRC for Marine Bioproducts. Professor Leslie Weston is the lead researcher. CSU will contribute directly to Program 3: Australian Marine Bioproducts, with an initial involvement in projects such as a) marine organisms as sources for agrichemical discovery and development as insecticides, fungicides and herbicides for use in crop and pasture protection, b) discovery and development of anti-parasitics for animal health c) development of marine algae for animal feeds and supplements and d) development of fine chemistry for use in a variety of agriculturally related products

CURRENT CRC BID INVOLVEMENT Charles Sturt University is a partner in two other CRC bids recently submitted for round consideration

• One Basin CRC • Smarter Regions CRC

Drought Hub

In 2020, CSU led a consortium to bid for the Southern NSW Drought Hub. The Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment created a competitive process to establish eight Drought Resilience Adoption and Innovation Hubs across Australia. The Hubs will focus on collaboration and will:

• provide networks for researchers, primary producers and community groups to work together to enhance drought resilient practices within their focus region.

• become flagship precincts for agricultural innovation.

In April 2021 CSU was advised that it was successful in its bid which will initially provide $8M to 30 June 2024. In addition, a further $12M is being contributed by the consortium in cash and in kind. The Hub recently received an additional $2.5m in funding to support its activities, broadening its remit beyond drought resilience.

The Drought Hub will work collaboratively to address local drought resilience research and innovation priorities, with the core aims of ensuring research is useful and accessible for primary producers and increasing opportunities to commercialise innovation. It will provide a shop front for farmers to access innovative technologies that enable to be more prepared and drought resilient.

Increasing opportunities for CSU researchers to become involved Drought Hub initiatives will occur from early 2022 when the full program of extension, adoption, commercialisation and monitoring activities are developed.

309


HDR Programs and Students Enrolment

In 2021 there has been a slight increase in domestic candidates, with improved retention rates reflecting the work undertaken from the Smythe review. This work has seen multiple improvements in engagement ie Expectation, Alignment and Communication Plan, enhancing communication and expectations between supervisors and candidates. New channels for student communication have also been developed, for example a Postgraduate research student committee being formed, a Facebook site established and an Interact 2 site created.

The inability of international scholarship recipients to travel to Australia to commence their studies in 2021 has caused a further drop in international HDR numbers which has been balanced by an increase in domestic numbers.

Table 4: HDR enrolments by domesticity Source: SPI and Research Master data

310


Completions

HDR completions have followed a similar trend to commencing enrolments, albeit lagged. The spike in commencing enrolments from 2010 to 2013 flowed through to a peak in completions in 2015 and 2016. Completion levels have since declined, although there was small uptick in 2020. In 2021, there has been 47 completions so far and a potential 20 to complete in the next few months, which would bring the total number similar to 2019 numbers.

Table 5: HDR completions Source: SPI and Research Master data. Note: 2021 completions are as at 11 October 2021

311


Attrition

This section examines the rates of attrition for candidates commencing from 2015 to 2021. It considers the varying attrition rates of candidates based original study mode. For the 849 course enrolments, 441 candidates remain actively enrolled (AS), while there have been 130 graduations (GR), 213 withdrawn cancelled (WC) and 60 withdrawn transfers (WT). The Figures clearly show that the rate of withdrawal is higher for a part time candidate compared to a full-time candidate.

Figure 1: Enrolment status –commenced from 2015 ‐ original study load of full‐time Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis.

Figure 2: Enrolment status –commenced from 2015 ‐ original study load of part‐time Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis.

312


There has been work undertaken through 2021 on the attrition and progress of candidates, which has also seen greater support for the HDR Candidate and their supervisor. A HDR specific survey was developed and implemented for the first time at the end 2020 to gather specific HDR feedback and data on an annual basis. There has been an increase in methods of engagement available to our HDR candidates, with a Post Graduate Research student committee formed, a Facebook site developed and a Interact 2 site created, with regular meetings organized on this site. Just recently, a pilot HDR peer to peer mentoring program has been rolled out within the Faculty of Arts and Education. There is also a review of communications to HDR candidates in their first 12 months, to assist with earlier identification of issues and provide greater ‘just in time’ engagement and information. Work on the Online Admission form has seen the Scholarship and Course application process for candidates merge into one form, improving the student experience. A task within the CRM Phase 3 project has seen the development of the Expression of Interest process being built with an online form and workflow, to improve the experience for both applicants and relevant academic and professional staff. There is a future technical enhancement coming, currently in development and testing, with an Examination Module being built to bring efficiencies to this process and a better student experience. All these activities are to increase support for HDR candidates as they work through their research project, in an endeavour to reduce attrition and increase completion.

Scholarships

The table below provides a summary of the Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) scholarships offered over the last few years.

AGRTP Scholarship Offered 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Domestic FT 25 45 47 32 24

AGRTP - Indigenous 4 4 3 2

Domestic PT (no stipend) 3 18 29 3 4

International 10 8 3 8 3

Table 6: AGRTP Scholarships * Source: Research Master database.

At Charles Sturt we continue to receive a strong number of scholarship applications each year, from both domestic and international candidates. The issue is there is not enough funding to provide scholarships to all the candidates that merit them. There has been a decline in the funding pool in recent years as we come off the spike of HDR completions in 2015 and 2016, that impacts the funding calculation utilised by the Australian Government. This funding is also impacted by research income.

The 2017 to 2021 grant years include transitional arrangements that provides a graduated application of the new funding formula implemented in 2017 where 25 % of a HEPs RTP grant amount is determined by applying the new funding formula, with the remaining 75 per cent based on its prior year’s allocation. The RTP allocation for 2022 will not include these transitionary arrangements; this is likely to see the RTP allocation for 2022 drop by $1.2m.

Supervision

In 2020 a review of supervision level was undertaken and a report provided to the University Research Council. This report identified:

• there are currently 496 active Higher Degree by Research candidates at Charles Sturt University. There are currently 521 people playing a supervisory role, including adjuncts, for these candidates (data from Research Master as at 16 August 2021 and following the session 2 census date).

313


• Just under 75 % of active supervisors have 1 to 2 candidates under their supervision. One supervisor has 12 candidates under their supervision. These figures exclude candidates under examination or on sessional leave.

The breakdown of these principal supervisory loads by academic level is below.

Table 7: Candidates per HDR supervisor (principal supervision only) and academic level Source: Graduate Studies Team calculations based on Research Master and RPI data. Note: Excludes candidates on sessional leave and under examination. Data was unavailable on academic level for 7 principal supervisors

Based on current Research Productivity data there are a number of observations which are germane to supervisory capacity at the University.

• There are 475 staff with a research work function with an academic appointment (level A-E) staff.

• 230 are engaged in some form of HDR supervision (48%) and 131 are engaged in principal supervision (27.5%)

• Of the remaining 245 academic staff who are not currently engaged in HDR supervision only 78 of these staff are currently appointed to the register of supervisors (31.8%), and only 31 would be eligible to undertake principal supervision.

It is interesting to note that there are 90 adjunct staff members with a research work function undertaking supervision of HDR candidates, with 30 of these engaged in principal supervision. However, it is important to also note that a large number of these adjunct staff are employees of the School of Theology, the Centre for Customs and Excise Studies or the Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation.

Communication plans and individual development plans have been developed to support supervisors in their discussions with candidates and to monitor candidates’ progress and future direction. The latter, from the start of 2020, is a requirement of probation under HDR policy. A more structured professional development program for supervisors has also been developed to ensure supervisors have the required skills to manage candidates. With these modules being provided several times in a year and communications with supervisors implemented, who have yet to complete these modules to encourage them to do so.

314


Research Funding HERDC Income

The Higher Education Research Data Collection (HERDC) comprises of research income data submitted by universities to the Australian Government annually. The certified and audited submission is due 30 June for the previous calendar year. The income data is to be provided against the four categories:

• Category 1: Australian competitive grant R&D income • Category 2: Other public sector R&D income • Category 3: Industry and other R&D income • Category 4: CRC R&D income

There are detailed specifications for what may and may not be included in each category.

This income data, together with the Higher Education Student data Collection, is used to determine the annual allocations of RTP and RSP.

Category 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Category 1 - Competitive 4,545 6,279 5,875 3,990 3,894

Category 2 – Other Public Sector 3,383 4,361 6,529 5,569 5,346

Category 3 – Industry and Other 3,844 2,559 2,962 1,906 1,006

Category 4 - CRCs 12 34 118 128 948

Total 11,783 13,234 15,484 11,593 11,194

% of sector income 0.3113 0.3363 0.3713 0.2529 n/a

Table 8: HERDC Income 2016 – 2020 $’000 HERDC income grew slowly 2016 to 2018, then declined in 2019 and 2020. The national 2020 data will not become available until December 2021 in order to make comparisons of our performance against the sector. At the time of writing, the current estimate of HERDC income for 2021 is $15.1M

Research Block Grants: RTP and RSP

Research block grants provide funding for research and research training to eligible Australian Higher education providers. They are allocated on an annual basis, using a program specific formulae and awarded on the relative performance of each higher education provider in attracting research income and supporting students to complete HDRs.

Table 9: RBG Grants 2017 – 2021

RSP RTP Total 2021 3,197,140 5,998,377 12,258,019 1. 2020 3,305,904 6,278,059 9,583,963 2019 3,418,368 6,356,780 9,775,148 2018 3,598,282 6,378,816 9,977,098 2017 3,723,693 6,168,180 9,891,873

1. In 2021, the Commonwealth Government provided additional funding support to alleviate the immediate financial pressures on universities as a consequence of Covid-19. An additional $3,062,502 was provided to CSU.

315


Research Infrastructure Levy

The Vice Chancellor’s Leadership Team approved the introduction of a Research Infrastructure Levy in September 2020. The purpose of the Levy is to cover the indirect costs associated with research.

The income from the Levy will be split to cover

• University wide infrastructure costs • Budget centre (Institute/Faculty/School) research infrastructure and support • Laboratory equipment and costs

As the Levy cannot be applied retrospectively, only new funding applications submitted in 2021 have been required to apply the Levy. As a result, income from the Levy is currently low, but over time, will grow to be a substantive source of funds to support research activity.

Internal Funding

In addition to the RSP and RTP funding mentioned above, the University provides additional funds for the following research purposes in 2020 and 2021:

Purpose

$ ‘000

2020

2021

University Research Centres 3,200 3,135

Cash contribution to Drought Hub - 150

(Faculty) Research Investment Fund 2,000 1,200

Global Digital Farm - 525

COVID 19 Grants 210 -

Faculty Liaison positions & Publishing Editor 300 300

ECR Grants - 340

CRC contributions 500 600

Sturt Scheme - 743

Data Science Research Unit (BJBS) - 220

HDR scholarships (outside RTP eligibility) 650 500

Chairs of Compliance Committees (% of salary) - 310

Total 6,860 8,023

Senior Research Fellows and Research Fellows ** ** from strategic investments specific purpose fund

1,650 107

Table 10: Internal Research Budget 2020/2021 A number of new competitive funding schemes have been initiated over the past two years including Covid 19 Grants, ECR Scheme and the Sturt Scheme. The latter two are to be part of the ongoing landscape to build research capability for staff, and for disciplines not clearly supported by the new research institutes.

316


Appendix 1

317

Item 12: 2020-2021 FOAE Research Report to University Research Committee

PURPOSE

To report to the University Research Committee on the 2020-2021 Faculty Research Report that includes staffing profiles for research, research outputs, external grant income, key research initiatives, higher degree by research (HDR) and strategic accomplishments from the many staff with research functionality across the Faculty.

RECOMMENDATION


1. Note the 2020-2021 Annual Faculty Research report for the Faculty of Arts and Education.

KEY ISSUES

1. Research Active and Doctoral Qualification Status

A total of 39 core FOAE staff with a research function are listed as being research inactive from 2018-2020 according to the RPI Category A Research Active threshold of 40 points. Strategies will need to be put into place to ensure that these research inactive staff are on track to help FOAE generate quality research outputs to meet required quality research performance thresholds. Moreover, almost a quarter of FOAE teaching/research staff with a research function do not have a doctoral qualification.

2. HDR Supervision Capacity

Combined with the 39 FOAE staff with a research function that are under the Research Active threshold, there are 21 FOAE staff listed as being Principal Supervisor of >5 HDR candidates. This represents a HDR supervision capacity strain on the Faculty.

3. FOAE Adjunct Staff

The report demonstrates that there are large numbers of adjunct staff (N=117) that could be drawn upon for research expertise and contributions (ensuring contributions meet quality criterions and expectations). Almost half of the adjunct staff are either research active or have doctoral qualifications.

4. HDR Enrolments

New funding models will be required to be able to promote any HDR growth with the amount of HDR scholarship places on the decline. There is also likely to be a growing demand for HDR places in the Faculty from the launch of the new FOAE HDR pathways in 2021. The research report showcases how FOAE HDR candidates favour a ‘distance mode’ Doctor of Philosophy degree, despite there being four other HDR qualifications on offer.

5. Meeting World Standard for Research in Key Teaching Areas

With FOAE’s major teaching areas falling outside the University Strategy 2030 discipline priorities (Agriculture-Water-Environment, Data & Cybersecurity, Rural Health), the moderate University 3-Year Sturt Scheme investments will be crucial towards FOAE’s capabilities in meeting and exceeding world standard research performance in teaching areas such as Education, Social Work, Sociology, Librarianship, Information Systems, Applied Ethics and Philosophy. These moderate investments will also be vital in supporting trajectories towards obtaining significant external funding to partially support these Sturt Scheme research groups in years 2 and 3, and beyond.


318

6. Quality Journal Publications

Although the Faculty’s proportion of publication in high quartile journal articles is relatively stable with positive trends, further strategies are required to fine-tune specific FOAE discipline areas towards higher ranked/quartile and listed refereed journal publications.

For discussion:

This report was considered at Faculty of Arts and Education Faculty Board on 12th October 2021. Discussion centred on the importance of the University undertaking a deeper dive into the Adjunct staffing profiles and the many, various research contributions that are made (alongside Adjunct staff career positioning). There was also discussion about the importance of further investigating the types of specific research outputs that staff generate, which are excluded from the Research Productivity Index (RPI). It was suggested that a breakdown of these outputs could further guide planning strategies for staff for research dissemination purposes. Additionally, the Faculty Board discussed the importance of staff being able to access listings of Q1/Q2 journals aligned with priority FoR codes. The Report was endorsed for submission for consideration by the University Research Committee.

COMPLIANCE

Legislative Compliance This report identifies activities that are required to comply with University requirements under the Higher Education Standards Framework threshold standards for Part 4. Research and Research Training.

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with The Research Policy; and The Higher Degree by Research Policy

RISK ASSESSMENT


Research Development, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Charles Sturt University has a High Appetite and willingness to take risks in high impact research and innovation activities that will support the University’s standing in research excellence, develop our strengths in key disciplines, foster significant third-party partnerships that will contribute value to the University industry and the community and contribute to research and innovation leadership at the University.

Charles Sturt University has a Low Appetite and willingness to take risks in the strategic direction and management of research and innovation activities which might otherwise produce diffuse or limited outcomes in terms of impact, excellence and value to the University or are unaligned to key research disciplines.


The report of research activities sits within the University’s current risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

A. 2020-2021 FOAE Research Report

Prepared by: Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman, Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Arts and Education

Cleared by: Professor John McDonald, Executive Dean, Faculty of Arts and Education

319





Faculty of Arts and Education Charles Sturt University

2020-2021 FOAE Research Report

320

Faculty of Arts and Education | 2020 FOAE Research Report Page 2 of 52

Contents

1. Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Beyond 2021 Initiatives ............................................................................................................................ 3 1.2 FOAE Staff Profile .................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 FOAE Adjunct Staff Profile ....................................................................................................................... 7 1.4 FOAE Staff Roles with Doctoral Qualifications ........................................................................................ 7

2. Research Outputs ...................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Research Outputs by Type .................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Research Outputs by Type According to School ................................................................................... 11 2.3 Research Outputs by Field of Research Code ...................................................................................... 14 2.4 Quality of the refereed journal article outputs ........................................................................................ 16 2.5 Research Productivity Index (RPI) Category A Points by School .......................................................... 19

3. Research Funding Applications and HERDC-Reportable Income ........................................................ 21 3.1 Successful External Research Grants ................................................................................................... 21 3.2 HERDC Reportable Income ................................................................................................................... 21

4. Faculty Committees, Initiatives and Research Supports ...................................................................... 26 4.1 Research and Graduate Studies Management Committee ................................................................... 26 4.2 Research Support Initiatives .................................................................................................................. 26 4.3 FOAE Field of Education/Field of Research Alignments ....................................................................... 27 4.4 Sturt Scheme Investments ..................................................................................................................... 28 4.5 DocFest 2021 and 3MT Success ........................................................................................................... 28 4.6 HDR Support Schemes .......................................................................................................................... 28

5. Higher Degrees by Research .................................................................................................................... 29 5.1 HDR Scholarships .................................................................................................................................. 29 5.2 FOAE HDR Candidates in 2020 ............................................................................................................. 30 5.3 Attrition and Completion ......................................................................................................................... 32 5.4 HDR Supervision Allocations ................................................................................................................. 32

6. Research Highlights and Accomplishments .......................................................................................... 36 6.1 Research Seminars Across the Faculty ................................................................................................. 36 6.2 Launch of the Faculty's HDR pathways ................................................................................................. 36 6.3 Faculty Research Engagements (mid 2020-2021) ................................................................................ 37

7. Summary..................................................................................................................................................... 43

Appendix 1. FOAE Quartile 1 (Q1) Refereed Journal Articles in 2020 ........................................................ 44

Appendix 2. FOAE Partnerships for Research .............................................................................................. 48

321


2020-2021 FOAE Research Report

1. Overview This report provides an overview of the Faculty’s research activities and accomplishments for 2020 to date, focusing on the 2020 calendar year in particular. The data comes from a variety of sources, including the CRO database, banner, Research Master, the Research Outputs team, the Research Productivity Index (RPI), records kept by the Faculty Office, and other sources across the university. The report has been compiled principally by the Faculty’s Associate Dean (Research) A/Prof. Brendon Hyndman and Research Officer Dr Sarah Redshaw. Information has also been provided by representatives on the Faculty’s Research and Graduate Studies Management Committee. As can be seen in Figure 1.1 below, the areas of research in FOAE are quite diverse and will be expanded upon in the sections relating to the staffing profile for research (section 1), research outputs (section 2), external grant income (section 3), key research initiatives (section 4), higher degree by research (section 5) and strategic accomplishments from the many staff with research functionality within the Faculty (section 6).

Figure 1.1. FOAE’s Diverse Research Areas

1.1 Beyond 2021 Research Initiatives

In 2020, a large collective of the Faculty’s leading researchers engaged in a range of project initiatives in response to the Faculty of Arts and Education Beyond 2021 strategic plan. The Beyond 2021 Research Project was developed to address the following objectives:

• Develop new and emerging research groups and grow HDR cohorts aligned with the University research strategy and built upon a collaborative and programmatic approach.

• Build research leadership among early and mid-career academics.

As a result of the strategic work from the Beyond 2021 Research Group, a number of outcomes were established:

1. A Faculty-wide mentoring scheme/listing with mentors specifying their research expertise and availability to support researchers in strategic areas.

322


2. A comprehensive 18-month plan for growing the Faculty’s HDR load with plans established relatingto i- maximising the Faculty’s HDR pathways, ii- strategies to enhance the PhD by Prior Publicationpathway and iii- partnering with industry.

3. Continued development of the Faculty’s research groupings to plan and implement collaborative,programmatic approaches to research. There are now 10 established research groups in the Facultyof Arts and Education, that include research leaders with strong research performance and distinctplans to develop approaches for high quality research outputs and to apply for external grantfunding. Newly formed research groups since the middle of 2020 include the Wellbeing and MentalHealth research group and the Social Equality, Intersectionality and Inclusion research group.

4. A Faculty research narrative based on the emergent research groupings and the visions of thevarious disciplines of the Faculty. An example of this strategic project work included theestablishment of the Faculty of Arts and Education Research Narrative can be seen below:

The Faculty conducts high-quality, programmatic research, producing scholarship that is internationally

recognised and regionally impactful. Our research embodies the notion of Yindyamarra Winhanganha,

fostering the wisdom of knowing how to live well in our world, a world worth living in. Further, it aims to be

transformative—environmentally, socially, politically, educationally, economically, and culturally. It challenges

assumptions, beliefs, and values underlying and influencing a wide range of professional and social settings.

Social transformation requires an evidence base informed by multi-dimensional and integrated research that

advances individual disciplines, and prioritises collaborative approaches between and across

disciplines. Social justice and sustainability are key research goals—for people, place, and practice—with

existing strengths honoured through establishing innovative pathways to the resolution of age-old dilemmas,

in partnership with stakeholders across social, cultural and institutional domains.

We regard First Nations knowledge sovereignty and research as core to each dimension of social life,

decolonising the positioning of First Nations peoples inside dominant discourses, but also providing a source

for understanding the impact of historical trajectories for all the Faculty’s disciplines. This goal is a deliberate

departure from taken-for-granted practices in research, education, communication industries, environment,

and information transmission. Our holistic framework cultivates capacity to understand new world orders

where we can divest ourselves of histories that no longer serve the contemporary world, envisioning

leadership toward this end.

An understanding and exploration of the multicultural and multifaith nature of Australian society is central to

the researching of it. Researchers from across the Faculty’s various disciplines adopt critical approaches that

value community and its organisations as co-creators and recipients of knowledge production, and full

research partners. Our research centres on people and culture, on individuals and communities, the local

and the global. It recognises the agency and contribution of the smallest dimensions of social life to the

largest of global systems.

Our fields of research are diverse, requiring a range of theoretically and methodologically approaches. They

traverse education, religion and Christian theology, information provision and use, communication and

representation, social work and human services, and creative practice and the arts. They address the

spiritual, social and historical aspects of the human condition. Investigating the policies, practices and

323


processes of professional and community structures, we seek out contemporary understandings of, and

creative solutions to, complex societal problems, particularly those related to themes such as diversity,

rurality, vulnerability and community wellbeing.

The Faculty’s research has a strong commitment to forging robust international, national and community

alliances and partnerships. Underpinned by values that uphold notions of social equity and justice,

citizenship, democracy, truth, and human dignity and rights, our research aims to make a difference

to how we live.

1.2 FOAE Staff Profile

As the university continues to align with the new Strategic Research Plan, the profile of staff within FOAE will be a major consideration. In 2020, there were 99 academic staff listed with a research and/or teaching and research function within the Faculty’s newly formed core schools (Education; Information & Communication Studies; Social Work and Arts; and Indigenous Australian Studies; Table 1.1). In addition to the academic roles with a research function, there are 14 teaching/technical staff, 11 teaching-only staff and 16 staff with ‘other roles’ that include Faculty executive leadership, Course Director-only staff and workplace learning or project roles. All schools have over half of the staff (excluding adjuncts) listed as research active (Table 1.2), yet there is lots of scope to improve this position. A number of the staff that are not listed as research active across the Faculty have recently completed their doctoral qualifications, and are yet to register RPI-aligned publications to reach this research active threshold.

When including adjunct staff with a research function or focus (including the N=37 School of Theology and N=8 Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation- CISAC; Table 1.3), the amount of staff that can contribute to the Faculty’s research performance expands to N=219. The amount of staff who are listed as Research Active or Research Inactive is according to the Charles Sturt Research Productivity Index (RPI) that requires a minimum of 40 points over the reporting period of 2018-2020. Depending on the inclusion of adjunct staff, the proportions of research-active staff can have a lot of variance. For instance, the School of Education proportion of research active staff increases by +8% when including adjunct staff, whereas the School of Information and Communication Studies proportion drops by -19%.

Table 1.1. Research Active Status for FoAE staff with a research function (2018-2020).

Research Active Status

Academic Staff with Research Function (Research only and Teaching/Research)

Executive Staff

Total

Research Active 60 4 64

Not Research Active 39 1 40

Total 99 5 104 Source: Office of Research Services, Research Productivity Index and Research Outputs Team analysis. *Teaching/technical focused staff (2/25 are research active) or adjunct staff are not included.

324


Table 1.2. Research Active Status for FoAE staff with a research function (2018-2020) by school.

School % Research Active Research Active Status Total

Faculty of Arts and Education Office

Not Research Active 0

Research Active 4 100

School of Education Not Research Active 17


School of Indigenous Australian Studies



School of Information and Communication Studies



School of Social Work and Arts


Research Active 27 69 Total 103

Source: Office of Research Services, Research Productivity Index and Research Outputs Team analysis. * Table does not include Faculty adjunct staff or partner schools. The table also does not take into account any staffing updates as a result of Organisational Review 2 which occurred in September 2021.

Table 1.3. Research Active Status for FoAE staff (including all ‘Adjunct staff and partner schools’) with a research function (2018-2020) by school.

School Research Active % Research Status Total Active

Centre for Islamic Studies Not Research Active 1

and Civilisation Research Active 7 88

Faculty of Arts and Not Research Active 0

Education Office Research Active 4 100



School of Indigenous Not Research Active 2

Australian Studies Research Active 2 50

School of Information and Not Research Active 23

Communication Studies Research Active 16 41




School of Theology Not Research Active 23


325


1.3 FOAE Adjunct Staff Profile

There are a total of 117 FoAE Adjunct Staff members across the Faculty (Table 1.4), of which 44% are research active. Low proportions of adjunct staff members that are research active were evident in the School of Social Work and Arts and the School of Information and Communication Studies. Given that almost half of all FoAE adjuncts are research active, this represents a strong pool of potential research support to the Faculty for aspects such as higher degree by research supervision in the phases ahead. Table 1.4. Research Active Status for FoAE Adjunct-Only with a research function (2018-2020) by school.

School % Research Active Research Active Status Total

Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation



Faculty of Arts and Education Office






Not Research Active N/A

Research Active







School of Theology Not Research Active 22


Overall FOAE Adjunct Staff

Not Research Active

65

Research Active 52 44 Total 117

Source: Office of Research Services, Research Productivity Index and Research Outputs Team analysis.

1.4 FOAE Staff Roles with Doctoral Qualifications

A total of 22% of Academic staff with a combined teaching research function did not possess a Doctoral degree (Table 1.5), which was slightly under the 25% proportion for the few research-only staff members. The research-focused staff without doctoral qualifications were identified as PhD candidates in supportive research roles on projects. As expected, a 9% proportion of staff members in teaching-only positions had a doctoral degree. A Level C and Level A staff member that were doctoral qualified were identified as being engaged in these non-research positions (teaching or teaching/professional).

326


The amount of academic staff that do not have a doctoral qualification that have a research function are evenly dispersed across the Faculty’s major schools. For example, in the School of Education (2 Associate Lecturers & 5 Lecturers), School of Information and Communication Studies (5 Lecturers & 1 Senior Lecturer) and School of Social Work and Arts (9 Lecturers). All four academic staff in the School of Indigenous Australian Studies have Doctoral degrees. In the Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation (CISAC), six out of the eight staff have doctoral degrees. A range of Adjunct staff in the School of Education and School of Information and Communications Studies do not have doctoral degrees. In relation to the adjunct roles/levels across the Faculty (Table 1.6), there were 24/54 (44%) of Adjunct Staff listed with a research focus/function that do not have a doctoral qualification with 14/30 Adjunct Lecturers/Senior Lecturers and 16/24 Adjunct Research Associates/Fellows having a doctoral qualification. Although there were 10 Adjunct Associate Professors/Professors that were listed that could be drawn upon for research expertise and contributions. Table 1.5. FOAE Academic Staff by Work Function and Doctoral Degree Qualification.

Academic Role- Level

Doctoral Degree

No Doctoral Degree

% No Doctoral Degree

Total Staff

Research Focused 1 3 25 4

Academic Level B

3

Academic Level D 1

Teaching and Research

76 22 22 98

Academic Level A 1 2

Academic Level B 29 18

Academic Level C 29 1

Academic Level D 9 1

Academic Level E 5 N/A

Executive 3 N/A

Teaching or Teaching/Technical (All)

2 23 9 25

Other (e.g. Executive; Course Directors)

4 12 33 16

Source: Office of Research Services, Research Productivity Index and Research Outputs Team analysis.

327


Table 1.6. FOAE Adjunct Staff by Work Function and Doctoral Degree Qualification.

Adjunct Description

Research Focused

Research & Teaching Focused

Total Doctoral

Degree No Doctoral

Degree Doctoral Degree

No Doctoral Degree

Adjunct Professor

3

--

2

--

5

Adjunct Associate Professor

--

--

5

--

5

Adjunct Lecturer/ Senior Lecturer

9

1

5

15

30

Adjunct Research Associate/ Fellow/ Senior Fellow

16

7

--

1

24

Total 28 8 12 16 64 Source: Office of Research Services, Research Productivity Index and Research Outputs Team analysis.

328


Book

Book Chapter

Conference Paper

Journal Articles

Report

Non-textual Creative Works

2. Research Outputs 2.1 Research Outputs by Type

Table and Figure 2.1 show the types of outputs that were produced by researchers in the Faculty in 2020. A total of 322 outputs were counted as eligible for reporting purposes, with a majority of these being journal articles. There were also large numbers of other kinds of output, including book chapters, conference papers and creative works. Table 2.2 shows how the amount of conference papers dropped in 2020 in comparison to previous years, which could relate to the many cancellations or postponements of conferences as a result of the pandemic.

Table 2.1. 2020 Research Outputs by Type.

Output type N %

Journal articles 212 65.8

Book chapters 72 22.4

Conference papers 11 3.4

Non-textual creative works 9 2.8

Textual creative works 3 0.9

Commissioned reports 6 1.9

Books 9 2.8

Curation of exhibition/event/festival N/A N/A

Total 322 100.0

Figure 2.1: 2020 research outputs by proportion.

329


Table 2.2. 2020 Research Outputs Compared to Previous Years.

Publication Type 2017 2018 2019 2020 Grand Total

Book 19 17 5 9 49

Book Chapter 97 88 77 72 337

Conference Paper 31 33 32 11 107

Journal Articles 197 201 216 212 837

Non-textual Creative Works 15 5 4 9 33

Report 14 13 16 6 49

Textual Creative Works 8 7 8 3 26

Textual Creative Works - Poetry 4 4

Grand Total 385 364 358 322 1443

2.2 Research Outputs by Type According to School

When examining the school research output types across the Faculty’s schools from 2018-2020 (Table 2.3- 2.8), there were higher proportions of research outputs that were excluded by the Research Productivity Index (RPI) criterions of quality and creation of knowledge. The included book chapter outputs were slightly lower in the School of Information and Communication Studies (16/139; 11.5%) in comparison to the School of Education (45/244; 18.4%), the School of Social Work and Arts (46/174; 26.4%) and School of Theology (49/103; 47.6%). In contrast, the School of Information and Communications Studies staff produced a high proportion of included refereed journal articles in the overall outputs (92/139; 66.2%) in comparison to the School of Social Work and Arts (49.4%) and Theology (42.7%). A similarly high proportion of included journal article outputs were reported for the School of Education (68.9%).

Table 2.3. School of Education 2018-2020 Research Outputs According to Type.

Publication Type Include Exclude Still Being Verified

Awaiting evidence

Grand Total

Book Chapters 45 41 86

Books 6 20 26

Commissioned Reports

9 3 12

Conference Papers 10 3 13

Creative Works 6 1 1 8

Journal Articles 168 23 191

Other Conferences 130 5 135

Specialist Publications

3 3

Grand Total 244 224 5 1 474 Source: Research Productivity Index.

330


Table 2.4. School of Indigenous Australian Studies 2018-2020 Research Outputs According to Type.

Publication Type Included Excluded Grand Total

Book Chapters 3 5 8

Creative Works 1 1


Other Conferences 2 2

Grand Total 12 12 24 Source: Research Productivity Index.

Table 2.5. School of Information and Communications Studies 2018-2020 Research Outputs According to Type.

Publication Type Include Exclude Still Being Verified

Awaiting evidence Pending Grand

Total

Book Chapters 6 2 8

Books 3 3

Commissioned Reports 5 1 6


Creative Works 8 2 3 2 15


Other Conferences 40 8 48

Specialist Publications 1 1

Other 3 3

Grand Total 139 59 10 3 2 213 Source: Research Productivity Index.

331


Table 2.6. School of Social Work and Arts 2018-2020 Research Outputs According to Type.

Publication Type Include Exclude Awaiting evidence Pending Full text

required Grand Total

Book Chapters 46 17 1 64

Books 7 7 14

Commissioned Reports

3 3


Creative Works 25 15 2 1 43




Other 7 7


Table 2.7. School of Theology 2018-2020 Research Outputs According to Type.

Publication Type Included Excluded Still Being Verified

Awaiting evidence

Full text required

Grand Total

Book Chapters 49 23 1 73

Books 6 8 14

Commissioned Reports 3 3

Creative Works 1 1 2

Journal Articles 44 14 7 1 66




332


Table 2.8. Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation 2018-2020 Research Outputs According to Type.

Publication Type Included Excluded Grand Total

Book Chapters 15 2 17 Books 2 3 5

Commissioned Reports 1 1

Journal Articles 20 20


Other 1 1

Grand Total 38 15 53 Source: Research Productivity Index.

2.3 Research Outputs According to Field of Research Code

Although a number of the research outputs had not been recoded to the new 2020 FoR codes by mid- August (N=65), the data in Table 2.9 demonstrates how the remaining research outputs have been reported against the new FoR codes. The majority of these FoR codes are aligned with the Faculty’s major teaching areas, although there were some cross-disciplinary FoR codes identified in areas such as Health Sciences (FoR 42; N=13 outputs) and Psychology (FoR 52; N=7 outputs). Figure 2.2 shows the FoR reporting associated with FoAE outputs over the broader period between 2017- 2020. Although a number of outputs were still to be coded by the time of this report, trends suggest that research outputs had dropped for the FoR code 44- Human Society and increased for the FoR code 46- Information and Computing Sciences. Figure 2.3 showcases the proportion of Quartile 1 (Q1) journals over the 2017-2020 period, which demonstrates that there were strong increases in Q1 publications from 2019 to 2020 in the FoR codes 45 (Indigenous Studies), 46 (Information and Computing Sciences via 4610) and 50 (Philosophy and Religious Studies).

Table 2.9. 2020 Research outputs by Field of Research.

Field of Research 2020

36 - CREATIVE ARTS AND WRITING 13

39 - EDUCATION 82

3901 - Curriculum and pedagogy 27

3903 - Education systems 41

3904 - Specialist studies in education 10

42 - HEALTH SCIENCES 13

4201 - Allied health and rehabilitation science 12

44 - HUMAN SOCIETY 14

45 - INDIGENOUS STUDIES 8

46 - INFORMATION AND COMPUTING SCIENCES 35

4610 - Library and information studies 35

47 - LANGUAGE, COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE 20 4701 - Communication and media studies 6

333


Total Journal Articles 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

0

2017 2018 2019 2020

4702 - Cultural studies 9

4705 - Literary studies 5

50 - PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES 53

5001 - Applied ethics 4

5002 - History and philosophy of specific fields 2

5003 - Philosophy 6

5004 - Religious studies 40

52 - PSYCHOLOGY 7

Had not been Coded to 2020 FoR Codes (17/08/2021) 65

Grand Total 322

Figure 2.2: Total journal articles according to Field of Research Codes (2017-2020).

36 -

CR

EATI

VE A

RTS

AN

D

WR

ITIN

G

39 -

EDU

CAT

ION

44 -

HU

MAN

SO

CIE

TY

45 -

IND

IGEN

OU

S ST

UD

IES

46 -

INFO

RM

ATIO

N A

ND

C

OM

PUTI

NG

SC

IEN

CES

47 -

LAN

GU

AGE,

C

OM

MU

NIC

ATIO

N A

ND

C

ULT

UR

E

50 -

PHIL

OSO

PHY

AND

R

ELIG

IOU

S ST

UD

IES

334


% Q1 Journal Articles by FoR Code 2017-2020

25 20 15 10

5 0

2017 2018 2019 2020

Journal Articles by journal rank 2017-2020

2020

2019

2018

2017

0 50 100 150 200 250

Not on Charles Sturt Journal List Q1 Q2 Q3/4 Unranked

Figure 2.3: Proportion (%) of Quartile 1 (Q1) journal articles by FoR Codes (2017-2020).

2.4 Quality of the refereed journal article outputs

During 2020, there were 84 refereed journal articles published with a Q1 ranking (39.6% of journal article outputs) and 68 with a Q2 ranking (32.1%) from a total of 212 (see Appendix 1 for sample). As seen in Figure 2.4, the quantity of publications that are not on the Charles Sturt University journal listing has remained relatively stable between 2017-2020. Encouragingly, the number of journal article contributions that were listed as being ‘unranked’ had dropped in 2020 from previous years of research reporting.

When examining the Quartile of journal publications across the Faculty schools (Table 2.10), the proportion of Q1 journal outputs were highest for School of Information and Communications Studies (48%), followed by School of Education (43%). School of Theology had the lowest proportions of Q1-ranked journal publications, yet had the highest proportion of respectable Q2-ranked journal article outputs (57%).

23 84 68 20 17

13 71 58 45 29

23 93 51 11 23

25 74 52 26 20

Figure 2.4: Journal articles by SJR quartile rank (2017-2020).

36 -

CR

EATI

VE

ARTS

AN

D

WR

ITIN

G

39 -

EDU

CAT

ION

44 -

HU

MAN

SO

CIE

TY

45 -

IND

IGEN

OU

S ST

UD

IES

46 -

IN

FOR

MAT

ION

AN

D

CO

MPU

TIN

G

SCIE

NC

ES

47 -

LAN

GU

AGE,

C

OM

MU

NIC

ATIO

N

AN

D C

ULT

UR

E

50 -

PHIL

OSO

PHY

AND

REL

IGIO

US

STU

DIE

S

335


Table 2.10. 2020 Refereed journal article proportions of quality by school.

Journal article ranking and School

Not on Charles Sturt Journal List

Q1 Q2 Q3/4 Unranked Grand Total


1 (11%) 3(33%) 1(11%) 4(44%) 9

Faculty Office, Arts & Education

4(80%) 1(20%) 5

School of Education 9(10%) 38(43%) 32(36%) 5(6%) 4(5%) 88


N/A


5(13%) 19(48%) 2(5%) 6(15%) 8(20%) 40


5(10%) 16(33%) 21(43%) 4(8%) 3(6%) 49

School of Theology 3(14%) 4(19%) 12(57%) 1(5%) 1(5%) 21

Grand Total 23 84 68 20 17 212

The following Table 2.11 showcases the apportioned publication counts according to both quality of the journal rankings and the new 2020 Fields of Research (#’s higher than 2020 count, as more than one staff member can report against the FoRs). The table provides a deeper dive into the quality of research across some of FOAE’s key teaching areas. The table shows similar journal output trends to the school-based breakdown. There were some higher proportions of lower quartile (Q3/Q4) apportioned counts in the 5004 Religious studies FoR code (17.3). Despite high quality journal outputs, the 3903-Education Systems (N=11.6) and 4610 Library and Information Systems FoR codes (N=10.7) also had some elevated Q3/4 apportioned counts. Although creative arts researchers often publish via non-traditional works, the journals that were published in for the 2-digit FoR code 36- Creative Arts and Writing had no Q1 or Q2 alignment in 2020. Table 2.11. Apportioned 2020 Publication Count and Journal Rank According to Field of Research.

3601 - Art history, theory and criticism 1.5 1 1 3.5

3602 - Creative and professional writing 2 2

3604 - Performing arts 1.5 1.33 3 5.83

3605 - Screen and digital media 1 0.33 2.8 4.13

3606 - Visual arts 0.3 0.3

3699 - Other creative arts and writing 0.5 0.5

Apportioned Publication Count CSU Journal Rank

Field of Research

Not on CSU

Journal List

Q1

Q2

Q3/4

Unranked

Grand Total

36 - CREATIVE ARTS AND WRITING 6.8 2.66 6.8 16.26

336


39 - EDUCATION

12.5

63.6

50.5 5

19.0 5

14

159.7

3901 - Curriculum and pedagogy 3.2 22.5 9.2 4 8.05 46.95

3902 - Education policy, sociology and philosophy

1.5

1

1

3.5

3903 - Education systems

6.73

27.8

32.8

11.5 5

4.7

83.58

3904 - Specialist studies in education 2.07 11.8 7.55 2.5 0.5 24.42

3999 - Other Education 0.5 0.75 1.25

44 - HUMAN SOCIETY 3 13 22.3 3.95 8 50.25

4402 - Criminology 0.5 0.25 0.75

4403 - Demography 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5

4405 - Gender studies 0.5 1.3 2.13 3.93

4406 - Human geography 1 0.7 1.4 1.4 4.5

4407 - Policy and administration 0.5 0.5

4408 - Political science 1 2.5 1 0.6 5.1

4409 - Social work

1

4.5

13.8 3

5

24.33

4410 - Sociology 2.2 3.14 1.7 0.6 7.64

4499 - Other human society 1 1

45 - INDIGENOUS STUDIES 1.9 5.9 0.9 1.57 0.5 10.77

4501 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, language and history

1.3

3.5

0.73

0.3

5.83

4502 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education

0.7

0.9

1.6

4504 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and wellbeing

0.5

0.5

4506 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander sciences

0.2

0.34

0.54

4513 - Pacific Peoples culture, language and history

1.5

0.2

1.7

4517 - Pacific Peoples sciences 0.6 0.6

46 - INFORMATION AND COMPUTING SCIENCES

7.6

35.3

13.4

10.7

10.67

77.67

4605 - Data management and data science

1

1.5

0.34

2.84

4609 - Information systems 1 1

4610 - Library and information studies 7.6 34.3 10.9 10.7 10.33 73.83

47 - LANGUAGE, COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE

4.65

11.0 4

5.5

2.2

4.13

27.52

4701 - Communication and media studies

4.04

3

0.55

1.73

9.32

337


4702 - Cultural studies 1.6 1.8 1.5 2.4 7.3

4703 - Language studies 0.5 1.2 1.7

4704 - Linguistics 1 1

4705 - Literary studies 1.55 1 1.65 4.2

4799 - Other language, communication and culture

1

3

4

50 - PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES

7.45

23.1

31.2

17.2 9

1.25

80.29

5001 - Applied ethics 5.5 2.2 7.7

5002 - History and philosophy of specific fields

2.4

2.4

5003 - Philosophy 1.25 5.1 5.9 12.25

5004 - Religious studies

6.2

10.1

23.1

17.2 9

1.25

57.94

No 2020 Code Loaded Yet 17/08/2021 6 27 29 7 11 80

Grand Total 60 227 170 70 61 588 Source: Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies. *Articles with more than one FOAE author can be counted towards the FoR codes, elevating the counts more than the N=212 listed in the previous sections.

2.5 Research Productivity Index (RPI) Category A Points

Although the Category A RPI points are primarily used to ascertain whether a Charles Sturt staff member is research active (minimum 40 points between 2018-2020) for HDR supervision purposes, the RPI data provides useful insights into research performance.

The following provides a breakdown of the Category A RPI points per school and staff member over the period of 2018-2020 according to eligible publications, creative works, and grants (HERDC eligible income). The School of Education had the highest average Category A RPI points with 106.21 points per staff member, followed by CISAC and the other two major FOAE schools (Social Work & Arts; Information and Communication Studies) ~85 points. The School of Education also had six of the top 10 individual Category A RPI points tallies from 2018-2020, followed by the School of Information and Communication Studies with three researchers in the top 10 Category A RPI points tallies and the Faculty Office had one researcher in the top 10. Each of the top 10 individual Category A RPI tallies from 2018-2020 were above 200 RPI points (just over double the average listed in the Table below).

338


Table 2.12. RPI Category A Points by School Total and Average Per Staff Member from 2018-2020.

School (including # staff members with research function captured)*

Total Category A RPI Points

Highest Individual

Category A RPI Score

Average Category A RPI Points Per Staff

Member

Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation (Adjuncts N=10)

956 180 95.6

Faculty Office, Arts & Education# (N=8) 580 375 82.86

School of Education (N=39)

4,142

990

106.21

School of Indigenous Australian Studies (N=4)

252

146

50.4

School of Information and Communication Studies (N=23)

1,989 335 86.48

School of Social Work and Arts (N=44) 3,679 252 85.56

School of Theology (Adjuncts N=40)

1,818

250

44.34

Source: RPI. *= Heads of School were captured; # = Only one staff member (Course Director) with FOAE Office is currently listed with a research function.

339


3. Research Applications and HERDC- Reportable Income 3.1 Successful External Research Grants

Although FOAE has had declines in externally sourced research income over recent years, Table 3.1 demonstrates some positive external grant success for the Faculty in 2020-2021. The Faculty had an ARC Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA) Fellowship awarded to Dr Jane Garner from the School of Information and Communication Studies (2nd DECRA awarded over a 5-year period). There are also a wealth of partnerships FOAE research staff have reported to be engaging with that could lead to potential investments and benefits from industry in the near future (see Appendix 2). Table 3.1. A sample of successful external grant applications in 2020-2021.

Lead Chief Investigator

School/Centre

Title

Total amount awarded

Garner

Information and Communication Studies

Public libraries in the lives of the homeless community: Laying the public policy foundations

$425,523

Cameron

Theology

Using a bio-psycho-social-spiritual model in first

responder organisations to prevent psychological harm post exposure to traumatic events

$145,636

Denyer- Simmons

Communications and Creative Industries (Pre- Merger)

Surfer attitudes to shark management

$66,481

Short

Social Work and Arts

Co-operative inquiry: Documenting student's and supervisor's experiences of COVID-19 $20,000

Randell-Moon

Indigenous Australian Studies

Consumer understandings of smart technologies and their applications in

North West NSW regional and rural communities

$16,606

Co- Investigator

School/Centre

Title

Total amount awarded

Jeffries (collaboration with ILWS)

Indigenous Australian Studies

Next Generation Water Engineering and River Management Hub

$3.6 million

*A number of additional smaller external grants were also awarded to FoAE staff during this period, such as via the State Library of NSW, Community Broadcasting Foundation and the Public Records Office of Victoria.

3.2 HERDC Reported Income

Table 3.2 demonstrates that all schools across the Faculty contributed towards HERDC income over the recent reporting period. The highest income was generated from staff within the three new and merged schools in Education (now includes both School of Education and Teacher Education staff), Information and Communication Studies (now includes Communications and Creative Industries staff) and the School of Social Work and Arts (now also includes Communications and Creative Industries Staff). The least amount of successful external grant applications occurred in the partner School of Theology (N=1). The new School of

340


Education (N=24) also had the most successful external grant applications between 2018-2020, followed by the School of Social Work and Arts (N=13).

There has been a steady declining trend in the amount of external grant funding and applications between 2015/2016 until 2020 (Table 3.3; Figure 3.1), despite a slight elevation in the success rate and applications in 2019. There are still a number of external grant applications listed as pending on the system for 2020, and further external grant success is still possible for 2020.

When examining the external income in 2020 by Field of Research (Table 3.4), Education had the highest income across the Faculty with $210, 071 via key priority FoRs 1302: Curriculum and Pedagogy and 1301: Education Systems which are to be supported by the upcoming Sturt Scheme university investments (see section 4.4). 22- Philosophy and Religious Studies received strong income ($52,710), alongside 16- Studies in Human Society ($37,351)- which was propped up by the 1607- Social Work FoR code. Table 3.2. HERDC Reported Income Summary: 2018-2020.

School/Partner School HERDC Income Summary

2018-2020 Centre for Islamic Studies & Civilisation

HERDC Income (Total) $122,593

HERDC Income (Staff Apportioned Income) $80,524

Number of Successful Grants 3

Faculty Office, Arts & Education HERDC Income (Total) $28,000



School of Education HERDC Income (Total) $1,151,636



School of Indigenous Australian Studies HERDC Income (Total) $39,697




HERDC Income (Total) $595,097



School of Social Work and Arts HERDC Income (Total) $255,359



School of Theology HERDC Income (Total) $70,396

341


2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Successful Grant

Unsuccessful Application

Pending Application

Withdrawn Application

Terminated Grant


Number of Successful Grants 1 Source: Research Productivity Index.

Table 3.3. External Grant Applications by Status 2015-2020.

Apps by Application Year

Successful Grant

Not Successful

Pending Application

Withdrawn Application

Terminated Grand Total

% Successful

2015 26 40 1 67 39%

2016 20 34 2 56 36%

2017 16 28 44 36%

2018 9 21 1 1 1 33 27%

2019 16 17 1 2 36 44%

2020 5 12 16 1 34 15%

Grand Total

92

152

18

7

1

270

34%

Source: Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies.


Figure 3.1: External Grant Applications by Status 2015-2020.

342



Figure 3.2: Grant Income 2016-2020.

Table 3.4. 2020 External Grant Funding by Field of Research Code (2020).

Field of Research HERDC_Income

08 Information and Computing Sciences $11,333.33

0806 Information Systems $4,333.33

0807 Library and Information Studies $7,000.00

10 Technology $4,333.33 1005 Communications Technologies $4,333.33

11 Medical and Health Sciences $33,881.40 1117 Public Health and Health Services $11,250.00

1103 Clinical Sciences $22.631.40

12 Built Environment and Design $5,000.00 1205 Urban and Regional Planning $5,000.00

13 Education $210,071.69 1302 Curriculum and Pedagogy $68,474.20

1303 Specialist Studies in Education $22,500.00

1301 Education Systems $119,097.48

16 Studies in Human Society $37,351.33 1608 Sociology $5,000.00

1607 Social Work $28,816.00

1604 Human Geography $3,535.33

17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences $35,198.00 1701 Psychology $35,198.00

343


19 Studies in Creative Arts and Writing $15,583.33

1902 Film, Television and Digital Media $4,333.33

1904 Performing Arts and Creative Writing $11,250.00

20 Language, Communication and Culture $7,070.67

2002 Cultural Studies $3,535.33

2001 Communication and Media Studies $3,535.33

22 Philosophy and Religious Studies $52,710.93 2201 Applied Ethics -$194.04

2203 Philosophy -$388.09

2204 Religion and Religious Studies $53,293.06

Grand Total $412,534 Source. Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies.

344


4. Faculty Committees, Initiatives and Research Supports

4.1 Research and Graduate Studies Management Committee

Since the last Faculty research report, a total of seven Arts and Education Research and Graduate Studies Management Committee (AERGSMC) have been held. These have included the September and November 2020 meetings, followed by meetings in January, March, May, July and September in 2021.

A number of special guests have presented at the AERGSMC that have included Pro-Vice Chancellor (RI) A/Prof. Jason White (ARC Review of ERA-EI and TEQSA requirements), Dr Jennifer Podesta (DocFest 2021), Dr Emmaline Lear (Research Impact Program and Peer2Peer Mentoring), Dr Lisa Limbrick (Tri- Faculty Grant Support and Toolkit) and Lisa Ditchfield (Charles Sturt Media Dissemination Opportunities).

Over the seven meetings, the terms of reference were updated due to the emergence of the Faculty research groups (research group leaders were subsequently included) and with the reduction in the amount of school research committee due to the Organisation Review amalgamations, it was agreed that all HDR coordinators would become members of the AERGSMC.

Many discussions were held in relation to Master of Philosophy admission criterions, PhD by Prior Publication recruitment strategies, mental health considerations for HDR candidates, a confidential ballot for the University RPI committee, research culture strategies (e.g. research cafes and mentoring possibilities), and discussion around the many university updates such as research infrastructure levies and Research Master upgrades.

4.2 Research Support Initiatives

The Faculty of Arts and Education received seven out of the 17 Early Career Research Grant schemes awarded earlier in 2021 to Dr Willie Wahlin ($17,808), Dr James Farley ($6,128), Dr Belinda Cash ($24,551), Dr Sabine Wardle ($13,809, Dr Nick Ruddell ($22,265), Dr Jane Garner ($22,466), and Dr James Deehan ($19,410). A total of two COVID-related project grants were awarded to Dr Steven Murphy ($20K) and Dr Jane Garner ($10,060) in 2020. Dr Jane Garner, Dr Brian Moore and Dr Sabine Wardle were also accepted into the university’s ‘Granted Program’ designed to build and transform ideas/trajectory towards obtaining grant funding. The Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies also facilitated a Research Impact Base Program in 2021 that was open to all staff and HDR candidates in which five places were made available to FOAE researchers. A total of 4 x HDR candidates and 1 x ECR were accepted into this program to enhance researcher impact from across various schools. Additionally, the Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation was able to effectively utilise the Open Access Publishing Scheme with 2/3 of the Faculty’s successful applications going to CISAC’s researchers.

Research Impact Base Program

Leila Khaled HDR Candidate School of Education and CISAC

Mark Layson

HDR Candidate

School of Theology (St Mark's Canberra)

Tracie Edmondson

HDR Candidate

Former Communication and Creative Industries

Mary Coe HDR Candidate Former School of Information Studies Susanne Francisco ECR School of Education

Open Access Publishing Scheme 2020/2021

Mehmet Ozalp Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation AUD 1,674.00 (2021)

Derya Iner Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation AUD 1,675.58 (2021)

345


Daniel Cohen

Former School of Humanities and Social Sciences

AUD 2,261.72 (2020)

AUD 2,386.00 (2021)

Zuleyha Keskin Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation

AUD 1528.00 (2020)

Suleyman Sertka Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation

AUD 1527.37 (2020)

Conference Support Scheme

Holly Randell- Moon


AUD 2,000.00

Jennifer Munday School of Education AUD 1,845.00

4.3 FOAE Field of Education/Field of Research Alignments

In FOAE, there are four Fields of Education that we will require strong research performance alignment. These Fields of Education include Information Technology (FoE 2), Education (FoE 7), Society and Culture (FoE 9) and Creative Arts (FoE 10).

Further strategic discussions are intended to be held at upcoming University meetings (e.g. Academic Senate and the University Research Advisory Group) relating to strategies to comply with the Coaldrake Review recommendation to undertake world standard research in at least three, or at least 50 per cent, of the broad (2-digit) fields of education where courses are delivered, whichever is greater.

Some of the key considerations for the Faculty moving forward are around ensuring 4-digit FoR codes do not undermine 2-digit level FoRs and further strategy relating to the diverse Society and Culture (FoE 9) teaching areas. For example, the Communications staffing profile is still being established for the new 2022 programs in FOAE. Another major consideration is that the Field of Education 10 (Creative Arts) is likely to no longer be reported against for research due to the dramatically reduced courses/teaching profile and contingencies are currently being established for any remaining staff that undertake research in Creative Arts.

From 2023 and pertinent to our Faculty which has the School of Indigenous Australian Studies and related courses, there will also be new FoR codes released for Indigenous Studies.

These will be:

4501 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, language and history

4502 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education

4503 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander environmental knowledges and management

4504 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and wellbeing

4505 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, society and community

4506 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander sciences

University analysis is also currently being undertaken to determine any targeted support for the new 45 FoR code leading into ERA2028.

With the university strategy towards 2030 having priority research areas in key areas outside of the Faculty of Arts and Education (Ag/Water/Environment; Cybersecurity; Rural Health), moderate investment (see section 4.4) has now been provided over three years towards FOAE areas of additional research/teaching importance for 2022. This moderate investment will be important, as a number of the FOAE major Fields of Education/Teaching areas are outside the three main research focus areas of the University Strategy. These areas include Library and Information Systems (aligns with Field of Education 2), Curriculum and Pedagogy (aligns with FoE 7), Education Systems (aligns with FoE 7), Applied Ethics (aligns with FoE 9), Philosophy and Religious Studies (aligns with FoE 9), Social Work (aligns with FoE 9) and Sociology (aligns with FoE 9).

346


4.4 Sturt Scheme Investments

The University has approved investment in two major programs of research with the aim of the investment to support and help facilitate increased quality research outputs and externally sourced funding:

1. The Accelerating Interdisciplinary Education Research (AIER) Program. The AIER Program presents a transformative research program of two Education FoR-aligned research streams in Curriculum and Pedagogy (Field of Research 3901) and Early Childhood Systems (Field of Research 3903). The foci of these streams capitalises on the existing disciplinary strengths of the Charles Sturt STEM and Early Childhood Research Groups (ECRG). Using these two areas of strength as a foundation, the AIER Program aims to boost research performance within the new School of Education through strategic interdisciplinary collaboration with colleagues from Schools of Nursing, Engineering, Allied Health, Exercise and Sports Sciences. The AIER Program will also capitalise upon partnerships with industry, communities and the professions through innovative and impactful research, thereby establishing us as national leaders in multidisciplinary education research. The two streams of the AIER Program specify programmatic research focussing on intersecting themes. The two streams of the AIER Program will collaborate across their thematic areas.

2. The Future of the Professions Research Group. This group has emerged out of discussions between leaders of three current research groups in the Faculty of Arts and Education (two of which have cross-faculty membership). These were the Practical and Public Ethics Research Group, the Environmental & Social Justice Research Group, and the Libraries Research Group. The proposal brings together leading research already conducted in the three groups to create a new interdisciplinary focus. Professions and the bodies that represent them were once, in effect, guilds serving to protect the interests of members who provided a well-specified set of services to society. In recent decades society has placed new demands on professions. It now expects professions to abide by societally endorsed codes of ethics, ensure that members do not discriminate against any clients, and ensure that professional services are provided to all requiring them. For the most part the professions have adapted to meet these societal demands. New and emerging challenges will require many of the professions to change much further. The Future of the Professions Research Group investment is based around priority Fields of Research in Applied Ethics (FoR 5001), Philosophy (FoR 5003), Social Work (FoR 4409), Sociology (FoR 4410) and Library and Information Systems (FoR 4610).

4.5 DocFest 2021 and 3MT Success

The Faculty of Arts and Education were well represented with approximately 15 academic staff involved in various sessions across the three days such as effective researcher workshops, keynotes, 3MT heats/poster judging and the various panels (e.g. methodologies, how to get involved in discipline areas).

After progressing through the 3MT heats at Docfest, two FOAE HDR candidates continued their success at the University 3MT Final, winning 2/3 of the awards on offer on the 23rd June in front of an audience of over 100 held at the Riverina Playhouse.

• Van Tran (School of Education and AERGSMC postgraduate representative) took out the People’s Choice Award at the University 3MT final and had her 3MT journey presented in the July research bulletin. Van’s research was related to the “Importance of home language maintenance and bilingualism”.

• Mark Layson (School of Theology) was the overall winner for his presentation relating to a “bio- psycho-socio-spiritual’ model to reduce traumatic stress in emergency first responders and made it through to the Asia-Pacific Final being held in October.

4.6 HDR Support Schemes

The Round 1 Tri-Faculty HDR Support Scheme was facilitated in mid-2021 with HDR candidates being able to apply for funding up to $2000 for thesis-related costs and preference for the scheme going to those without access to funds/scholarships and were performing satisfactorily with their HDR candidature. In FoAE, there were 23 applications approved in the initial round of the HDR scheme for 2021 (totalling $20,520.43),

347


with 12 applications declined. A second round of the HDR support scheme is intended for later in the year. Funds have also been approved to support a Tri-Faculty Symposium in the first week of November to showcase higher degree research from across disciplines, and to encourage new research connections within the HDR community.

5. Higher Degrees by Research 5.1 HDR Scholarships

The listing below shows the successful domestic scholarship applications for 202130 for the Faculty of A&E after the many stages of application processes in 2020:

Full time AGRTP Scholarships:

First Name

Last name

School Proposed Principal Supervisor

David Drennan CISAC Hakan Coruh Susan McIntyre Theology Michael Mawson Leanne Mitchell Former

SHSS (now SWA)

Karen Bell

Andrew Clark- Howard

Theology Michael Mawson

Sally Mordike Theology Elizabeth MacKinlay

Part-time AGRTP Scholarship:

First Name Last name Faculty School Proposed Principal Supervisor

Deborah Mitchell A&E SOTE (now SoE)

Lena Danaia

Suzanne Smith A&E Theology David Neville Svantje Mertens A&E SOTE (now

SoE) Lena Danaia

Indigenous AGRTP

First Name Last name Faculty School Proposed Principal Supervisor

Fiona Dyball A&E Theology Anthony Rees

The Domestic HDR scholarship mid-year round for 2021 was also successful, with FOAE receiving the highest amount of HDR scholarship applications (n=23). A total of 3/6 of the mid-year round HDR scholarships went to FoAE candidates, a great result (candidates in Education, Theology & CISAC). Unfortunately, the international HDR scholarship round was cancelled due to the pandemic circumstances. Those awarded from the previous year are still attempting to defer their enrolment until 2022- due to the pandemic/border restrictions.

A number of suggestions have been made for the application process moving forward from the Faculty HDR scholarships committee, including having a set section for applicants to be able to detail any research experiences and to have the application documentation further aligned with the assessment criterions.

348


Victoria Erskine and Lisa Watt from the School of Information and Communication Studies were also successful for the 2021 round of the Academic Staff Higher Degree by Research Workload Support Scheme which assists selected Charles Sturt University Academic staff members to obtain a higher degree by research in areas of strategic importance to the institution.

5.2 FOAE HDR Candidates in 2020

From 2020 reporting, there were 172 candidates enrolled in Higher Degree by Research (HDR) courses in FoAE at Charles Sturt University (Table 5.1;Table 5.2). This “headcount” number is higher than enrolments figures, as many candidates have taken sessional leave, are under examination are may not be enrolled in any subject during the 2020 reporting year but are still enrolled in their course.

The bulk of the current enrolments in HDR programs in FoAE are in the Doctor of Philosophy with81%andare undertakingtheirdegreeviadistance mode (74%; Table 5.3).

Table 5.1. Headcount by FOAE HDR Course.

Count Course 172

Doctor of Philosophy 140 Doctor of Social Work 16 Doctor of Ministry 8 MA(IslStudRes) 4 DComm* 2 Master of Theology (Research) 1 Doctor of Education* 1

Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis. *= phase out course

Table 5.2. Headcount broken down by School.

Count Arts and Education 172

School of Theology 45 School of Humanities and Social Sciences 39 School of Education 23 School of Teacher Education 21 School of Communication & Creative Industries 18 Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation 15 School of Information Studies 9 A&E, Faculty Office 1 School of Indigenous Australian Studies 1

Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis.

Table 5.3. Online and on-campus head-count broken down for both full-time and part-time enrolment.

Online On-campus Total Full-time 33 25 58

Part-time

95

19

114


349


With HDR enrolments being very reliant on scholarships available, and HDR scholarship allocations on the decline (funding based on HDR completions), Tables 5.4 and 5.5 show that there has been little HDR enrolment growth in recent years. The trends in relation to enrolment and scholarship places emphasise that new funding models will need to be considered or drawn upon in order to grow HDR enrolment places in FOAE.

Table 5.4. Enrolment Trends for FOAE Domestic and International HDR Candidates from 2016-2020.

Enrolments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 30

Total 221 186 166 148 126 Domestic 201 176 155 140 119


60

Total 15 16 12 17 23 Domestic 10 15 12 16 22

International 5 1 1 1

90

Total 2 1 2 1 Domestic 2 2 1

International 1

Total 238 203 178 167 150

Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis. *= Numbers can be less than Headcount statistics due to candidates taking leave or may not be enrolled in any subject.

Table 5.5. Commencing Enrolment Trends for FOAE Domestic/International HDR Candidates (2016 to 2020).

Commencing Enrolments

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

30


41

29

19

23

19

Domestic 38 27 18 22 18


60


5

6

4

9

9

Domestic 3 6 4 8 8

International 2 0 1 1

90 4 3 3 4 2 Faculty of Arts and Education

Domestic 2 2 0

International 1

Grand Total 48 36 26 34 28


350


5.3 Attrition and Completion

Table 5.6. Enrolment Status by Initial Study Mode.

Study Mode AS % GR % WC % WT % Total FT 52 63% 14 17% 12 15% 4 5% 82 PT 59 61% 7 7% 26 27% 4 4% 96


5.4 HDR Supervision Allocations

The Faculty has 174 eligible supervisors and 77 (44%) of these are Principal Supervisors (Table 5.7). Of the total 122 staff members that are supervising HDR candidates, there are 16 staff member with six or more candidates with one staff member listed as being Principal Supervisor of nine HDR candidates (Figure 5.1). There are 13 eligible Principal Supervisors and 39 eligible co-supervisors who are not currently supervising HDR candidates. Interestingly, there are more Principal Supervisors listed as supervising two candidates than those supervising a single candidate (Figure 5.1).

The School of Social Work and Arts (N=88) has the highest amount of HDR supervision allocations, followed by the School of Theology (N=84) from across their staffing pools (Table 5.8). The partner schools of Theology and CISAC have a large influence on the HDR culture and capacity in FOAE, with CISAC also having a total of 33 HDR supervision allocations, which exceeds the School of Information and Communication Studies (N=31). Similarly, both School of Theology and School of Social Work and Arts have a total of six and five staff supervising >6 HDR candidates, respectively. The School of Education has three staff that are supervising >6 HDR candidates (Table 5.9). Table 5.7. Supervisors and HDR candidate numbers.

Number of Students Total with Students

No Students

Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Principal Supervisor

1 2

1 5

1 2

4 5 6 5 4 1 64 13 77

Co-Supervisor 3 5

1 5

2 2 4 58 39 97

Total 4 7

3 0

1 4

6 9 6 5 4 1 122 52 174


351


Co-Supervisor and HDR Candidate Numbers

5

4

3

2

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40


Figure 5.1: FOAE Principal Supervision and HDR candidate numbers.

Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis. Figure 5.2: FOAE Co-Supervision and HDR candidate numbers.

Supervisors 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Principal Supervisor and HDR Candidate Numbers

Num

ber o

f Stu

dent

s

352


Table 5.8. HDR Principal Supervision and Co-Supervision by School and Modes.

Co- Supervisor

Co- Supervisor Total

Principal Supervisor

Principal Supervisor Total

Grand Total

Supervision by School Full- time

Part- time

Full- time

Part- time

A&E, Faculty Office 3 6 9 1 3 4 13 Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation 3 14 17 3 13 16 33

School of Communication & Creative Industries* 1 1 1 1 2

School of Education 11 16 27 16 15 31 58 School of Teacher Education 1 1 2 2 School of Humanities and Social Sciences* 2 2 2

School of Indigenous Australian Studies 1 2 3 3

School of Information and Communication Studies 4 15 19 3 9 12 31

School of Social Work and Arts 12 33 45 9 32 41 88

School of Theology 15 25 40 18 26 44 84 Grand Total 51 114 165 50 99 149 316

Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis. *=Based on data, has not been assigned to new merged school.

353


Table 5.9. Supervisors and HDR Candidate numbers by school.

Schools

HDR candidate numbers

Total with HDR candidates

# With No HDR

Total

%* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Centre for Islamic Studies & Civilisation

1 2 1 1 2 7 1 8 13

Co-Supervisor 1 1 2 1 3 33

Principal Supervisor 1 1 1 2 5 5 0

Faculty Office, Arts & Education 5

1

6 4 10 40

Co-Supervisor 5 5 2 7 29

Principal Supervisor 1 1 2 3 67

School of Education 11 8 3 1 2 1 1 1 28 15 43 35

Co-Supervisor 7 3 1 11 12 23 52

Principal Supervisor 4 5 3 1 1 1 1 1 17 3 20 15

School of Indigenous Australian Studies 1 1

2 1 3 33

Co-Supervisor 1 1 1 0

Principal Supervisor 1 1 1 2 50


8

2

3

1

14

12

26

46

Co-Supervisor 6 2 8 10 18 56

Principal Supervisor 2 3 1 6 2 8 25

School of Social Work and Arts 12 13 3 4 3 1 2 2

40 8 48 17

Co-Supervisor 9 4 1 2 2 18 4 22 18

Principal Supervisor 3 9 2 2 1 1 2 2 22 4 26 15

School of Theology 10 5 3 2 1 2 1 1 25 11 36 31

Co-Supervisor 7 5 1 13 10 23 43

Principal Supervisor 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 12 1 13 8

Grand Total 47 30 14 6 9 6 5 4 1 122 52 174 30 Source: Banner, Research Master and Graduate Studies Team analysis.* Proportion of eligible supervisors with no current HDR candidates.

354


6. Research Highlights and Accomplishments

6.1 Research Seminars Across the Faculty

Despite all of the organisation review changes occurring across 2020-2021, the Faculty and schools across the Faculty were busy facilitating a number of research seminars with guest speakers. Two FOAE Research Cafes were facilitated. The first was a research café sponsored by the former School of Humanities and Social Sciences and facilitated by Dr Monica Short and Dr Emma Rush on “Co-operative Inquiry”. The FOAE Research Café detailed how co-operative inquiry is an accessible, participatory research methodology and enables the collection of narratives, experiences, epistemologies and practice wisdom of research inquirers.

The second FOAE Research Café was sponsored by the School of Information and Communication Studies and hosted by Dr Kasey Garrison that details a range of COVID-19 Research Projects. These included Dr Robert Lewis presenting on ‘Action/reaction in virtual space’, Dr Yazdan Mansourian detailing lessons from bonsai growers during COVID lockdowns, Dr Holly Randell-Moon presented on Media/sport biopower and Aboriginal controlled health during COVID-19, Dr Jane Garner and Dr Simon Wakeling presented on Australian Libraries during the COVID-19 Crisis.

In addition to the Faculty Research Cafes, the schools across the Faculty also provided a range of seminars. The Former School of Information Studies facilitated a Visiting Scholar Series with guests such as Dr Karen Gavigan from the University of South Carolina and Dr Joel Barnes (policy, politics and public value of humanities research in Australia). The former School of Information Studies also had regular seminars with staff such as with A/Prof Hamid Jamali (on research diversification), Dr Yasdan Mansourian (online information sharing among bonsai hobbyists), and Dr Kasey Garrison, A/Prof. Mary Carroll and Liz Derouet (portrayal of masculinity in Australian young adult novels). The former School of Communications and Creative Industries (CCI) facilitated seminars with both staff and HDR candidate work on How Australian Filmmakers were responding to the Pandemic? (Che Baker), A Revival of Egyptian khayal al-zill shadow theatre (Dr Sam Bowker), The 'Painting Women' of German Modernism (Silvia Westuba), Tasmanian and Van Demonian Gothic in colonial and contemporary art (Sabrina Keen), the Australian literary establishment and iconic Poets (Dr Joy Wallace & Sharyn Anderson). The Former School of Humanities and Social Sciences also held seminars, such as with A/Prof. Susan Mlcek on cross-cultural competencies, decolonisation, Indigeneity and Whiteness behaviours, alongside the guest speaker appearance of Brenda Morris from Carleton University Canada on responding to student mental health. In addition to the research group accomplishments listed in section 6.3 (e.g. ECV2020), the Creative Practice Circle research group successfully launched their Online Exhibition and Symposium, “Listening in the Anthropocene” that was attended by local, interstate and international guests, and opened by one of Australia’s most well-known contemporary artists Mandy Martin.

There have been a number of school-based seminars in recent weeks that are yet to be captured and can be included in the 2021 report. Between October to December 2021, the FOAE Research Altitude series (based on Research KPIs) is also set to launch. Weekly guest speakers from across the Faculty that have achieved significant quality publication and external grant success will be sharing their success stories.

6.2 Launch of the Faculty’s HDR pathways

The Faculty’s new Bachelor of Arts and Social Sciences (Honours) and Graduate Certificate in Arts and Social Sciences Research courses were approved towards the end of 2020 and were built upon a range of stakeholder consultations with the intention to:

1. Move towards a centralised faculty-owned research preparation courses 2. Take a modularisation approach for subjects (where required) to account for discipline differences

The intention of the new subjects within these courses was to cover a general base of research theory and methods; research proposal and literature review; and dissertation/project for the major body of work (with supervisor allocated early in the course).

355


Add-on pathways towards HDR have been either non-existent or under suspension in the Faculty of Arts and Education, yet there was a distinct need to service the Faculty’s diverse disciplinary needs with these AQF Level 8 qualifications. The intention of having these HDR pathways was to ensure improved chances of competing with other faculties for HDR scholarships, building supervision capacity and research culture within the Faculty.

The new HDR pathways can now provide enhanced supervision capacity by providing training and experiences for those in early-career research realms and if supervisors are situated within research groups, this will help with visibility and wider disciplinary support to hopefully accommodate continued HDR and research career trajectories for the students.

The new HDR pathways now provide opportunities for high achieving graduates to identify real-world challenges they want to investigate and then devise and conduct an in-depth research project – resulting in new understandings. The students will now get the chance to work more closely with academics to inspire and guide in any number of areas of interest across communications, education, humanities, information studies, Indigenous studies, Islamic studies, social work or theology. There is the online convenience and connection with scholarly culture (e.g. chance to attend available workshops/seminars) and a chance to establish foundational research training steps.

Some of the steps to establishing the HDR pathways’ functionality in 2021 have been letters going out to successful undergraduate/postgraduate coursework students, professional development sessions to FOAE Alumni, development of Honours testimonials from Faculty research staff, strategic development of research content across the suite of subjects, and Faculty Course Directors embedding the first two Graduate Certificate subjects into Masters coursework electives to help bridge students into the new HDR pathways. The HDR pathway team included Dr James Deehan (Education; Research Proposal subjects); Dr Sam Bowker (SWA; Research Methods subjects); Dr Sheena Elwick (Education: Graduate Certificate Dissertation), A/Prof. Brendon Hyndman (Honours Progress Reporting) and Paul Parker (Honours Dissertation).

Over 100 applications were received for both the Honours and Graduate Certificate HDR pathways, with eight honours and 13 Graduate Certificate students commencing studies in 202130. Multiple students also deferred their enrolment until 2022. A breakdown of Principal Supervision allocations for the 21 HDR pathways students that commenced in 202130 included:

• School of Social Work and Arts: 5 students • School of Information and Communications Studies: 8 students • School of Education: 7 students • Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation: 1 student

6.3 Research Engagements (mid 2020-2021)

The following are a “sample” of the many research engagements, accomplishments and highlights reported by a number of FOAE staff over the recent reporting period. The following are mainly other research highlights beyond the focuses covered in the other sections or including submissions pending (or HDR candidate completions).

School of Education

• A/Prof Lena Danaia and A/Prof Amy MacDonald’s Little Scientists Research Project is a finalist in the 2021 Australian Museum Eureka Prizes: https://australian.museum/get-involved/eureka- prizes/2021-eureka-prizes-finalists/. The Eureka Prizes reward excellence in the fields of research and innovation, leadership, science engagement, and school science.

• Professor Sharynne McLeod, A/Prof Amy MacDonald, A/Prof Lena Danaia and Dr Tamara Cumming were successful in their Sturt Scheme bid for three years of strategic research funding titled “Accelerating Interdisciplinary Education Research”.

• The Early Childhood Voices Conference (ECV2020) was a large success. ECV2020 was a platform to share research about innovative methods, theories and partnerships with children, families and practitioners that supports social justice during early childhood or within the early childhoodsector.

356

https://australian.museum/get-involved/eureka-prizes/2021-eureka-prizes-finalists/




https://earlychildhoodresearch.csu.domains/early-childhood-voices-conference-2020/


This was held between 16-20th November 2020 and led/facilitated by Professor Sharynne McLeod, Belinda Downey and Dr Tamara Cumming.

o ECV2020 was organised by the Charles Sturt University Early Childhood Research Group, and was an opportunity to present research in a virtual online space. 2020 was a challenging year, and COVID-19 altered the way in which we do many things, including research. Many conferences had been cancelled or postponed. ECV2020 provided researchers with the opportunity to present work that they been unable to present in other forums, research that they have been working on during the year, and/or work that responds to challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic.

o Researchers and post-graduate students from around the world submitted abstracts and shared their work on innovations to improve the lives of children, families and practitioners during early childhood (generally birth-8 years) or within the early childhood sector.

o ECV2020 was held entirely online and asynchronously. There was no registration fee and no fees to present or view the presentations. The conference was held from 16th to 20th November 2020. Presentations were pre-recorded, and remained online.

o Sample metrics included: 2847 people registered from 70 countries; 8 keynote presentations with 9 invited speakers; 89 oral presentations; there were 11,500 views of the presentations during the week of the conference.

• Professor Sharynne McLeod became a Fellow of the Royal Society of NSW and received Honors from the American Speech-Language Hearing Association, was interviewed for Speech Pathology Australia’s podcast on the topic of “Communication is Everyone’s Right”, describing her speech at the United Nations, as well as other work being undertaken in relation to communication rights. Sharynne was also a co-author on the Katharine G. Butler Trailblazer Award Winning publication in a Q1 journal with PhD by Prior Publication candidate Marie Ireland- who Sharynne supervises.

• Dr Tamara Cumming was Appointed Deputy Editor, Australasian Journal of Early Childhood (SJR: .355, Journal H index: 10, Q2) and was invited to join the Editorial Board of Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. In 2021, Tamara was nominated by Charles Sturt for Engagement Australia Award for Research Excellence in Industry Engagement, for the Early Childhood Educators’ Well-being Project. Tamara also engaged with the media widely with interviews with Prime 7, the Women’s Agenda and via an article in The Conversation collaborating with Dr Laura McFarland relating to the complexities of budget funding for childcare. Based on research conducted by Tamara and colleagues, Early Childhood wellbeing workshops were also conducted by Industry.

• A/Prof. Jenni Munday was awarded a small grant from Celsius (an initiative of Hothouse Theatre) to work with dramaturg, Peter Matheson, on her playscript draft Life is Short. Jenni was also invited for a one-month artist residency with ArtsIceland in 2022.

• A/Prof. Brendon Hyndman and Dr Rachael Jefferson-Buchanan were awarded by the University of Southern Queensland for the ‘highest source normalised impact per paper score’ in Education for their interstate collaborative Q1 journal article “PE across the media: A five year analysis”. Brendon was also co-editor of the Q1 Journal of Teaching in Physical Education special issue on Social Media for Professional Development and was invited to join the editorial board of the Q1 International Journal of Play. Brendon was also part of an international panel relating to returning to school after the pandemic at the US Play Coalition conference, as part of being an Australian representative on the Global Recess Alliance.

• Dr Rachael Jefferson-Buchanan published her inaugural article in The Conversation titled “Uniform discontent: how women athletes are taking control of their sporting outfits” which had significant readership reach and a number of ABC interviews across Australia.

• Dr Andi Salamon presented with Early Childhood Australia CONNECT, National Virtual Event, about connecting with curriculum, pedagogy and play with a focus on maths, literacy and creative arts with babies and toddlers. Andi also presented at the Victorian Early Childhood Research Consortium September Meeting about her doctoral work and how it has informed her current research. Andi is now also sharing the emergent research findings with participants, staff and the families in the community, as part of her Jean Denton Memorial Scholarship research project. Rights Commissioner Kristen Hilton: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQzL8lxcY2o&feature=youtu.be

• Dr Brian Moore was awarded an Early Career Conference Grant ($4000) by the Association of Commonwealth Universities, and also published his inaugural article in The Conversation titled: School students who had COVID-19 report stigma and bullying. How can we stop it?

• A new research group was launched by Dr Libbey Murray and Dr Brian Moore on Wellbeing and Mental Health.

357

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRXcSAl_dA7a29Dwe62u5O3CjgIQcaVMY

https://csu-span.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9741efbaca9545fcbdda4342e0035eea

https://soundcloud.com/speechpathologyaustralia/communication-is-everyones-right-s03-e31

https://usplaycoalition.org/gra-panel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQzL8lxcY2o&feature=youtu.be

https://theconversation.com/school-students-who-had-covid-19-report-stigma-and-bullying-how-can-we-stop-it-166507

https://theconversation.com/school-students-who-had-covid-19-report-stigma-and-bullying-how-can-we-stop-it-166507


• Dr Jacquie Tinkler from School of Education has become co-convenor of the Learning and Teaching special interest group (SIG) for the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE).

• PhD candidate Van Tran won the People’s Choice Award at the University 3MT competition. • Dr Lana McCarthy co-authored her first book “The will to win: New Zealand netball greats on team

culture and leadership” published by Massey University Press. Lana was also interviewed on various radio and had the book covered by the NZ Herald newspaper. Lane was also successful in her proposal to present at the 8th IWG World Conference on Women in Sport, May 2022, Auckland, New Zealand. The title of the presentation is; “There’s no one way to coach: Practitioner Perspectives on Team Leadership and Culture”.

• In December 2020, the Pedagogy Education Praxis (PEP) International group published an edited book with Springer. The PEP international group includes School of Education researchers Dr Susanne Francisco, Letitia Galloway, Sharyn Ahern and Dr Kip Langat. Adjunct staff Prof. Christine Edwards-Groves and Prof. Stephen Kemmis are also members of the group. Susanne, Stephen and Christine were three of the six editors that compiled the book based upon the work of the group since 2006.

• Adjunct A/Prof. Noella Mackenzie co-authored a winning paper for the prestigious UKLA/ Wiley Research in Literacy Education Award 2021.The Award is given annually for papers in Literacy and the Journal of Research in Reading judged to be exemplary in terms of the criteria applied. The paper was titled “A case study on the challenges of learning and teaching English spelling: insights from eight Australian students and their teachers”.


• CISAC launched their online research website in September 2021: https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/cisac/

• Dr Derya Iner presented with Tackling Hate (www.tacklinghate.org) Collecting data about Islamophobia: the experience of the Islamophobia Register Australia, Anti-Hate Website https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiDlHcM5XPI. And then a webinar in July on Freedom of Religion in Australia: a focus on serious harms (With Human Rights Commissioner Ed Santow and Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human. Derya was also a panellist for an online event https://mwa.org.au/product/the-effects-ofdiscrimination-and-mental-health/

• A/Prof Mehmet Ozalp published three high impact articles in The Conversation on topics such as on the war in Syria, voting on USA elections and collaborating with A/Prof Zuleyha Keskin on an article relating to Shariah Law.

• A/Prof Zuleyha Keskin published a new book with Springer titled “Attaining Inner Peace in Islam”. • Dr Mahsheed Ansari spoke to ABC News about why many people have used their religious beliefs

to help them cope with mental hardship during COVID-19 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07- 09/meditation-prayer-faith-cope-anxieties-coronavirus/12434824


• As part of the Research in Applications for Information and Library Studies Conference organised by the School of Information Studies (now School of Information and Communications Studies) and sponsored by the Faculty of Arts and Education last year, a special Issue of the Journal of the Association of Library and Information in Australia was published featuring a range of papers from the conference.

• The SICS Radio Show has been running since Social Science Week 2020 with all shows accessible from the 2MCE website at https://2mce.org/shows/sics-radio-2/ and completed another successful Social Science Week show about the Social Implication of Censoring Books for Youth.

• A/Prof. Hamid Jamali was appointed to the editorial boards of the Journal of Information Science, the Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, and the Journal of Data and Information Science.

• Prof. Philip Hider (discipline co-lead) and A/Prof. Hamid Jamali (discipline co-lead) were successful in their Sturt Scheme bid for three years of strategic research funding titled “Future of the Professions Research Group”.

• Dr Jane Garner had a range of accomplishments from mid 2020: o was an invited participant at the United States Department of Justice, meeting of the Data-

Driven Librarianship in Corrections project.

358

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koDLtMVzZ1Q&t=6s

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/will-to-win-dr-farah-palmer-on-why-netball-was-her-first-love/JCMLVEPWR7GSOL644WPN22R5YU/

https://ukla.org/awards/ukla-wiley-blackwell-research-in-literacy-education-award



https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/cisac/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiDlHcM5XPI

https://mwa.org.au/product/the-effects-ofdiscrimination-and-mental-health/

https://mwa.org.au/product/the-effects-ofdiscrimination-and-mental-health/

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-09/meditation-prayer-faith-cope-anxieties-coronavirus/12434824




https://2mce.org/shows/sics-radio-2/

https://2mce.org/podcast/sics-radio-the-social-implications-of-censoring-books-for-youth/


o was asked to present on her work exploring the role and practices of libraries in prisons, and to update the group on the responses of Australian prisons with regards to access and use of prison libraries during the COVID-19 crisis.

o Accepted an elected position as a Standing Committee Member for the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) Library Services to People with Special Needs Section.

o Is leading an IFLA Working Group that is writing the fourth edition of the Guidelines for Library Services to Prisoners.

o Jane accepted the position of Associate Editor of the Library Quarterly. o Published an edited book: Garner, J. (Ed.) (2021). Exploring the roles and practices of

libraries in prisons: International Perspectives. (Advances in Librarianship; Vol. 50). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

o Was awarded a State Library of New South Wales Research Grant ($5,260) for the project: Experiencing first-language reading in migrant communities: The role of public libraries.

o Was awarded a Charles Sturt Early Career Researcher Award ($22,466) for the project: “Exploring the information behaviours of Australian adult prisoners.”

o Was awarded an ARC DECRA.

• Dr Waseem Afzal was awarded funds for a project titled “Mapping the COVID-19 Information Flows in Asia-Pacific: Towards creating an ASIS&T International COVID-19 InformationSource”—Awarded $2874 by the Association for Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T) under ‘Chapter Development Fund’.

• Louise Curham’s PhD was confirmed on 21 July and she will be conferred on 23 September through University of Canberra, Faculty of Arts and Design. Also holds a Donald Horne Fellowship for 2022 at the Centre for Creative and Cultural Reseach, University of Canberra.

• Dr Kasey Garrison was: o Invited to co-author a chapter in a book: Garrison, K.L., & Gavigan, K.W. (2021). “To act for

a better world”: Using social justice graphic novels to empower youth. In D. Hartsfield (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching diverse literature to pre-service professionals: A handbook of methods for library and teacher educators. IGI Global.

o Invited to write the introduction to the School Library Association of Victoria’s published book: Building a Library Reading Culture.

o Appointed to the editorial boards of the Libri, and School Libraries Worldwide. • Dr Simon Wakeling:

o Published a major book on Open Access with Taylor and Francis: Pinfield, S., Wakeling, S., Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2020). Open access in theory and practice: The theory-practice relationship and openness (p. 256). Taylor & Francis.

o Co-led a project with Jane Garner investigating Australian public library responses to the COVID crisis, funded by a CSU COVID-19 Research Grant ($10,060).

o Secured funding as project lead from the State Library of New South Wales ($12,481) for a project investigating public library user needs in a COVID-changed Australia.

o Co- guest edited with Jane Garner (a Special Issue of the Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association (volume 70 (3), 2021), devoted to articles about the experience of disaster and crises management in the library sector.

• Jane Garner, Kasey Garrison, Sabine Wardle, and Karen Bell were awarded an Australian Library and Information Association Research Grant ($4961) for the project: Greening Libraries.


• Professor Manohar Pawar published an edited book titled “COVID-19: Impact on and implications for community and social development” with SAGE and co-authored a book titled “Virtue ethics in social work practice” with Routledge. Manohar continued with his Editor-in-Chief role with the International Journal of Community and Social Development, professional leadership as President, International Consortium for Social Development. Manohar also engaged with widespread media across Australia in areas of Social Work, social justice and commenting on the COVID-19 pandemic impacts.

• Professor Dominic O'Sullivan published two books in the last year “We Are All Here to Stay: citizenship, sovereignty and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” was published

359

https://in.sagepub.com/en-in/sas/the-international-journal-of-community-and-social-development/journal203511#description

https://in.sagepub.com/en-in/sas/the-international-journal-of-community-and-social-development/journal203511#description


by ANU Press and was launched by the New Zealand High Commissioner to Australia, Dame Annette King. The second book “Sharing the Sovereign: Indigenous Peoples, Treaties, Recognition and the State” was published by Palgrave Macmillan and was launched by Dr Will Sanders, Honorary Senior Fellow at the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research at the Australian National University. Dominic also completed his 100th op-ed article, produced six high impact articles in The Conversation on areas such as Colonialism, Declaration of Rights, Maori Health, Indigenous Recognition and Fiji political insights. Another media example was Dominic being interviewed on Radio Australia’s Pacific Beat programme (16/09/20), discussing developments in contemporary Fijian politics. Dominic and Manohar both co-authored a journal publication in 2020 titled “Impact and Implications of COVID-19: An Australian Perspective” which was viewed and downloaded almost 90,000 times and had over 50 citations in a short period of time. Dominic was also elected by AERGSMC to the new University RPI committee as the Faculty level D/E representative.

• A/Prof. Steve Clarke (Lead), A/Prof. Karen Bell (discipline co-lead), Dr Heather Boetto (discipline co-lead) and A/Prof. Morgan Luck (discipline co-lead) were successful in their Sturt Scheme bid for three years of strategic research funding titled “Future of the Professions Research Group”.

• Dr Belinda Cash was successful as a Cross-Faculty co-lead for three years of strategic research funding via the “Ageing Well in Rural and Regional Australia” Sturt Scheme bid.

• The Research Office created a webpage dedicated to showcasing Dr Sam Bowker's research on the history of the tentmakers of Cairo https://research.csu.edu.au/engage-with-us/research- impact/history-of-the-tentmakers-of-cairo. In 2020, Sam has presented a series of virtual lectures across the USA, most recently with the California Lutheran University on 19 June: https://rollandgallery.callutheran.edu/events/virtual-lecture-series-the-tentmakers-of-cairo

• Dr Sabine Wardle, Dr Kasey Garrison, and A/Prof. Karen Bell were awarded $5823 in research funding from the State Library of New South Wales for a project entitled Embracing the cultural identity of burgeoning ethnic groups in regional public libraries: A pilot project with the Punjabi Indian Community in the Riverina. The project was featured in The Daily Advertiser on 11 May 2021, https://www.dailyadvertiser.com.au/story/7245309/punjabis-to-bring-culture-activities-to-wagga-city- library/?cs=9402

• PhD candidate Connor Weightman and his supervisor Dr Lachlan Brown were shortlisted for the prestigious Bruce Dawe poetry prize. Connor’s poem ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’ was developed as part of his PhD in creative writing.

• PhD candidate Tracy Sorensen wrote the Foreword to the new edition of the Donald Horne memoir triology, The Education of Young Donald (New South Books 2021). Tracey also won the 2021 Bathurst Regional Council’s Jo Ross Memorial Award for environmental action and the Curator’s Award in the Regional Waste to Art competition for her piece, Ritual Artifacts.

• Dr Will Dobud and Dr Monica Short presented at Social Sciences Week on topics such as Wilderness or Outdoor Therapies (Will) and Creating Communities of Hope in Uncertain Times (Monica).

• Dr Heather Boetto was awarded a $5,000 contract to research “The impacts of climate change on rural Australian women” to review evidence relating to the position of rural women in Australia in preparation for the development of an infographic to be used by the NRWC for government policy advocacy. Heather also guided a Social Work Honours student Mellisa Wonson to uniquely publish a refereed journal article with Dr Bernadette Moorhead titled “Student participation in study abroad programs: Social justice implications for tertiary education”.

• The School of Humanities and Social Science (now Social Work and Arts) hosted mental health expert Brenda Morris from Carleton University Canada in a successful and important public lecture regarding responding to student mental health, attracting participants from universities in Australia and the mental health sector. Link: https://youtu.be/B7-P7oMKmxY. The event included short presentations by the Former School of Humanities and Social Science staff. Dr Merrilyn Crichton spoke about the significance of the topic, Dr Emma Rush interviewed Brenda, Dr Monica Short introduced the International Network of Co-operative Inquirers, Dr Fredrik Velander both fielded radio interviews and formally responded to Brenda's lecture, Rohena Duncombe chaired the Q&A section, A/Prof. Susan Mlcek made final comments, Dr Donna Bridges organised promotions and media and provided general support, Benjamin Iffland delivered IT services and Sarah Boothey designed the invitation.

• A Social Work and Arts subgroup of Dr Monica Short, Dr Donna Bridges, Dr Merrilyn Crichton, Dr Fredrik Velander, Dr Emma Rush, Benjamin Iffland and Rohena Duncombe joined Brenda (based on the above session) in co-authoring an article about the topic, with the associated article

360

https://www.abc.net.au/radio-australia/programs/pacificbeat/former-fiji-pm-held-hostage-in-

https://rollandgallery.callutheran.edu/events/virtual-lecture-series-the-tentmakers-of-cairo

https://www.dailyadvertiser.com.au/story/7245309/punjabis-to-bring-culture-activities-to-wagga-city-library/?cs=9402





https://www.usq.edu.au/bruce-dawe-prize

https://socialsciences.org.au/socialsciencesweek/event/the-next-frontier-wilderness-therapy-and-the-treatment-of-complex-trauma/

https://socialsciences.org.au/socialsciencesweek/event/the-next-frontier-wilderness-therapy-and-the-treatment-of-complex-trauma/

https://socialsciences.org.au/socialsciencesweek/event/opening-the-counselling-room-door-the-promise-of-outdoor-therapies/

https://socialsciences.org.au/socialsciencesweek/event/creating-communities-of-hope-in-uncertain-times/

https://youtu.be/B7-P7oMKmxY


recently published online titled “Responding to student mental health challenges during and post- COVID-19”.

• Professor Eleanor Gates-Stuart's work ‘Save Face’ is in the Power: Activism, Advocacy, and the Influence of Women Online! Was displayed at an exhibition organised by Kathy Rae Huffman for the ACM SIGGRAPH Digital Arts Community, 2020. Eleanor was also a panellist for Artstate, a four-year project by Regional Arts NSW that shone a light on excellence in arts practice in the regions and explored exciting possibilities for arts and cultural development across the state.

• A/Prof. Chris Orchard held an exhibition “Decolonisation and Reinhabitation” that was displayed via the Margaret Carnegie Gallery of the Wagga Wagga Art Gallery between the 6th of February and Sunday 11th of April, based on his doctoral research. There was an official launch on Saturday the 20th of February.

• Dr Cate Thomas launched the new Social Equality, Intersectionality and Inclusion Research Group with membership from across the globe. The group is already compiling papers for a special edition in Sociologia Ruralis which is “the official journal of the European Society for Rural Sociology”.

• The revised offering of the recently reviewed Doctor of Social Work was launched. School of Indigenous Australian Studies

• Dr Holly Randell-Moon’s research It just works!’: Regional and rural consumer understandings of smart technologies in North West New South Wales is a new report that draws on an evidence base from over 130 participants and 6 case studies including Dubbo, Wellington, Narromine, Peak Hill, and Gilgandra. The project is funded by the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN). The report will be launched by Fiona Nash at the Dubbo campus on November, 12. Holly was also recently elected by AERGSMC to the new University RPI committee.

• Dr Peta Jeffries was a collaborator with ILWS on a successful $3.6 million dollar grant “Next Generation Water Engineering and River Management Hub”. Peta also presented at Social Sciences Week on “Decolonising Ecologies” , a webinar chaired by Professor Sue Green.

• Members of Charles Sturt University's Critical Research in Indigenous Studies group that included Arlene McInherny, Professor Sue Green, Dr. Holly Randell-Moon, Dr Peta Jeffries and A/Prof. Christopher Orchard explored a survey of the ongoing role of art in colonisation and decolonisation. The group spoke at the Charles Sturt Riverina Playhouse on historic and contemporary issues including – cultural appropriation, the role of statues/memorialisation, choices in public art and agricultural-imagery.

School of Theology

• The School of Theology had a high performing 2020-2021 for HDR scholarships (receiving the most HDR scholarships in FOAE) and range of great HDR outcomes (e.g. Mark Layson winning the University 3MT competition).

• Dr Anthony Rees published a new edited book titled “Things that Make for Peace: Traversing Text and Tradition in Christianity and Islam” published by Lexington Books. This book was the result of a previous conference held at United Theological College. The conference was a deliberate mechanism for the School of Theology and Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation to collaborate on a project of mutual interest and public importance and was supported by funding from the Centre for Public and Contextual Theology and a previous FoAE compact funding scheme. Faculty contributors to Anthony’s book included A/Prof. David Neville, Dr Hakan Coruh and Dr Mahsheed Ansari.

• Updates to the Doctor of Ministry were also approved from recent course reviewprocesses.

361

https://smartregions.csu.domains/

https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/webinar-decolonising-ecologies-by-dr-peta-jeffries-tickets-168834557707


7. SummaryThe Faculty of Arts and Education has been implementing a range of new initiatives towards bolstering research culture (the growth & emergence of high performance research groups), identity (a new research narrative) and alignment with new key performance indicators towards quality publication output and external grant application submissions. Foundations have been made towards research culture such as via new HDR pathways that align with our strategic research areas, the launch of a new Faculty ‘Research Altitudes’ seminar series with leading researchers. With the Faculty’s major teaching areas falling outside the University Strategy 2030 discipline priorities, the Sturt Scheme investments will be crucial towards meeting and exceeding world standard research performance in areas such as Education, Social Work, Sociology, Librarianship, Information Systems, Applied Ethics and Philosophy over the years to come.

This 2020 Faculty Research Report showcases a deep dive into a range of research performance areas, including utilising the new 2018-2020 RPI Category A data release in August, 2021. Despite a lot of promising results in 2020 for research, there are a number of areas that will require additional attention. Based on the latest RPI data, there were 39 core FOAE staff with a research function that were listed as being research inactive. Although a number of these staff have either been undertaking recent Institutional Leadership roles or have recently completed their doctorate, strategies will need to be put into place to ensure that these research inactive staff are on track to generate quality research outputs.

With 21 FOAE staff members being a principal supervisor of five or more HDR candidates and 39 staff listed as research inactive, there are strains on the HDR supervisory capacity in FOAE. This also doesn’t include the growing HDR pathways that will require supervision. Moreover, almost a quarter of teaching/research staff with a research function do not have a doctoral qualification. The report demonstrates that there are large numbers of adjunct staff (N=117) that could be drawn upon for research expertise and contributions (ensuring contributions meet quality criterions and expectations). Almost half of these adjunct staff are either research active or have doctoral qualifications. New funding models will be required to be able to promote any HDR growth with the amount of HDR scholarship places on the decline and potentially growing demand with the launch of new FOAE HDR pathways in 2021. The implementation of the Faculty’s HDR growth strategy will be important to establish further industry connections to bolster co-investment in research training with industry. The research report showcases how FOAE HDR candidates are very much reliant on the ‘distant mode’ PhD, despite there being four other HDR qualifications on offer.

In 2020, the refereed journal article and book chapter contributions were relatively consistent with the proportions in the previous five-year period. The amount of conference papers dropped in 2020 compared to previous years, which could be attributed to the many postponements and cancellations of conferences due to the pandemic. The quality of the journal publications were also relatively stable compared to previous years, yet there is still work to be undertaken to reduce the journal publications which are ‘unlisted’. The main trend with journal quality in 2020 was the reduced proportion of Q3/Q4 level publications from 2019. As expected, the outputs of research were aligned with the biggest teaching areas (& therefore more staff to contribute research). FOAE researchers also aligned their research to areas outside the Faculty such as in Health and Psychology. With a drastically reduced creative arts teaching profile from 2022, research reporting contingencies will likely need to be considered if this area (Field of Education 10) is no longer reported against for research.

Despite declining trends in FOAE’s external grant funding, there have been some major positive successes, such as a recently awarded ARC DECRA for funding in 2022. There have also been some major FOAE research group initiatives in 2020-2021, that included the Early Childhood Voices 2020 conference (ECV2020) in which 2847 people registered from 70 countries; there were 8 keynote presentations with 9 invited speakers; 89 oral presentations; and 11,500 views of the presentations during the week of the conference. Five of the 10 Faculty research groups are now aligned towards two of the University’s 3-year Sturt Scheme Investment of Funding (see Section 4.4) with the intention of them obtaining significant external funding to partially support the research group in years 2 and 3, and beyond. With multiple newly merged schools across FOAE, it will be crucial to re-establish research momentum towards 2022 and beyond.

362

https://csu-span.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9741efbaca9545fcbdda4342e0035eea


Appendix 1. FOAE Quartile 1 (Q1) Refereed Journal Articles in 2020 Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation Sertkaya, S., & Keskin, Z. (2020). A prophetic stance against violence: An analysis of the peaceful attitude of prophet Muhammad during the Medinan period. Religions, 11(11), [587].

Çoruh, H. (2020). Relationship between religion and science in Muslim modernism. Theology and Science, 18(1), 152-161.

School of Education Blake, H. L., McLeod, S., & Verdon, S. (2020). Intelligibility enhancement assessment and intervention: A single-case experimental design with two multilingual university students. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 34(1-2), 1-20.

Cronin, A., McLeod, S., & Verdon, S. (2020). Holistic communication assessment for young children with cleft palate using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: Children and youth. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 51(4), 914-938.

Crowe, K., & McLeod, S. (2020). Children's English consonant acquisition in the United States: A review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 29(4), 2155-2169.

Ireland, M., McLeod, S., Farquharson, K., & Crowe, K. (2020). Evaluating children in U.S. public schools with speech sound disorders: Considering federal and state laws, guidance, and research. Topics in Language Disorders, 40(4), 326-340.

Masso, S., McLeod, S., Cronin, A., & Phám, B. (2020). Transcription of Vietnamese adults' and children's consonants by English-speaking speech-language pathologists. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 72(2), 92- 107.

McGill, N., Crowe, K., & McLeod, S. (2020). “Many wasted months”: Stakeholders’ perspectives about waiting for speech-language pathology services. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 22(3), 313-326.

Elwick, S., & Green, B. (2020). Merleau-Ponty's body and beyond? Early childhood studies, philosophical- empirical inquiry, and educational research. Qualitative Inquiry, 26(5), 500-506.

Owens, K. (2020). Transforming the established perceptions of visuospatial reasoning: Integrating an ecocultural perspective. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 32, 257-283.

Moore, B., Dudley, D., & Woodcock, S. (2020). The effect of martial arts training on mental health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 24(4), 402-412.

Daffern, T., & Mackenzie, N. M. (2020). A case study on the challenges of learning and teaching English spelling: Insights from eight Australian students and their teachers. Literacy, 54(3), 99-110.

Thornton, S. (2020). (Re)asserting a knowledge-building agenda in school mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 1-17.

Deehan, J., Danaia, L., & McKinnon, D. H. (2020). From students to teachers: Investigating the science teaching efficacy beliefs and experiences of graduate primary teachers. Research in Science Education, 50, 885-916.

Einarsdóttir, J. T., Crowe, K., Kristinsson, S. H., & Másdóttir, T. (2020). The recovery rate of early stuttering. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 64, 1-16. [105764].

Murphy, S. (2020). The impact of school disadvantage on senior secondary science: A study of patterns of participation and achievement in government secondary schools in Victoria, Australia. Research in Science Education, 50(4), 1603–1618.

363


Murphy, S. (2020). Science education success in a rural Australian school: Practices and arrangements contributing to high senior science enrolments and achievement in an isolated rural school. Research in Science Education, 1-13.

Davidson, C., & Edwards-Groves, C. (2020). Producing and closing down multiple-response sequences during whole-class talk in an early years classroom. Language and Education, 34(3), 193-211.

Salimpour, S., Bartlett, S., Fitzgerald, M. T., McKinnon, D. H., Cutts, K. R., James, C. R., Miller, S., Danaia, L., Hollow, R. P., Cabezon, S., Faye, M., Tomita, A., Max, C., de Korte, M., Baudouin, C., Birkenbauma, D., Kallery, M., Anjos, S., Wu, Q., ... Ortiz-Gil, A. (2020). The Gateway Science: a review of astronomy in the OECD school curricula, including China and South Africa. Research in Science Education.

Newell, C., & Bain, A. (2020). Academics’ perceptions of collaboration in higher education course design. Higher Education Research and Development, 39(4), 748-763.

Lancaster, J., & Bain, A. (2020). Teacher preparation and the inclusive practice of pre-service teachers: A comparative follow-up study. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(12), 1311-1325.

Davidson, C., Danby, S., Ekberg, S., & Thorpe, K. (2020). The interactional achievement of reading aloud by young children and parents during digital technology use. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 1-26.

Francisco, S. (2020). Developing a trellis of practices that support learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 42(1), 102-117.

Stevens, L., & Wurf, G. (2020). Perceptions of inclusive education: A mixed methods investigation of parental attitudes in three Australian primary schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(4), 351-365.

Auhl, G., & Bain, A. (2020). Do pre-service teachers develop a schema for inclusive classroom practice? Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 1-17.

McGill, N., McLeod, S., Ivory, N., Davis, E., & Rohr, K. (2020). Randomised controlled trial evaluating active versus passive waiting for speech-language pathology. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 1-20.

McLeod, S., Davis, E., Rohr, K., McGill, N., Miller, K., Roberts, A., Thornton, S., Ahio, N., & Ivory, N. (2020). Waiting for speech-language pathology services: A randomised controlled trial comparing therapy, advice and device. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 22(3), 372-386.

Cruickshank, V., Hyndman, B., Patterson, K., & Kebble, P. (2020). Encounters in a marginalised subject: The experiential challenges faced by Tasmanian health and physical education teachers. Australian Journal of Education, 1-17.*

Hyndman, B., & Harvey, S. (2020). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of Twitter for health and physical education teacher education: A self-determination theoretical approach. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 39(4), 472-480.*

Harvey, S., Carpenter, J., & Hyndman, B. (2020). Introduction to social media for professional development and learning in physical education and sport pedagogy. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 39(4), 425-433.*

Harvey, S., Atkinson, O., & Hyndman, B. (2020). An investigation into sports coaches' Twitter use. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 39(4), 481-490. [7]. *

Hyndman, B., Suesee, B., McMaster, N., Harvey, S., Jefferson-Buchanan, R., Cruickshank, V., Barnes, M., & Pill, S. (2020). Physical Education across the international media: A five-year analysis. Sport, Education and Society, 25(3), 274-291.*

*Although FOAE Office, published under previous School of Education workload allocation.

364


School of Information and Communication Studies Shamsi, S., Williams, M., & Mansourian, Y. (2020). An introduction to aboriginal fishing cultures and legacies in seafood sustainability. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(22), 1-17. [9724].

Yi, G. (2020). The approaches used to make change decisions and the influencing determinants. Library Management, 1-9.

Evans, M., & Smith, K. (2020). Surfacing assumptions via ‘metaxic’ method: An arts-based method for team fieldwork. Qualitative Research, 20(3), 324-339.

Jamali, H. R., Steel, C. C., & Mohammadi, E. (2020). Wine research and its relationship with wine production: A scientometric analysis of global trends. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 26(2), 130-138.

Pham, H., & Williamson, K. (2020). Towards effective collaboration between academics and library staff: A comparative Australian/Vietnamese study. Library and Information Science Research, 42(2), [101015].

Hider, P., & Kennan, M. A. (2020). How far apart are L and M? The institutional and publishing disconnects between LIS and museum studies. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 61(1), 48-63.

Hider, P. (2020). Towards a sociology of KOS and more basic KO research. Knowledge Organization, 47(6), 501-510.

Thompson, K., & Paul, A. (2020). Factors of digital inclusion among women: Revisiting India and extending to Chile and Australia for additional analysis. The Library Quarterly, 90(2), 173-188.

Garner, J. (2020). "Almost like freedom": Prison libraries and reading as facilitators of escape. The Library Quarterly, 90(1), 5-19.

Garner, J. (2020). Experiencing time in prison: The influence of books, libraries and reading. Journal of Documentation, 76(5), 1033-1050.

Lee, C. J., & Northcott, S. J. (2020). Art for health’s sake: Community art galleries as spaces for well-being promotion through connectedness. Annals of leisure research, 1-19.

Danaei, D., Jamali, H. R., Mansourian, Y., & Rastegarpour, H. (2020). Comparing reading comprehension between children reading augmented reality and print storybooks. Computers and Education, 153, 1-10. [103900].

Jamali, H. R., Nicholas, D., Watkinson, A., Abrizah, A., Rodríguez-Bravo, B., Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C., Xu, J., Polezhaeva, T., Herman, E., & Świgon, M. (2020). Early career researchers and their authorship and peer review beliefs and practices: An international study. Learned Publishing, 33(2), 142-152.

Jamali, H. R., Nicholas, D., Herman, E., Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C., Abrizah, A., Rodríguez-Bravo, B., Xu, J., Świgon’, M., Polezhaeva, T., & Watkinson, A. (2020). National comparisons of early career researchers' scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours. Learned Publishing, 33(4), 370-384.

Jamali Mahmuei, H. R., Abbasi, A., & Bornmann, L. (2020). Research diversification and its relationship with publication counts and impact: A case study based on Australian professors. Journal of Information Science, 46(1), 131-144.

Nicholas, D., Jamali, H. R., Herman, E., Watkinson, A., Abrizah, A., Rodríguez-Bravo, B., Boukacem- Zeghmouri, C., Xu, J., Świgoń, M., & Polezhaeva, T. (2020). A global questionnaire survey of the scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours of early career researchers. Learned Publishing, 33(3), 197-210.

Nicholas, D., Herman, E., Jamali Mahmuei, H. R., Abrizah, A., Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C., Xu, J., Rodríguez- Bravo, B., Watkinson, A., Polezhaeva, T., & Świgon, M. (2020). Millennial researchers in a metric-driven scholarly world: An international study. Research Evaluation, 29(3), 263-274.

Nicholas, D., Jamali Mahmuei, H. R., Herman, E., Xu, J., Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C., Watkinson, A., Rodríguez-Bravo, B., Abrizah, A., Świgon, M., & Polezhaeva, T. (2020). How is open access publishing going down with early career researchers? An international, multi-disciplinary study. El Profesional de la Informacion, 29(6), 1-22. [e290614].

365


School of Social Work and Arts Ibrahim, Q. A., Sorur, M., Labidi, L., & Osburn, L. G. (2020). Quality of social work education and practice in the Arab countries: a comparative study of Palestine, Qatar and Tunisia. Social Work Education, 1-14.

Pawar, M., Hugman, R., Anscombe, B., & Alexandra, A. (2020). Searching for virtue ethics: A survey of social work ethics curriculum and educators. The British Journal of Social Work, 50(6), 1816-1833.

Pawar, M., & Nixon, M. (2020). Social policy practice preferences by social work students: Implications for macro practice education. British Journal of Social Work, 50(8), 2279-2297.

Cohen, D., Luck, M., Hormozaki, A., & Saling, L. (2020). Increased meaningful activity while social distancing dampens affectivity; mere busyness heightens it: Implications for well-being during COVID-19. PLoS One, 15(12), [e0244631].

Wardle, S., & Bennett, C. (2020). Spiritual inclusiveness at end-of-life for Punjabi Indians: Experience with regional residential aged care facilities. Journal of Religion, Spirituality and Aging.

Bell, K., Cash, B., Boetto, H., & Thampi, K. (2020). International study abroad programmes: Exploring global south student perspectives, reciprocity and sustainability. Social Work Education, 1-13.

Boetto, H., Bowles, W., Närhi, K., & Powers, M. (2020). Raising awareness of transformative ecosocial work: Participatory action research with Australian practitioners. International Journal of Social Welfare, 29(4), 300-309.

Browne, T. K., & Clarke, S. (2020). Bioconservatism, bioenhancement and backfiring. Journal of Moral Education, 49(2), 241-256.

Clarke, S. (2020). Straight out of Durkheim? Haidt’s Neo-Durkheimian account of religion and the cognitive science of religion. Sophia, 59, 197-210.

Cohen, D. (2020). An actualist explanation of the procreation asymmetry. Utilitas, 32(1), 70-89.

Bridges, D., & Wadham, B. (2020). Gender under fire: Portrayals of military women in the Australian print media. Feminist Media Studies, 20(2), 219-237.

Lewis, C., & Mehmet, M. (2020). Does the NPS® reflect consumer sentiment? A qualitative examination of the NPS using a sentiment analysis approach. International Journal of Market Research, 62(1), 9-17.

Came, H., O'Sullivan, D., & McCreanor, T. (2020). Introducing critical Tiriti policy analysis through a retrospective review of the New Zealand Primary Health Care Strategy. Ethnicities, 20(3), 434-456.

Bridges, D., Wulff, E., Bamberry, L., Krivokapic-Skoko, B., & Jenkins, S. (2020). Negotiating gender in the male-dominated skilled trades: A systematic literature review. Construction Management and Economics, 38(10), 894-916.

School of Theology Cameron, A., Stevens, B., Shaw, R., Bewert, P., Salt, M., & Ma, J. (2020). Towards a ‘social anthropology’ of end of life moral deliberation: A study of Australian Salvation Army officers. Studies in Christian Ethics, 33(3), 299-317.

Rees, A. (2020). On patting snakes and sitting under trees: Just peace theory and prophetic witness. International Journal of Public Theology, 14(2), 135-148.

Doherty, B. (2020). The smoke of satan on the silver screen: The Catholic horror film, Vatican II, and the revival of demonology. Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 33(1), 66-96.

Francis, L. J., Powell, R., & Village, A. (2020). Mystical experience and emotional wellbeing: a study among Australian church leaders. Journal of Beliefs and Values, 41(4), 509-513.

366


Appendix 2. FOAE Partnerships for Research School /Unit Partner organisation Description of organisation Type of relationship / current commitments / activities

Various

Bathurst Regional Council, Port Macquarie-Hastings Council, Wagga Wagga City Council

Local government Various – steering groups, review panels, joint projects, support of community events, internships.

SICS Commercial Radio Australia

National industry body representing Australia's commercial radio industry

Charles Sturt-CRA Agreement: CRA sponsorship of course; Charles Sturt sponsorship of Radio Alive conference; Charles Sturt is CRA’s exclusive university source of internships.

SICS ACE Radio Broadcaster Pty Ltd

ACE Radio Broadcasters includes 17 radio stations, The Weekly Advertiser newspaper, ACE Digital and ACE Direct Sales, employing over 200 people across Victoria and southern New South Wales.

MOU Regional Radio Endorsement Program – course promotion, endorsement of applicants by ACE.

SWA Australian Council of Heads of Schools of Social Work (ACHSSW)

National peak body of heads of schools of social work that lobbies on issues affecting social work education and the social work profession.

SWA is a financial member with full voting rights.

SWA

Australian & New Zealand Social Work & Welfare Education & Research (ANZSWWER)

Peak body for social work education and research.

Charles Sturt is a financial member and regular contributor of papers and presentations to the annual ANZSWWER conference.

SWA University of Jyvaskyla Tertiary institution, Finland Research partnership, co-publication.

SWA Nihon Fukushi University (Japan)

Nihon Fukushi University Department of Social Welfare

To-date, three staff exchange visits completed (one scheduled/on-hold due to Covid-19), student mobility program (on-hold), NFU student exchange (2019), current (social work) research project.

SWA Rajagiri College of Social Sciences (India)

Rajagiri College of Social Sciences is a highly regarded provider of social work education.

Co-presentation, keynote speeches at the DYUTI conference, facilitation of student mobility programs, hosting visiting RCSS students on exchange, research collaboration and co- publication.

SWA King's College Tertiary institution, London England Research partnership, co-publication.

SWA Tel Aviv University Tertiary institution, Tel Aviv Israel Research partnership.

SWA- ESJ

Wagga Wagga City Council

Local government - Community Services team, Equity Project team,

Research partnerships - Equity Project - Domestic Violence; Disaster Resilience Project and community reference group.

367


SWA - ESJ Australian Red Cross Humanitarian organisation - Regional

Emergency Services Research partnership - Disaster Resilience Project, Community Reference Group.

SWA - ESJ

NSW Department of Communities and Justice

State government; Welfare Functional Area Coordination, Murrumbidgee District Research partnership - Disaster Resilience Project, Community Reference Group.

SWA - ESJ

NSW State Emergency Service (SES) State government; Community Capability team Research partnership - Disaster Resilience Project, Community Reference Group.

SWA - ESJ NSW Department of Health State government; Murrumbidgee Local Health

District Disaster Management Research partnership - Disaster Resilience Project, Community Reference Group.

SOE Rural Regional Education Advisory Group (RREAG) Department of Education (NSW) group The group is mainly comprised of DoE exec managers but also representatives from parents,

Catholic and School Principals. Deals with challenges facing regional schools.

SOE Wagga Department of Education Directorate Regional Department of Education Structuring collaboration opportunities with new school build in Estella and the Open

Professional Space as well as STEM development

SOE Dublin City University European Network of Universities External Adviser for eLearning and external examiner of the quality of Post Graduate degrees.

SOE

Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER)

National educational research organisation

A SOE staff member is an expert advisor to ACER.

SOE

Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA)

International research association A SOE staff member is a Vice President of the association. Several staff from SOE and SOTE

are members.

SOE ALEA (Albury and Wagga) Australian Literacy Education Association Reframing literacy development and interest in these regional areas.

SOE Froebel Australia/Little Scientists Australia Not-for-profit early childhood STEM program Long-standing research partnership with SOE (6 years continuous funding).

SOT Uniting Church in Australia

(NSW/ACT)

Church denomination that is the main ecclesial stakeholder for the North Parramatta campus (United Theological College)

Key engagement point for development of subjects and courses, as well as key source of funding.

SOT Anglican Diocese of

Canberra and Goulburn

Church denomination that is the main ecclesial stakeholder for the Canberra campus (St Mark's National Theological Centre)

Key engagement point for development of subjects and courses, as well as key source of funding.

SOT Council of Deans of Theology

National body of theological educators in Australia Provide standards for course development and key knowledge of industry practice.

SOT

NCLS (National Church Life Survey)

National body devoted to qualitative and quantitative research around church life and practice - responsible for the well-known National Church Life Survey

Key engagement point for research for HDR students and faculty.

SICS Australian Library and

Information Association

Australia’s main peak body for the library profession (and non-ICT information professions more broadly).

Accredits MIS, BIS and METL. Close relationships in many areas and at many levels, e.g. strong SICS representation on its committees, sponsors SICS prizes and scholarships, SICS exhibits at its conferences, etc. Current president is a CSU alumnus.

368


SICS Australian Society of Archivists

Australia’s peak body for the archives profession. Accredits MIS and BIS specialisations. SICS represented on its Council. Sponsors a SICS prize.

SICS RIM Professionals Australasia Australia’s peak body for records managers. Accredits MIS and BIS.

SICS University of Hong Kong,

SPACE Top HK university’s continuing education division.

Partnership 20 years old, provides local tutorial and administrative support for HK students enrolling in MIS and BIS; markets courses, manages local relationships (including employers and HK Library Association).

SICS National Film and Sound

Archive

Australia’s premier audiovisual archive and a place of engagement with Australian audiovisual production, past and present.

Subject development and delivery in the Grad Cert in Audiovisual Archiving.

SICS Australian School Library Association

Australia’s main national association for school/teacher librarians.

Informal partnership that provides for e.g. discounts for ASLA events for METL students. Close relationships with some of the TL academics.

SICS iSchools International network of ‘information schools’. Charles Sturt one of three Australian members. Useful network for recruitment, marketing, advocacy, etc.

SICS Department of Defence Australian Army Investigating informational content of different extremist groups.

SICS Libraries ACT Canberra public library network Investigating impact/value of ACT public libraries with Libraries Research Group members.

SICS Australian Public Library Alliance Peak body for Australian public libraries COVID-19 project in Libaries Research Group partnering APLA and ALIA.

CISAC

Respect Graduate School

Respect Graduate School is an academic institution through which students and faculty engage in teaching, learning, and research primarily in Islamic Studies located in Pennsylvania, USA.

Working in collaboration to develop their students in order to prepare them for enrolling in our Master of Islamic Studies course.

CISAC Darul Ulum College of

Victoria

A Muslim education provider that offer a 6-year program for their student in traditional Islamic studies.

We offer their student the opportunity to get proficiency credits. Many of their graduates choose to study with CISAC.

CISAC

International Association of Muslim Psychologists

The International Association of Islamic Psychology is a professional body which aims to set and maintain a high standard of research and practice in this specialised field. They combine Islamic tradition into the context of modern clinical psychology, with a focus on practical application.

Memorandum of Understanding with the International Association of Muslim Psychologists.

The agreement covers three areas:

1- Design and delivery of the Graduate Certificate in Islamic Psychology course. 2- Conduct research on mental health and wellbeing from an Islamic perspective and in relation to Muslims. 3- Organise a biannual conference on Islamic Psychology.

CISAC

Sirius College

A private high school located in Melbourne

We have met with senior management of the school and have a number of the Religion and Values teachers enrol and graduate from our courses. We also offer professional development workshops for their Religion and Values staff.

369


CISAC

Australian Association of Islam and Muslim Studies

AAIMS is an inter-disciplinary network of scholars at Australian universities. AAIMS promotes teaching and research excellence on Islam and Muslim experiences as a minority or majority.

One of the CISAC staff is the vice president of the association. CISAC undertakes various collaborative initiatives with AAIMS.

CISAC

Respect Graduate School

Respect Graduate School is an academic institution through which students and faculty engage in teaching, learning, and research primarily in Islamic Studies located in Pennsylvania, USA

Working in collaboration to develop their students in order to prepare them for enrolling in our Master of Islamic Studies course.

SIAS

Wiradjuri Council of Elders

This council comprises Elder representatives across CSU’s Wiradjuri Nation footprint (WW, Bathurst, Dubbo). Currently being re-convened by relevant community groups, and Elders of each area).

Uncle Dr Stan Grant (intellectual leader and custodian of Wiradjuri language program) is part of this group. Key group for activities that require cultural protocol to be followed. (Note: this is a representative Council and does not refer to specific local Elders groups, although they have members on the Council).

SOE

Speech Pathology Australia

Professional body for 10,000+ speech pathologists in Australia

Life member, previous grant holder

SOE

Little Scientists Australia

Little Scientists Australia is a not-for-profit professional development program for early childhood educators and teachers that focuses on the area of STEM education in the early years. The project is supported and funded by the Australian Government’s Department of Education and Training through the National Innovation and Science Agenda. It is also funded by the Frobel Foundation.

Contract research (funded)- it is recorded in the Research Office- we have an ongoing partnership with Little Scientists. We have been responsible for evaluating their professional development program and materials. We have presented Webinars for the organisation. We have led conference presentations and delivered keynote talks at some of their conferences. Current CSU team members are: A/Prof Amy MacDonald, A/Prof Lena Danaia and Mr Steve Murphy.

SOE

CCSA Early childhood member organisation for

Services in regional-rural-remote NSW

Contract research

SOE Independent Education

Union

Union for early childhood teachers

Contract research

SOE

C & K QLD

Not for profit Early Childhood service provider

Contract research

SOE NSW Department of

Education, Australia

Government Partner organisation re research project. Developing pilot for functional assessment project.

Grant application submitted.

370


SOE DIPF: Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education, Germany

Research institution Research collaboration. Inclusive education project. Paper submitted for review, papers being drafted.

SOE Macquarie University, Australia Tertiary institution Research collaboration. Projects: Mental health and martial arts, functional assessment. Various

activities including papers submitted, papers being drafted, pilot development.

SOE North East Health Wangaratta

SOE Murray Valley Refugee Sanctuary

SOE Victorian Department of Education

SOE Regand Park ECEC Dubbo Early Childhood Education and Care Centre in Dubbo.

Professional partnership between RPECEC and researchers, Dr Elizabeth Murray (Charles Sturt) and Dr Loraine Fordham (MQU). No current research activity being undertaken with this setting.

SOE Gowrie NSW

<End of 2020 FOAE Research Report>

371

Item 13: 2020 BJBS Faculty Research Report, 27 September 2021

PURPOSE

To receive, and note the findings of, the 2020 BJBS Faculty Research Report

RECOMMENDATION


1. Receive and Note the findings of, the 2020 BJBS Faculty Research Report

KEY ISSUES

• The Faculty is seeing favourable trends with respect to external grant income, the quantity of

publications, and their quality.

• The number of conference papers has decreased markedly, primarily because of COVID19.

Nonetheless, the quality of conference papers submitted needs to be carefully monitored,

particularly in SCME.

• Improving citations will be an important future focus for the Faculty. It is strong in some areas

(eg. SCME), while there is opportunity for improvement in others

• Research Compacts effectively ended in 2020, though some limited support was provided.

The reduced research administrative support for the Faculty is expected to create (and is

creating) ongoing challenges.

• High first year HDR attrition rates were identified in 2020. While the Faculty has previously

performed very well against this metric, and this KPI is very volatile, this result suggest that

further investigation is warranted, including potential measures to address first year attrition.

In interpreting this figure, positive results for timely completions and 6 year completions

should be acknowledged.

• Overall satisfaction for HDR students in BJBS is relatively high, even in the context of Covid

19.

• Substantive progress has been made in identifying priority 4 digit FOR codes in the context of

new TEQSA research requirements, and this work is ongoing.


372

COMPLIANCE

Legislative Compliance This decision contributes to compliance with: 1. Threshold standards Part 4. Research and Research Training of

the Higher Education Standards Framework 2021

RISK ASSESSMENT


Charles Sturt University has a High Appetite and willingness to take risks in high impact research and innovation activities that will support the University’s standing in research excellence, develop our strengths in key disciplines, foster significant third-party partnerships that will contribute value to the University industry and the community and contribute to research and innovation leadership at the University. Low Appetite Charles Sturt University has a Low Appetite and willingness to take risks in the strategic direction and management of research and innovation activities which might otherwise produce diffuse or limited outcomes in terms of impact, excellence and value to the University or are unaligned to key research disciplines.


The decisions make in the attached are consistent with the current risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS A. Faculty Research Report, 27 September 2021

Prepared by: Mark Morrison (ADR, BJBS) Cleared by: Mark Morrison (ADR, BJBS)

373




Dated: September 2021

Compiled by Professor Mark Morrison, Associate Dean (Research) and

Associate-Professor Ramudu Bhanugopan, Sub-Dean (Graduate Studies)

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences

2020 Faculty Research Report for Faculty Board

374

Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences | 2020 Faculty Research Report for Faculty Board Page 2 of 28

Contents

HIGHLIGHTS ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

A. FACULTY RESEARCH OUTCOMES ....................................................................................................... 5

1. External Grant Income ........................................................................................................................... 5

2. Research Grant Proposals .................................................................................................................... 6

3. Quantity of Publications ......................................................................................................................... 8

4. Quality of Publications ......................................................................................................................... 10

5. Citations ............................................................................................................................................... 14

B. 2020 FACULTY COMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 15

C. HIGHER DEGREE RESEARCH STUDENTS ......................................................................................... 17

D. OTHER ASPECTS OF FACULTY RESEARCH ..................................................................................... 23

1. Faculty Research Areas ...................................................................................................................... 23

2. Faculty FOR codes .............................................................................................................................. 24

3. Data Science Research Unit (DSRU) .................................................................................................. 24

4. Research Centre Participation ............................................................................................................. 24

5. Faculty Research Committee .............................................................................................................. 25

6. Covid 19 Grants ................................................................................................................................... 25

7. Other Highlights ................................................................................................................................... 25

8. External Grant Outcomes .................................................................................................................... 25

375


HIGHLIGHTS

• External grant income increased by 60.4 % in 2020, and grant success rate increased by about 10-

15%.

• Between 2017 and 2020 the number of journal articles produced by the Faculty consecutively

increased each year, and by 21.3% in total across the four years

• Between 2017 and 2020, the number of Q1 journal articles increased from 95 to 109 (14.7%

increase), and the number of Q2 journal articles increased from 35 to 58 (65.7% increase).

• The proportion of Q1 journals has remained relatively stable over the past five years (51-55%), but

the proportion of Q1 and Q2 journals is increasing. There has been a noticeable decline in the

proportion of low quality output.

• The number of conference papers has decreased markedly, primarily because of COVID19.

Nonetheless, the quality of conference papers submitted needs to be carefully monitored.

• The increase in quality and quantity is most noticeable in those schools who had relatively lower

outcomes in the first half of the evaluation period

• Improving citations will be an important future focus for the Faculty. It is strong in some areas, while

there is opportunity for improvement in others

• Research Compacts effectively ended in 2020, though some limited support was provided. The

reduced research administrative support for the Faculty is expected to create ongoing challenges.

• The Faculty collaborated effectively with the other two Faculties at Charles Sturt in delivering a Tri-

Faculty workshop series in 2020, a substantive proportion of which was led or initiated by

researchers in BJBS.

• Commencing HDR enrolments in 2020 for full time students were higher than 2019, while part time

enrolments decreased substantively. Enrolments of both part-time and full-time students are

generally consistent with the range and wide yearly variation in enrolments over the past five years.

• Total HDR enrolments has increased over the past four years, however from Session 2 there was a

substantive decline in current enrolments due to Covid 19. The Faculty has provided substantial

additional support to HDR students during the pandemic.

• First year attrition rates in 2020 are the highest of any Faculty in the university for both full and part-

time HDR students, and about 5% higher than the RUN group benchmark. While the Faculty has

previously performed very well against this metric, and this KPI is very volatile, this result suggest

that further investigation is warranted, including potential measures to address first year attrition.

• While BJBS HDR students may at times have higher attrition in first year, the results for timely

completions and 6 year completions collectively suggests that, overall they are more likely to

complete and in a timely way.

• Overall satisfaction for HDR students in BJBS is relatively high, and close to the university average.

A high level of HDR student satisfaction was maintained in 2020, even in the context of Covid 19.

• Full-time employment of HDR students was found to be about 25% lower than the university average

376


and the BJBS figure for 2019, and 37.5% lower than 2016. It is probable that this decline is related

to the changing employment market due to Covid 19, but also in part to students’ decisions to

complete further study (which may also be due to Covid 19).

• There was substantial optimisation of Faculty doctoral programs during 2020, for both the PhD and

Professional Doctorates. This included a reduction from seven to three PhD courses, with the three

new courses. Two are classified as high cost (Doctor of Philosophy (Engineering) and Doctor of

Philosophy (Psychology). For the Professional Doctorate programs. Modifications were carried out

on Doctor of Public Safety (DPS), Doctor of Business Administration (DBA) and Doctor Information

Technology (DIT) subjects, such that all three professional doctorates in BJBS now utilise the same

four coursework subjects and the same two thesis subjects except DIT, which have ITC 715 and ITC

716 thesis subjects.

• Faculty has proposed to start a Master of Research (M.Res) in 2022, which aims to provide an

alternative and stronger pathway to PhD studies, and equip those students seeking to work in

industry with strong research skills.

• Progress has been made in identifying priority 4 digit FOR codes, and this work is ongoing.

• The Faculty Research Committee provided useful input into a range of important university-wide and

Faculty research-topics over 2020.

• Faculty researchers continue to be involved in University research centres and Institutes, and to

participate in Faculty Research Groups

• The Data Science Research Unit continues to progress and is held in increasing esteem across the

University.

377


A. FACULTY RESEARCH OUTCOMES

1. External Grant Income

External grant income increased by 60.4% from 2019 to 2020, and by 54.2% compared to the average

income between 2016 to 2019 ($951,528). As shown in Figure 1, this has primarily been because of the

substantive increase in CRC funding.

Figure 1. External Grant Income 2016-2020 by Funding Category

Figure 2 provides details about the distribution of external grant income across schools. In 2020, the biggest

earners were the School of Computing, Maths and Engineering (SCME), and School of Business (SOB).

Both schools have substantively increased external grant income over the period. School of Psychology

also had increasing grant income between 2019 and 2020.

378


Figure 2. External Grant Income 2016-2020 by School

2. Research Grant Proposals

Figure 3 presents data on the number (N) of successful vs unsuccessful grant proposals, while in Figure 4

the same data is presented in percentage terms (%). As many of the 2020 grant outcomes are still pending,

it is difficult to interpret 2020 data, however there is evidence of an increasing trend in grant success (about

10-15% increase) when comparing 2019 and 2020, with data from earlier years. This greater success rate is

probably related to greater involvement in CRCs.

379


Figure 3. Grant Submitted 2015 – 2020 and Outcomes (N)

Figure 4. Grant Submitted 2015 – 2020 and Outcomes (%)

380


3. Quantity of Publications

Between 2017 and 2020 there has been a steady increase in the number of journal articles produced by the

Faculty, with a 21.3% increase overall in this period. The other noticeable trend in this period is a decline in

conference publications, which in part is because of COVID19 travel restrictions.

Figure 5. Faculty Publications 2017 to 2020 by Publication Type

Row Labels Book Book Chapter Conference Paper Journal Articles Report Grand Total

2017 2 31 105 178 12 328

2018 4 30 88 188 15 325

2019 6 16 81 207 15 325

2020 4 27 41 216 11 299

Figures 6 to 9 show the publication outcomes between 2017 to 2020 for the four research schools in the

Faculty. Excluded are publications from staff in School of Policing Studies and the Faculty Office. SCME

has consistently been the highest producer of journal articles in the Faculty over the period. The substantive

increase in the number of journal articles in School of Psychology across the period is noteworthy.

Figure 6. AGSPS Publications 2017 to 2020 by Publication Type

381


Figure 7. SOB Publications 2017 to 2020 by Publication Type

Figure 8. SCME Publications 2017 to 2020 by Publication Type

Figure 9. Psychology Publications 2017 to 2020 by Publication Type

382


Reports to external agencies are summarised in Table 1. These had remained relatively constant in number across the evaluation period.

Table 1. Faculty Reports

Major Minor Total

2017 5 7 12

2018 13 2 15

2019 8 7 15

2020 9 2 11

Total 35 18 53

4. Quality of Publications

While it is pleasing to see improvements in the quantity of publications, of greater import in the current

sectoral environment is the quality of publications. First, in Table 1 and Figure 10 the data related to journal

quality rankings are presented. These and are other rankings in this section are based on the Charles Sturt

Rankings lists. We see in this table:

• The number and percentage of Q1 journal articles is relatively stable across the period, though there

is a small (4%) decrease between 2019 and 2020

• The number and percentage of Q1+Q2 journals has increased across the period – from n=130

(73%) to n=167 (77.3%)

• Between 2017 and 2020, the number of Q1 journal articles increased from 95 to 109 (14.7%

increase), and the number of Q2 journal articles increased from 35 to 58 (65.7% increase).

• The proportion of Q3/4 journals has remained relatively stable, though with a slight peak in 2018

• The proportion of unranked/unlisted journals has consistently declined, and by about 5% in total,

though the number has remained stable. Some of these are anticipated as being new and quality

journals which will be re-ranked over time, but there is still some low-quality output that will need to

be addressed.

Table 2. Faculty Journal Rankings 2017 to 2020

Year Q1 Q2 Q1+Q2

(%) Q3/4

Unranked or Not on CSU Journal List

Grand Total

N % N % % N % N %

2017 95 53.4% 35 19.7% 73.0% 14 7.9% 34 19.1% 178

2018 103 54.8% 32 17.0% 71.8% 23 12.2% 30 16.0% 188

2019 113 54.6% 44 21.3% 75.8% 20 9.7% 30 14.5% 207

2020 109 50.5% 58 26.9% 77.3% 19 8.8% 30 13.9% 216

Grand Total 420 53.2% 169 21.4% 74.7% 76 9.6% 124 15.7% 789

383


Figure 10. Faculty Journal Rankings 2017 to 2020

In Table 3 and Figure 11 the proportion of Q1 and Q1&2 combined journal articles are presented across the

evaluation period and by school. The results indicate that three of the Faculty’s schools (SOB, SCME, SOP)

are consistently publishing 70-80% of journal articles in Q1 and Q2 journals, and about 50-60% in Q1

journals. Two schools are evidencing consistent improvements in quality of journal rankings – AGSPS and

SOP.

Table 3. Q1 and Q1&2 Journal Rankings 2017 to 2020 by School

AGSPS SOB SCME SOP

Year Q1% Q1+Q2

(%) Q1%

Q1+Q2 (%)

Q1% Q1+Q2

(%) Q1%

Q1+Q2 (%)

2017 28.6% 50.0% 42.5% 67.5% 61% 80% 48.1% 66.7%

2018 26.7% 40.0% 59.5% 86.5% 61% 75% 52.8% 75.0%

2019 31.3% 59.4% 64.6% 87.5% 59% 73% 51.2% 80.5%

2020 39.4% 60.6% 51.2% 79.1% 50% 79% 54.2% 81.4%

Grand Total 32.7% 53.6% 55.2% 80.2% 58% 77% 52.4% 78.2%

384


Figure 11. Q1 and Q1&2 Journal Rankings 2017 to 2020 by School

Rankings of books and book chapters are presented in Table 4 and Figure 12. The data indicates that in

2017, 2018 and 2020 the majority of book chapters were in books published by high quality publishers, but

this was not the case in 2019 which saw a slightly higher proportion of use of standard publishers than high

quality publishers. The majority of these were published by staff in AGSPS (7/11)

Table 4. Faculty Books and Book Chapters 2017 to 2020 (N) by Quality Ranking

Year High Quality Standard Not on Charles Sturt publisher

list Total

2017 27 4 2 33

2018 22 8 4 34

2019 10 11 1 22

2020 27 3 1 31

Grand Total 102 27 8 137

385


Figure 12. Faculty Book Chapters 2017 to 2020 (%) by Quality Ranking

Lastly, in Table 5, are presented CORE rankings for conferences in SCME only. These data suggest

relatively consistent results across the period, with a slightly higher proportion of A*/A/B ranked journals in

the second half of the period. However, about two thirds of conference papers are ranked lower than A*/A/B

which is a high proportion.

Table 5. SCME CORE Conference Rankings 2017 to 2020

Year A* A A*/A B Other Total

N % N % N % N

2017 3 3 6% 23 22% 76 72% 105

2018 4 5% 21 24% 63 72% 88

2019 1 1 2% 27 33% 52 64% 81

2020 1 1 5% 11 27% 28 68% 41

Total 5 9 4% 83 26% 219 69% 316

386


5. Citations

Data on citations are of importance particularly for FOR codes where ERA evaluations are based on citations

(Psychology only in BJBS). However, they potentially have increased importance for all disciplines given the

TEQSA Quality of Research Determination (12/07/2021) that included volume of citations as a criterion.

In Tables 6 and 7, Faculty and then School citation results are presented using the SciVal Field Weighted

Citation Index (FWCI). To interpret this index, a FWCI value of >1 means that the author has publications

that are cited more than the average. That is, a FWCI of 2.10 means that a researcher, or group of

researchers, is cited 2.1 times more cited than the average.

Across the Faculty, BJBS researchers are being cited more than the average (when all items are included,

not just open access). However, as can be seen from the data in Table 7, this is being driven by strong

citation results from SCME. SOP had average citations close to unity in 2018 and 2019, and SOB in 2018.

However, for all schools apart from SCME, it is apparent that there is opportunity to increase citations.

The Faculty will need to put more effort into increasing citations in coming years. The university has an

Open Access publications funding scheme to support increased citations. However, this has not be

substantively utilised by Faculty researchers, and offers one route to increase citations. However, there are

other factors that influence citations, including:

• Social media presence, including listing papers on academic websites such as Research Gate and

Google Scholar profiles

• Choice of journal

• Choice of article type

• Type of contribution

• Choice of article title

• Use of keywords

• Other writing strategies

• Networking

• Collaboration

These and other strategies are recommended for further discussion and socialisation.

Table 6. Faculty SciVal Field Weighted Citation Index (FWCI) Metrics

Average SciVal FWCI Sum of PLUMX_Citations Sum of PLUMX_Usage

2017 1.12 3,133 83,171

2018 1.47 2,891 73,583

2019 1.24 2,014 32,731

2020 1.58 1,237 7,660 Note: citations in Physical sciences have been excluded

Table 7. Average SciVal Field Weighted Citation Index (FWCI) by School

AGSPS SOB SCME SOP

2017 0.46 0.29 1.31 0.48

2018 0.55 0.92 1.72 0.98

2019 0.31 0.57 1.43 1.01

2020 0.34 0.21 2.75 0.51

Average 0.42 0.50 1.70 0.75 Note: citations in Physical sciences have been excluded

387


B. 2020 FACULTY COMPACTS

Faculty Research Compacts were substantively curtailed in 2020, given university-level budget remediation

measure undertaken in the context of the Covid 19 pandemic. The Faculty received direct Compact funding

of $229,609 in 2020. This was much lower than the magnitude of Compacts provided in previous years

which were in the range of $1-2m or more, and funding was predominantly approved only to cover existing

commitments, as well as the Faculty Grant Development Officer (Dr Lisa Limbrick) and the Faculty Research

Editor (Mr Mark Filmer), the latter of which was a joint appointment with FOSH. There was approximately

$60K unspent at the end of the year, in part because of a reimbursement relating to an activity in 2019, and

a call was made for minor research-related expenses in the final quarter of 2020, with funding distributed

across the schools in the Faculty and mostly for infrastructure and data access. The 2020 budget was fully

expended. Compact funding was allocated to the categories of funding as shown in Table 8.

A number of additional funding categories were managed collaboratively on a “Tri-Faculty” basis with the

funding managed by the PVC-RI – these included HDR training and operating funding, return to research

funding, funding to support open-access publishing, and external presenters for staff researcher

development workshops.

The three Faculties collectively organised and ran the staff development workshops. The workshop calendar

is presented in Figure 13. BJBS led or arranged the majority of these workshops, including the Journal

Writing Workshop (led by Prof Mark Morrison) (31 participants) and the series of Grant Writing Workshops

(led by Prof Oliver Burmeister) which are generally run about every two years. The most recent series was

attended by 55 staff and HDR students from across the university, with 42% (23) of those from BJBS; some

of those were presenters and mentors, and there were also a few observers (people who could not commit

to full engagement, but could attend a few sessions). Past workshops have shown that the majority of those

attending have ended up successfully receiving an external grant.

BJBS also arranged for the support of a grant support expert – Lee Williamson – who helped to critique ARC

and NHMRC EOIs, draft proposals and rejoinder statements for BJBS staff, as well as staff in other

Faculties, with over 60 participants across the workshops. The Qualitative Methods workshop by Nick

Hopwood was attended by 27 participants. In general, Faculty staff engaged most with development

activities associated with external grant development.

Faculty Research Compacts as they were previously known have now effectively ended, with research

support at the university now provided directly through the PVC-RI portfolio, and the Faculty provide advice

on the design of programs and some assistance in their administration and management.

Table 8. Approved (Budgeted) 2020 Compact Funding

Category Title Amount

Faculty HDR Symposia & Training Activities & Operating Expenses for Projects $10,684

Compact Funded HDR Scholarships $6536

Researcher Salaries (including Grant Development Officer, and Research Editor) $167,280

CRC Time Release (research officer support for theme lead Cyber CRC) $20,436

Past Leveraging Commitments $24,329

388


Leveraging commitments for 2020 (Pending) $1415

Publishing charges $1759

TOTAL BUDGET $229,609

Figure 13. Tri Faculty Research Calendar 2020

389


C. HIGHER DEGREE RESEARCH STUDENTS

The cohort of commencing full-time HDR students in BJBS has remained relatively stable between 2015 and

2020, ranging from 9 (in 2017 and 2019) to 16 (in 2018). In 2020, the commencing cohort was 12, which is

an average-sized cohort for BJBS. This represented about a quarter of university commencements in 2020,

as shown in Table 9.

Between 2015 and 2020, part-time enrolments of HDR students in BJBS ranged from 16 to 28. 2020 had

the lowest figure of 16, though for context this followed the highest figure in the period of 28 commencing

part-time students in BJBS in 2019. The 2020 figure was close to, though slightly lower than, the 2016 and

2017 figure of 18 commencements. In 2015 there were 22 commencements. Part-time HDR students in

BJBS are slightly higher than a third of all part-time HDR students at Charles Sturt.

Table 9. HDR Commencing Enrolments and Load

Metric Faculty Full

Time 1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

% Course Profile

Part Time

1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

% Course Profile

Commencing Enrols All 51 -17.7% -23.9% 100.0% 44 -18.5% -21.4% 100.0%

Business, Justice & Behavioural Sciences

12 +33.3% -14.3% 23.5% 16 -42.9% -27.3% 36.4%

Commencing Load All 42.8 -17.0% -24.0% 100.0% 17.3 -22.9% -22.9% 100.0%


10.3 +28.1% -18.8% 24.0% 6.0 -47.8% -35.1% 34.8%

Total HDR Enrolment by Course Type

Overall there has been an increase in the total number of HDR students in FBJBS, when considered across

all years of enrolment. The degrees with the greatest increase between 2018 and 2021 were:

• Total DPS enrolments grew by 75 per cent, and

• Total PhD enrolments grew by 16 per cent.

However, since 2015 growth in total HDR enrolments has not been uniform across disciplines. Enrolments in

some disciplines, most notably policing, information technology, business management, have grown

substantially more than others, while enrolments in psychology have fallen slightly (see Table 9).

As total HDR student numbers have slightly increased, so too has the diversity of students. Enrolment

growth has been especially marked among domestic students. While domestic student enrolments increased

across all disciplines, there is considerable variation between disciplines. The COVID-19 global pandemic

and associated travel restrictions had a substantial impact on the movement of international students in 2020

and this is continuing in 2021. In the 20 months from 1 January 2020 to 31 August 2021, there were many

enrolment deferments made by HDR students, over one thirds of whom were outside Australia. In 2021, the

proportion of HDR students studying part-time is 89%.

Changing pathways into research doctorates have also been noted. For example, while honours remains the

most common pathway into a doctorate, the proportion of students using honours as an entry qualification is

declining, while an increasing number of candidates commence having completed a coursework masters

390


degree. Hence, a proposal has been submitted to offer Master of Research (MRes) as the main pathway to a

Ph.D .

HDR enrolments by year, and for 2020 and 2021 by session, are shown in Table 9 and Figure 14. Note that

yearly/session enrolments are different from total enrolments because of students deferring studies or taking

leave of absences. The latter was especially pronounced for the DBA, DIT and PhD in Session 2 of 2020

and 2021 due to Covid 19.

Table 9. HDR enrolment status by course type by year/session

Course 2018 2019

2020 Session 1

2020 Session 2

2021 Session 1

2021 Session 2

DBA 25 25 22 17 18 16

DIT 35 33 34 19 22 20

PhD 82 89 90 62 60 68

DPS 10 18 20 15 19 18

DLaw Enforcement (Suspended)

1 1 1 1 1 1

Doctor of Policing and Security (Suspended)

1 1 1

Doctor of Psychology (Clinical) (Suspended)

1 1 1

Figure 14. HDR enrolment status by course type

391


The impact of COVID-19 on HDR students and Implications

The COVID-19 pandemic poses several challenges for HDR students and their supervisors.

The Australian Research Council (ARC) has allowed a re-imagining of the Australian HDR experience. The

following steps has taken to support our HDR students during COVID, in FBJBS. The Sub-Dean (Graduate

Studies), a dedicated academic position, acts as an advocate and mentor to our students.

1. FBJBS’s communication plan and strategy with HDR students put us in an excellent position to

respond quickly and transparently as the pandemic spread. This included checking on the status

and wellbeing of each Faculty HDR student, and determining whether there was a need for

additional Faculty support for students in their studies.

2. At the beginning of 2021, a number of supervisors left Charles Sturt. As a result, 30 HDR students

were redistributed to other eligible supervisors in the schools in FBJBS.

3. The pandemic has led to changes in the format of supervision, as meetings moved primarily online

as navigating restricted physical access and remote work posed a significant burden on both HDR

students and their supervisors.

4. HDR supervisors were specifically asked to provide timely support to all their students in Australia

and overseas. We asked questions about working-from-home environments to ensure students had

the computing and internet resources needed to continue their research. We also made note of any

circumstances or potential risks that might affect their progress.

5. We ensured students were aware of extra support available such as HDR operating funds and

counselling services. While we have been empathetic, in many cases students need to be redirected

to the mental health support and counselling services.

6. HDR students experienced financial hardship because of the pandemic. Students nearing

completion were hit hardest. They were faced with the end of their scholarships at a time of

employment uncertainty. FBJBS provided financial assistance through HDR operating funds and

extensions to scholarships.

7. FBJBS annual HDR conference, a cornerstone event, and HDR supervisory training shifted online

via zoom. To avoid Zoom fatigue, sessions were recorded, and breakout rooms used to focus

student engagement with each other. Approximately 120 participants were present in HDR

conference in 2020.

8. Finally, FBJBS continued to celebrate successes on doctoral thesis submissions and graduation in a

monthly newsletter update.

While the Faculty provided effective support to its HDR students in 2020, the removal of the Faculty-

embedded administrative support position for HDR students, and the proposed ending of the Sub-Dean

(Graduate studies) position in July 2022 remain of concern in terms of their potential and likely impact on

student support. It is recommended that these changes (both actual and proposed) be carefully evaluated

and monitored with the goal of providing effective and quality service and support to HDR students, and

recognition be given to the unique context of each Faculty.

392


Attrition, Completion Rates, and Timely Completions

First year attrition rates in 2020 are the highest of any Faculty in the university for both full and part-time

HDR students, and about 5% higher than the RUN group benchmark (see Table 10). For part-time students,

there was some improvement between 2019 and 2020, with a decline in attrition of about 8%. Attrition

percentage tends to be quite volatile, as might be expected given the nature of the cohort and the small

number of students involved. Full-time HDR student first year attrition in 2017 and 2018 was 0%, and part-

time attrition was also 0% in 2018. Full-time attrition was at its highest in the period of evaluation in 2016 at

22% for full time students, and was over 25% for part-time students in both 2017 and 2019. While the

inherent volatility of this statistic given cohort size is recognised, this result suggests that there is a need is a

need to investigate the causes of and potentially address first year attrition. It is possible that this higher rate

of attrition to some extent may be related to Covid 19.

Completion rates (6 year) for the Faculty were pleasing for full time students in 2020 (71.4%), and was the

highest of the Faculties, and exceeded the benchmark. For most of the evaluation period (apart from 2019),

BJBS has met or exceeded the benchmark for full-time students. However, for part-time students BJBS was

slightly lower than the benchmark (by 3.7%), though was closer to the University average in 2020.

Timely completions were substantively higher in BJBS than the University average for both full and part-time

students, and showed a substantive improvement compared to 2015, while minor declines compared to

2019.

The results for timely completions and 6 year completions collectively suggests that while BJBS HDR

students may at times have higher attrition in first year, overall they are more likely to complete and in a

timely way.

Table 10. Attrition, Completion Rates, and Timely Completions

Metric Faculty Full

Time 1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

vs On-campus Benchmark

Part Time

1 Yr chg

5 Yr chg

vs Online Benchmark

First Year Attrition All 6.5% -6.8 -6.2 6.5% 13.0% -2.0 -9.8 13.5%


11.1% +4.8 -1.4 N/A 17.9% -8.2 +2.9 N/A

6 Year Completion Rate

All 52.2% -1.8 +5.8 54.9% 28.6% +0.5 +14.1 31.0%


71.4% +21.4 +12.6 N/A 27.3% -27.7 +21.4 N/A

Timely Completions All 75.6% +1.2 +15.3 N/A 73.0% +0.6 +17.1 N/A


88.9% -2.0 +44.5 N/A 81.8% -3.9 +24.7 N/A

Satisfaction, Full-time Employment, and Further Full Time Study

Overall satisfaction for HDR students in BJBS is relatively high, and close to the university average.

However, this figure has declined from 2019 and 2015. Nonetheless, maintaining a high level of HDR

student satisfaction in the context of Covid 19 is a pleasing result.

Of greater concern is the decline in full-time employment of HDR students, which is about 25% lower than

the university average and the BJBS figure for 2019, and 37.5% lower than 2016. It is probable that this

393


decline is related to the changing employment market due to Covid 19, but also in part to students’ decisions

to complete further study. The rate of further full-time study in 2020 (12.5%) is highest for BJBS at Charles

Sturt, and increased from zero in both 2019 and 2016.

Table 11. Satisfaction, Full-time Employment, and Further Full Time Study

Metric Faculty Rate 1 Yr chg 4 Yr chg vs Benchmark

GOS - PREQ Overall Satisfaction All 87.9% +0.4 -5.3 91.1%

Business, Justice & Behavioural Sciences 87.5% -4.8 -12.5 N/A

GOS - Full Time Employment All 87.1% -3.2 +5.5 72.0%

Business, Justice & Behavioural Sciences 62.5% -26.4 -37.5 N/A

GOS -Further Full Time Study All 6.1% +4.0 +6.1 7.1%

Business, Justice & Behavioural Sciences 12.5% 12.5 12.5 N/A

Optimisation of Higher Degree by Research subjects and courses in 2020-2021

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) courses

The Provost and Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) requested that the Faculty of Business, Justice and

Behavioural Sciences address the optimisation of subjects and courses within the Faculty. This request

included Higher Degree by Research Programs.

A review of FOBJBS PhD courses highlighted considerable overlap in the content and delivery of four FOBJBS

courses and three shared courses with FOAE:

• 2901AA Doctor of Philosophy (Business)

• 2904BU Doctor of Philosophy (Business - Extended)

• 2905AA Doctor of Philosophy (Business - By Publication)

• 2916PY Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology)

• 2901AR Doctor of Philosophy (Art)*

• 2904AR Doctor of Philosophy (Art - Extended)*

• 2905AR Doctor of Philosophy (Art - By Publication)*

*Shared courses are due to some students in disciplines in the previous Faculty of Arts commencing in these

courses and continuing after their discipline transitioned into the Faculty of Business, Justice and behavioural

Sciences. Thus, these courses had students enrolled from both FOBJBS and FOAE.

The current suite of PhD courses primarily differentiated by discipline was phased out. In addition, the PhD

(Business-Extended) and the PhD (Arts-Extended) have been used for granting specific scholarships and/or

visas for international students under certain circumstances (such as Australia Award (AusAid)

Scholarships). These students have now been enrolled in the appropriate course from the new suite of

offerings. The reduction from seven to three PhD courses in the Faculty of Business, Justice and

Behavioural Sciences resulted in better Faculty alignment (i.e., only FOBJBS courses), as well as alignment

394


to funding category. That is, the replacement courses are differentiated according to the high-cost and low-

cost fields of education (FOEs), set out in the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Research) 2017. The

nomenclature denotes high-cost degrees as “lab based” and low-cost as “non-lab based”. Within the Faculty,

only psychology and engineering are classified as high-cost FOEs; all other FOEs are low-cost.

Based on the recommendation from the University Research Committee (URC) approval for BJBS to rename

the Doctor of Philosophy courses across the Faculty from 202030,the current suite of seven courses,

denoted by discipline, was phased out and replaced by a group of only five new courses. Where the current

courses are primarily differentiated by discipline (Business, Art and Psychology), the courses will be

differentiated by cost according to lab-based activities referenced by the ASCED field of education (FOE).

According to the ASCED field of education, FBJBS classifies PhD courses as:

1. High cost and low cost

2. Lab based and non-Lab based

The following, Under the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Research) 2017, are deemed as being

High-Cost Field of Education (FOE):

1. Doctor of Philosophy (Engineering)

2. Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology)

Tuition Fees: No changes occur with tuition fees. Students studying engineering and psychology would

enrol into the Doctor of Philosophy (BJBS – Lab Based)

Course Structure: No changes in course structures would occur. Students would enrol into the Doctor of

Philosophy (BJBS – Lab Based). However, the subjects specific to the different disciplines included in the

appropriate course structure.

Traditionally PhDs have been named for a particular discipline. These “doctorates' are awarded as a

recognition of a substantial contribution to the discipline. Using generic nomenclature for the Doctor of

Philosophy is a comparatively recent phenomenon. It represents providing a greater flexibility, scaling up and

improving visibility of PhDs offered in other Universities. It aims to enhance graduate mobility and

employability in the global marketplace.

Graduation: Australian Higher Education Graduation Statement (AHEGS). An AHEGS is issued in addition to

other documentation, such as testamurs and academic transcripts. Its purpose is to describe a higher

education qualification in an easily understandable way, providing greater transparency by including

descriptions of the nature of research, discipline, level, context and status of the studies undertaken as well

as information about the education system to which the qualification belongs.

Professional Doctorate Courses (DBA, DIT, DPS)

The Provost and Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) requested that the Faculty of Business, Justice and

Behavioural Sciences address the optimisation of subjects and courses within the Faculty. This request

included Higher Degree by Research Programs including professional doctorate courses.

Modifications were carried out on Doctor of Public Safety (DPS), Doctor of Business Administration (DBA)

and Doctor Information Technology (DIT) subjects. Concerning Level 700 coursework subjects, the

committee determined to replace the 18 level 700 subjects currently offered across the three degrees.

Subject profiles for 6 new subjects with the new prefix RES have been developed except ITC 715 and ITC

716 thesis subjects. All three professional doctorates in BJBS utilise the same four coursework subjects and

the same two thesis subjects except DIT, which have ITC 715 and ITC 716 thesis subjects.

395


RES701 Critical Issues in Research

RES702 Research Methodology for Professional Practice

RES703 Comprehensive Literature Review

RES704 Research Proposal & Presentation

RES705 Doctoral Thesis (FT)

RES706 Doctoral Thesis (PT)

ITC715 Doctoral Thesis (Computing and Mathematics)

ITC716 Doctoral Thesis (Computing and Mathematics)

The distinction between the degrees is based on the enrolment course codes.

Proposal to start Master of Research (M.Res) in 2022

Consistent with the internationally recognised Bologna model (3+2+3), this Master of Research (MRes)

program prepares the students for a PhD. There are concerns within the sector that the Australian Honours

degree, the traditional entry pathway into HDR training, is not adequately preparing candidates for a

research degree and therefore Australian Council of Learned Academies (ACOLA) recommends the most

innovative newly developed entry pathway model which is that two-year hybrid Master of Research degree

(see pages 23-24, ACOLA report,2017). M.Res will provide a broad foundation of research skills required for

a range of roles in the business world. The content and learning activities of MRes course of study engage

with advanced knowledge and inquiry consistent with the level of study and the expected learning outcomes.

On completion of their MRes, students continue to a PhD or industry. Students who complete the MRes and

proceed to the PhD programme can apply to have their MRes year counted towards their PhD. Those

students who go into industry will secure an impressive range of research position in organisations. Drawing

on data from a variety of sources, MRes, is considered as the most in-demand research degree all around

the world for 2022 and beyond.

D. OTHER ASPECTS OF FACULTY RESEARCH

1. Faculty Research Areas

Faculty research areas in operation in 2020 were:

• Accounting and Finance (led by Dr Nick Pawsey)

• Ageing (Cross Faculty)

• Applied Economics (led by Professor Eddie Oczkowski)

• Human Resource Management and Organisational Behaviour (led by Associate Professor Ramudu

Bhanugopan)

• Law, Justice and Resilience (led by Dr Emma Colvin)

• Marketing (led by Dr Felicity Small and Dr Abhishek Dwivedi)

• Mental Health and Community Wellbeing (led by Associate Professor Andrew McGrath and Dr

Rachael Fox)

396


• Public Safety and Security (led by Associate Professor Patrick Walsh and Associate-Professor Phil

Birch)

• Regional Entrepreneurship (led by Professor Morgan Miles)

2. Faculty FOR codes

Given the requirements to prioritise improving ERA outcomes, the Faculty has progressed in selecting

priority FOR codes within Schools. As at 27 September 2021, the following codes have been selected,

noting that selection process is ongoing and not yet complete.

School of Business

3505 Human resources and industrial relations 3506 Marketing 3507 Strategy, management and organisational behaviour

School of Computing, Mathematics and Engineering

4005 Civil engineering 4603 Computer vision and multimedia computation 4604 Cybersecurity and privacy 4605 Data management and data science

School of Psychology

5201 Applied and developmental psychology

Greater alignment of both research and HDR student recruitment with priority FOR codes is now and will

increasingly be prioritised in the Faculty.

3. Data Science Research Unit (DSRU)

DSRU is led by Associate Professor Zahid Islam, and their new management team met regularly in

2020. Research themes/areas include:

• Imaging and Sensing (led by Associate Professor Lihong Zheng)

• Data Mining (led by Associate Professor Azizur Rahman and Dr Ashad Kabir)

• Advanced Networks Research Lab (led by Dr Arif Khan)

• Machine Vision and Digital Health Research Group (led by Professor Manoranjan Paul)

• Cyber Security (led by Associate Professor Rafiqul Islam)

DSRU is well recognised in the University and is collaborating widely internally and externally.

4. Research Centre Participation

Faculty researchers have participated predominantly in three research centres, particularly the first two

listed Centres:

• The Institute for Land, Water and Society (ILWS)

397


• Graham Centre

• National Wine and Grape Industry Centre (NWGIC)

5. Faculty Research Committee

Key achievements for the Faculty Research Committee in 2020 were:

• Developing new TOR for the committee which were subsequently endorsed by Faculty Board

• Drafting Faculty feedback on the draft research strategy

• Providing a response to the restructure of the research and engagement portfolio

• Providing feedback on the Research Productivity Index (RPI)

• Providing feedback on the restructure of doctoral programs

6. Covid 19 Grants

Faculty researchers received the majority of internally-funded Covid 19 grants in what proved to be a

very competitive round. This included projects led by Dr Kirsty Campion, Dr Ryan Ip, Dr Ashad Kabir,

Dr Jodie Kleinschafer, Professor Suzanne McLaren, Professor Manoranjan Paul, Dr Azizur Rahman

and Professor Russell Roberts.

7. Other Highlights

Two of Prof Russell Roberts papers in the Australian Journal of Rural Health were among the top 10%

most downloaded papers:

• Improving the physical health of people living with mental illness in Australia and New Zealand

• Older people's mental health in rural areas: Converting policy into service development, service

access and a sustainable workforce

Prof Morgan Miles named field leader in citations in strategic management by The Australian.

Women in Trades Team (including Prof Branka Krivokapic and A/Prof Larissa Bamberry) contacted by

Hon. B. Taylor (NSW Minister for Women) who read about their research report in the ABC news and

arranged to meet in person with with the research team and a few trade women to discuss female

tradies as the solution for skill shortages.

8. External Grant Outcomes

External grants approved in 2019 and 2020 and not reported in the 2019 Annual Research Report are

presented in Table 12. The majority of projects were Faculty led. About a quarter (8/30) of the grants

were funded through CRC’s. Two of the grants involved commercialisation. All were applied, and align

closely with the University’s research strategy in its focus on Agriculture/Environment, Health, and

Cyber-security and Data Sciences.

398


Table 12. New External Project Grants Commencing in 2019/2020 (not previously reported)

TITLE Primary Investigator

Funding Amount

Primary Funding Organisation

Faculty Led – Approved in 2019 but not included in 2019 Research Report

Support for Care-Experienced People in Higher Ed. DR Emma Colvin

$36,005 Collier Charitable Fund

Crime and Disorder Audit, Wagga Wagga ASPRO Philip Birch

$15,000 NSW Police Force

Cyber Security CRC - Online radicalisation and grievances from an Australian context Aspro Yeslam Al-Saggaf

$10,000 Cyber Security CRC

Cyber Security CRC: Early Detection of Botnets in Web which use Privacy Preservation Techniques

ASPRO Md Rafiqul Islam


Cross-examination of child witnesses: Professional perspectives on best practice versus real practice

Prof Jane Delahunty

$12,510 Griffith University

Faculty Led – Approved in 2020

Desk top policy review - Improved transnational crime coordination within the Mekong Countries

DR Amber McKinley

$38,016 DT Global Australia

Impact of IFRS Adoption in Australia: Evidence from academic research (2015-2020) Dr Nicholas Pawsey

$4,960 Australian Accounting Standards Board

Evaluation of the Integrated Chronic Care Programs in North West Melbourne funded by NWMPHN

PROF Russell Roberts

$95,000 North West Melbourne Primary Health Network

Waste to Energy Feasibility Study Dr Simon Wright

$35,000 Wagga Wagga City Council

Protecting data privacy from cyber threat in the Dark Web (Honours Scholarship - J.Saleem) ASPRO Md Rafiqul Islam


Towards building privacy enhancing technologies: Quantification of privacy risks using Personal Information Factor. Honors Student Umair AHMAD

Prof Tanveer Ahmad Zia


399

javascript:parent.bobj.event.publish('drilldown','ucCRViewer__UI','gnpath%3d%252fGROUP_NAME%255bYear%255d%252fTO_CHAR(BUDGET.FSC_NAME)%255b2020%255d%26name%3dSumofSUMDISTINCTBUDGETAMTAPPLIEDINCTAX1%26brch%3d2-0%26drillname%3d2020')


Technology in Homes Project Evaluation Prof Oliver Burmeister

$20,000 MidCoast Council

Investigating the viability of developing a digital foot measurement app using smartphones DR Muhammad Ashad Kabir

$10,656 Trustee for the AR and NJ Trust

A Framework for Information Disclosure Risk Assessment and Privacy-Preserving Data Sharing (PhD student Syed Ghorashi)

Prof Tanveer Zia


2.S.006 Developing a Hyperspectral Imagery based Decision Support System for Soil Assessment using Vegetation Pattern (PhD Scholarship - Student: Drista Datta)

PROF Manoranjan Paul

$95,000 CRC High Performance Soils

Health modelling with big-data from Southeast Asia ASPRO Azizur Rahman

$5,000 Department of Education and Training (Cwlth)

Automated Database Schema Matching PROF Md Zahidul Islam

$27,300 Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (Cwlth)

Investigating the viability of developing a diabetic foot ulcer measurement application for smartphones

DR Muhammad Ashad Kabir

$16,297 Trustee for the AR and NJ Trust

CT25935: VetCompass Data Investigation PROF Md Zahidul Islam

$8,978 University of Sydney

Automated thermal imagery analysis platform for multiple pest species. DR Anwaar Ul-Haq

$115,000 Invasive Animals Ltd

Investigating the psychological barriers to accepting advice from ‘thinking’ machines in high-stakes work settings

Dr Ben Morrison $98,179 Centre for Work Health and Safety (NSW Gov't)

Family & Domestic Violence in Rural Australian Emergency Departments - A qualitative study of institutional discourse (PhD Stipend Sheree Moore)

DR Rachael Fox

$46,732 NSW Department of Health

Remote Simultaneous Interpreting in Investigative Interviews Prof Jane Delahunty

$699,161 Federal Bureau of Investigation

Led by Other Faculties – Approved in 2020

400


Using a bio-psycho-social-spiritual model in first responder organisations to prevent psychological harm post exposure to traumatic events (Mark Layson PhD) (CWHS_RP_070)

REVDR Andrew Cameron

$145,636 Centre for Work Health and Safety (NSW Gov't)

FA080 The Australian Cool Soil Initiative Prof Niall Blair $722,075 Food Agility CRC Limited

20-1.003 Addressing barriers to adoption. Building farmer innovation capability - Phase 2 PROF David Falepau

$310,000 CRC High Performance Soils

DTF334 - Prototype development of an image analysis system for quantitation of offal health for the red meat processing industry

ASPRO Quinn $49,500 ANU Connect Ventures

CONT20/899: Surfer attitudes to shark management Aspro Peter Denyer-Simmons

$66,481 Department of Regional NSW (inc Dept of Primary Industries)

Interventions to minimise the impact of bushfire and drought on the wellbeing of children living in rural and remote Australia

Aspro Michael Curtin

10,000 Spinifex Network

Evaluation of Royal Far West Bushfire Response Program Aspro Michael Curtin

$76,800 Royal Far West

Source: Research Master (based on grant approval date)

401

Item 14: Faculty of Science and Health Research Performance and Investment Report 2020

PURPOSE

To provide a report on research productivity and Higher Degree by Research student performance for the Faculty of Science and Health for end-of-year 2020. The Committee is requested to review the report and consider the recommendations identified.

This report identifies activities that are required to comply with University requirements under the Higher Education Standards Framework threshold standards for Part 4. Research and Research Training. Specifically identified in this report are activities that support FOSH delivering ‘research training in a supervisory and study environment of research activity, and to provide supervision and resources required for projects’. Activities within this Report also support HESF requirements that research is conducted, or overseen, by staff with qualifications, research experience and skills relevant to the type of research undertaken.

RECOMMENDATION


1. Note the Faculty of Science and Health Annual Research Performance Investment Report 2020;and;

2. Endorse referral of these recommendations for action by the Research Advisory Group as part ofthe University Strategy Implementation Plan.

KEY ISSUES

1. Background

This report was considered at Faculty of Science and Health Faculty Board on 10th August 2021.Discussion centred on the limitations of the current staffing profile in terms of Level E academics,numbers of research focussed staff and how these limitations reflects on experience andalignment to HDR supervision; that the limited numbers of HDR student available is also alimitation for staff training in HDR supervision of students; that the number of staff without higherdegree research qualifications also represents a limitation to research performance across theFaculty, and that coincident administrative, technical and financial is fundamentally required forresearch areas that sit outside the current Centre model. The Report was endorsed forsubmission for consideration by the University Research Committee.

2. Current Status

• Research income in the Faculty is consolidated in a small number of schools, with someschools generating little or no research income. Lack of grant success is limiting growth ofresearch active staff and potential for growth of HDR numbers in these areas.

• Low numbers of research active staff, particularly in health-related disciplines – represents arisk delivering on research growth targets for ERA performance. These areas also possesslower numbers of PhD-qualified staff. This will need to be addressed with strategic trainingand pathways to PHD, and / or targeted recruitment and research performance managementgoals for these areas;

• A high number of staff who are either research inactive and / not PhD qualified limits our HDRsupervisory capacity and potential for research growth;

• Loss of staff through the OR2 restructure or natural attrition has increased the number ofresearch inactive staff supervising HDR students, this presents a risk to compliance with theprovider category requirements for research and HESF standards for staff qualifications andresearch experience for HDR supervision under HESF 4.2.


402



• A targeted approach is required to increase PhD-qualified staff in health-related schoolsthrough strategic recruitment and / or directed pathways to PhD within minimum candidature.

• A management approach is required to support research-inactive staff in all areas to meetbaseline research performance goals with 12 and 24 month performance targets.

• Research income targets should be set for Schools to achieve a lift in research performancewith aligned application and research management support at a School / Faculty / Divisionallevel.

• Areas of ERA risk and / or strategic importance should receive targeted funding for strategicrecruitment, technical support, infrastructure support and staff teaching buy-out.

• Recommend a targeted research performance plan be developed for probationary and ECRstaff (3 years since first academic appointment or 5 years since PhD completion) to supportresearch development and growth internal capability.

• Ensure alignment of Faculty research plans with the University Research Strategy KPIs,targets and goals with aligned funding to achieve strategic goals.

COMPLIANCE


1. Standard 4 Research and Research Training of the HigherEducation Standards Framework 2021

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with

The Research Policy and; The Higher Degree by Research Policy

RISK ASSESSMENT


Charles Sturt University has a High Appetite and willingness to take risks in high impact research and innovation activities that will support the University’s standing in research excellence, develop our strengths in key disciplines, foster significant third-party partnerships that will contribute value to the University industry and the community and contribute to research and innovation leadership at the University.



Staff profiles and performance represent a risk to the University’s research productivity and compliance with the Higher Education Standard’s Framework and do not sit within the current risk appetite for the University.

ATTACHMENTS

A. Faculty of Science and Health Research Performance and Investment Report 2020.

Prepared by: Associate Professor Jane Quinn, Associate Dean Research Cleared by: Professor Megan Smith, Executive Dean

403







Faculty of Science and Health 2020 Research Activity and Investment Report

Prepared by:

Associate Professor Jane Quinn &

Associate Professor Sandra Savocchia Associate Dean Research & Sub-Dean Graduate Studies, Faculty of Science and Health

404

Completed August 2021

Faculty of Science and Health | Faculty of Science and Health 2020 Research Activity and Investment Report Page 2 of 37

Contents

Faculty of Science and Health – Research Activity and Investment Report 2020 .................................... 3

1. FOSH Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 3

1.1. FOSH Staff profile .............................................................................................................................. 4

2. FOSH Research Activity and Performance Indicators ....................................................................... 12

2.1. Publication quality metrics ............................................................................................................... 12

2.2. Research applications and HERDC-reportable income .................................................................. 13

2.3. HERDC income by School ............................................................................................................... 16

3. ERA performance for the Faculty of Science – a prospective evaluation ....................................... 22

3.1. 02 Physical Sciences ....................................................................................................................... 22

3.2. 03 Analytical Chemistry ................................................................................................................... 23

3.3. 05 Environmental Science ............................................................................................................... 23

3.4. 06 Biological sciences ..................................................................................................................... 23

3.5. 07 Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences .......................................................................................... 24

3.6. 09 Engineering ................................................................................................................................. 25

3.7. 11 Medical and Health Sciences ..................................................................................................... 25

3.8. Research active status by Field of Education (FoE) ....................................................................... 26

4. Central Research Funding to FOSH 2020 ........................................................................................... 28

4.1. DVCR Funds – Income and expenditure ......................................................................................... 28

4.2. FOSH staff support through DVCR schemes .................................................................................. 28

5. Higher Degree by Research Students ................................................................................................. 32

5.1. HDR enrolments and completions ................................................................................................... 32

5.2. AGRTP Scholarships ....................................................................................................................... 32

5.3. Changes in HDR Supervisory Teams .............................................................................................. 34

5.4. Supervisory capacity and ‘Research Active’ status of HDR supervisors ........................................ 34

5.5. HDR activities .................................................................................................................................. 35

6. Key findings ........................................................................................................................................... 36

405



Faculty of Science and Health – Research Activity and Investment Report 2020

1. FOSH Overview

Research impact and performance is now a key strategic focus for the University (Figure 1). The new University Strategy, with a 10 year vision for the University, has research as a central pillar, with the message of Charles Sturt undertaking impactful research that enhances the quality of life and environment for our partners and communities. This vision continues to talk to our purpose as an organisation of ‘Yindyamarra winhanganganha’ – the wisdom of respectfully knowing how to live well in a world worth living in’. Our research as a Faculty speaks to many components of this purpose – generating wisdom through integration of new and old knowledge; ‘respectfully knowing’ – the purpose of respectful learning from past, present and future experience, and ‘living well’ by contributing our research knowledge and findings to enhance the lives and experiences of others.

Figure 1. The University Strategy – Research as a central pillar.

A high level overview of the priority areas of the Research Strategy was shared with staff across the University in July 2021 (Figure 2). The University Research Strategy encompasses four key strategic areas: Agriculture, Water and Environmental research; Rural Health research; Cyber Security and Data Science research and supporting community research needs. These strategic priorities aim to build on existing and

406



emerging areas of research strength for the University, with a number of these areas driven by research excellence within the Faculty of Science and Health (FOSH). This presents FOSH with a unique opportunity for strategic research growth over the next decade with staff in the Faculty delivering in key research areas represented in this ten-year plan. The Research Strategy also articulates a concentrated focus on commercialisation and innovation, and Indigenous and First Nations research. All are primary areas of research growth for the Faculty of Science and Health. Developing a strategic staff profile, equipment and infrastructure to support the Research Strategy moving forward will be key to delivering on the strategic goals of the University.

Figure 2. Research as a central pillar of the University Strategy.

1.1. FOSH Staff profile

The profile of staff in the FOSH will become increasingly important as the Faculty continues to develop and expand its research footprint under the new University Strategic Research Plan.

In 2020, 229 Teaching / Research staff were identified within the Faculty of Science and Health under the previous School denominations, 10 with a designation of Teaching / Professional and 91 Teaching Focussed staff. Numbers of staff who are designated Research Active or Research Inactive by the Charles Sturt Research Productivity Index, are identified below (Figure 3 - 7, Table 1 - 5). Currently, the percentage of research-active staff, so those that are contributing to the research income and outputs of the Faculty, varies widely between schools, with some schools containing 90% Research Active staff with a Teaching / Research denomination, and others less than 50% (Table 1). Advent of the Research Productivity Index in 2020 has allowed a greater level of scrutiny of research performance across the Faculty. The figures below indicate that in 2020 a significant proportion of Teaching / Research staff were identified as ‘Research Inactive’ by the new performance metric - 45.4% of T/R positions, 70% of T/P positions, and somewhat surprisingly, 25% of the few research-focussed positions in the Faculty.

407



Figure 3. Number of FOSH Teaching / Research academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels including Executive levels, all Schools excluding adjuncts 2020. Total staff 330.

Table 1. Percentage of FOSH Teaching / Research academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels 2020.

Teaching / Research % Research Inactive

% Research Active

Commercial Operations (1) 0.0 100.0

Faculty Office, Science (1) 0.0 100.0

School of Agricultural & Wine Sciences (25) 20.0 80.0

School of Animal & Veterinary Sciences (44) 27.3 72.7

School of Biomedical Sciences (35) 54.3 45.7

School of Community Health (36) 63.9 36.1

School of Dentistry & Health Sciences (19) 63.2 36.8

School of Environmental Sciences (21) 9.5 90.5

School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health (14) 64.3 35.7

School of Nursing & Midwifery & Indigenous Health (24) 58.3 41.7

School of Rural Medicine (3) 66.7 33.3

Three Rivers University Department of Rural Health (6) 100.0 0.0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Not Research Active

Research Active

408



1.1.1. Teaching / Professional Staff

A relatively small number of Teaching / Professional staff are identified in the schools, with these positions mainly occurring in clinical teaching disciplines. Most staff in the School are Research Active, a positive model for clinical research performance across the Faculty.

Figure 4. Number of FOSH Teaching / Professional academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels including Executive levels, all Schools excluding adjuncts 2020.

Table 2. Percentage of FOSH Teaching / Professional academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels 2020.

Teaching / Professional

% Research Inactive Research Active

Faculty Office, Science (1) 0 100

School of Animal & Veterinary Sciences (4) 75 25

School of Biomedical Sciences (1) 0 100

School of Community Health (1) 100 0

School of Dentistry & Health Sciences (2) 100 0

School of Rural Medicine (1) 100 0

0

1

2

3

4

School ofAnimal &VeterinarySciences

School ofBiomedicalSciences

School ofCommunity

Health

School ofDentistry &

HealthSciences

Three RiversUniversity

Department ofRural Health

Not Research Active

Research Active

409



1.1.2. Teaching Focussed staff

Several Teaching Focussed staff are identified as Research Active (Figure 5, Table 3), and expansion of the research activity or redesignation of staff within this cohort, should be an area for investigation.

Figure 5. Number of FOSH Teaching Focussed academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – – all academic levels including Executive levels, all Schools excluding adjuncts 2020.

Table 3. Percentage of FOSH Teaching Focussed academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels 2020.

Teaching Focussed % Research Inactive

Research Active










0

5

10

15

20

25

Not Research Active

Research Active

410



1.1.3. Research Focussed Staff

Perhaps of greatest concern is the exceptionally small number of Research Focussed staff within the FOSH. This number has decreased in recent years with the loss of Faculty Post-doctoral Fellow positions and represents an area of risk for the FOSH. Growing the number of Research Focussed staff present across our schools requires a considered strategy and a sustainable and long-term funding approach.

Figure 6. Number of FOSH Research Focussed academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels including Executive levels, all Schools excluding adjuncts 2020.

Table 4. FOSH Research Focussed academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels 2020.

Research Focussed

% Not Research Active

% Research Active

School of Animal & Veterinary Sciences (1) 0 100

School of Biomedical Sciences (1) 0 100

School of Community Health (2) 0 100

School of Dentistry & Health Sciences (1) 100 0


0

1

2

School ofAnimal &VeterinarySciences

School ofBiomedicalSciences

School ofCommunity

Health

School ofDentistry &

HealthSciences

Three RiversUniversity

Department ofRural Health

Not Research Active

Research Active

411



1.1.4. Adjunct staff

Finally, consideration of our adjunct profile is also necessary. Whilst the majority of these staff are recruited for clinical teaching purposes, clearly there is capacity within this pool to conduct research (Figure 7, Table 5), and this should also be encouraged and supported.

Figure 7. Number of FOSH Adjunct academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels 2020.

Table 5. Percentage of FOSH Adjunct academic staff, Research Active / Inactive by RPI metrics – all academic levels 2020.

Adjuncts only % Research Inactive

% Research Active











1.1.5. Staff qualifications and research active status

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Not Research Active Research Active

412



Table 6. Number of staff at (all levels Level A – E) relative to doctoral or non-doctoral qualification and research active status. % research active is shown as % staff in the School (bold) and % staff research active qualification (plain text – Doctoral degree or no Doctoral degree).

Operational Area Not Research Active

Research Active (%) Total

Commercial Operations 0 1 (100%) 1

No Doctoral Degree 0 1 (100%) 1

Faculty Office, Science 0 2 (100%) 2

Doctoral Degree 0 1 (50%) 1


School of Agricultural & Wine Sciences 8 19 (70%) 27

Doctoral Degree 4 17 (89%) 21 (77%)


School of Animal & Veterinary Sciences 21 36 (63%) 57



School of Biomedical Sciences 31 19 (38%) 50

Doctoral Degree 14 18 (94%) 32 (64%)


School of Community Health 37 14 (27%) 51



School of Dentistry & Health Sciences 24 6 (20%) 30


No Doctoral Degree 20 0 20

School of Environmental Sciences 2 19 (90%) 21

Doctoral Degree 2 19 (100%) 21 (100%)

School of Exercise Science, Sport & Health 10 5 (33%) 15



School of Nursing & Midwifery & Indigenous Health 31 11 (26%) 42



School of Rural Medicine 25 1 (3%) 26

Doctoral Degree 2 1(100%) 3 (11%)


Three Rivers University Department of Rural Health 7 2 (22%) 9



Grand Total 196 (59.3%) 135 (40.7%) 331

413



Research activity shows some relationship to the number of HDR qualified staff in Schools. Although not a direct correlation, numbers of staff identified to possess a HDR qualification, and their research active status is shown in Table 6. Schools with high research income are those that also have a high proportion of research active doctorate-qualified staff (SES – 100%, SAWS – 77%, SAVS – 64%, SBMS – 64%), whilst those with the lowest research income also have a lower proportion of doctorate qualified staff (SCH – 41%, SDHS – 33%, SNMIH (33%). Notably, the UDRH, with only one research active doctorate-qualified staff member has a increasing trajectory of research income, whilst SESSH, with 81% of their doctorate-qualified staff being research active, received the lowest Faculty research income. SES is the only school in which all staff with a doctorate qualification were research active using the RPI formulae (Table 6).

The number of staff holding a doctorate qualification in Schools is also important as a determinant of the number of staff who can supervise HDR students. Whilst experience equivalent of qualification can be considered for some disciplines, generally, the HESF standard require that to teach or supervise students undertake a HDR qualification, the supervisor must possess a degree higher than the level of supervision. Where staff are not doctorally-qualified that limits their ability to act as HDR supervisors (156/331), but equally this applied where staff do possess a doctorate qualification and are not research active (57 / 31 staff). In total, this identifies that 213 of 331 staff in FOSH would not be eligible as HDR supervisors.

Our HDR staff qualification profile, in addition to staff ‘Research Active’ status will become a necessary focus for FOSH, when considering our delivery of the research income and performance goals for the University.

414



2. FOSH Research Activity and Performance Indicators

FOSH staff produced a total of 3833 publications in 2020 that were identified by the RPI metric. Q1 journal submissions have only increased marginally, with the majority of additional works identified in 2020 in non-Q ranked journals (Figure 8). Q1 journal rankings were highest in proportion of total outputs in the SESSH, SES, SAVS, and SAWS, with the lowest proportion of Q1 journal publications in SCH and SDHS (Figure 9). This, to some extent, represents a discipline bias in terms of opportunity of placement in Q1 journals, but can also be a target for focus for these areas to extend into multidisciplinary journals with higher quartile rankings where possible.

2.1. Publication quality metrics

Figure 8. FOSH publication rankings by Quartile (Q1-4) rankings 2015 – June 2021.

Figure 9. FOSH publication rankings by Quartile (Q1-4) rankings 2015 – June 2021 by School of primary author.

415



2.2. Research applications and HERDC-reportable income

Figure 10. Number of FOSH non-Centre funding applications, 2017-2020, rates of success. 58 proposals are still pending outcome in 2020.

FOSH staff have led approximately 70 funding submissions per annum, bar 2019 when this number dropped to 47. Success rates have remained relatively stable at approximately 40%, although 2019 saw a lift in income despite a drop in application number overall (Figure 10). Several applications for 2020 are still pending as of July 2021.

HERDC reportable income for financial years 2016-2020 are shown in Figure 11. This data, collected as part of the RPI and through Research Manager, only identifies completed contracts where funding has been collected by Charles Sturt within a specific calendar year and where a FOSH staff member is identified as the Chief Investigator.

Figure 11. FOSH total research income financial years 2016-2020 ($/annum) by HERDC category 1-4.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2017 2018 2019 2020

Unsuccessful Successful Pending

$-

$1,000,000.00

$2,000,000.00

$3,000,000.00

$4,000,000.00

$5,000,000.00

$6,000,000.00

$7,000,000.00

$8,000,000.00

$9,000,000.00

$10,000,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

4 - Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) Funding

3 - Industry and Other Funding for Research

2 - Other Public Sector Research Funding

1 - Australian Competitive Research Grants

416



As previously, most research income to FOSH is administered through the Centres (Graham Centre, National Wine and Grape Industry Centre, and Institute for Land, Water and Society). Comparative income for Centres and Faculty for each HERDC category are shown in Table 7.

Table 7. FOSH total research income financial years 2016-2020 ($/annum) by HERDC category 1-4. Including Centre income.

Year




4 - Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) Funding Grand Total

2016 $2,625,690.08 $1,700,996.94 $783,784.57 $11,656.26 $5,122,127.85 2017 $3,741,838.99 $1,696,573.29 $1,336,623.23 $34,349.06 $6,809,384.57 2018 $3,386,698.27 $4,404,615.70 $1,036,243.28 $30,216.50 $8,857,773.75 2019 $2,007,919.71 $2,902,472.90 $1,069,702.39 $57,234.19 $6,037,329.18 2020 $1,952,108.85 $3,468,446.29 $877,079.88 $260,368.66 $6,558,003.68

HERDC reportable income for FOSH has been largely static from 2016 to 2020 (Figure 11). Except for 2018, Category 2 funding has remained largely stable, but Category 1 has decreased giving an overall reduction in HERDC reportable income to date. The change in funding profile in 2020 was due to income from Category 4 CRC grants, which had been very minimal prior to this date. A total breakdown of funding between FOSH Research Centre income, and non-Centre income is shown in Table 8. Overall, both areas saw an increase in Category 4 income, and a general decrease in Category 3. FOSH saw an increase in Category 1 income which was generally not matched in the Centres, whilst both areas saw a small increase in Category 2. Overall, this resulted in no significant net gain.

When FOSH non-Centre HERDC reportable income is considered alone, FOSH saw a marginal lift to 2017 income levels in 2019, with approximately 60% of 2019 income confirmed by the reporting period in June 2020 (Figure 12).

Figure 12. FOSH non-Centre HERDC-reportable research income financial years 2017-2020 for HERDC Category 1-4. 2020 is a partial year to June, with 58 applications still pending decision.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

2017 2018 2019 2020

$ M

illio

ns

417



Table 8. Total FOSH research income financial years 2019-2020 for HERDC Category 1-4.

HERDC Category 2019 2020 % Change

Category 1 Australian Competitive Research Grants 2,007,919.71$ 1,952,108.85$ -2.78

Research Centres 1,886,612.71$ 1,658,371.81$ 12.10

1.2 Australian Research Council (ARC) 134,122.00$ 5,930.25$ -95.58

1.4 Rural R&D 1,064,537.71$ 1,071,189.63$ 0.62

1.5 Commonwealth Other 627,196.99$ 420,187.59$ 33.01

1.6 State/Territory Government -$ 116,133.33$ -

1.7 Other 60,756.00$ 44,931.00$ -26.05

Science 121,307.00$ 293,737.04$ 142.14

1.1 National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) 25,000.00$ 131,671.24$ 426.68

1.4 Rural R&D 65,802.00$ 148,065.80$ 125.02

1.5 Commonwealth Other 16,505.00-$ -$ -

1.7 Other 14,000.00$ 14,000.00$ 0.00

Category 2 Other Public Sector Research Funding 2,902,472.90$ 3,468,446.29$ 19.50

Research Centres 2,221,327.43$ 2,727,640.61$ 22.79

2.1 Commonwealth (own purpose) 1,214,380.94$ 1,679,373.59$ 38.29

2.2 Commonwealth (other/grants) 612,724.62$ 590,738.16$ -3.59

2.3 State/Territory/Local (own purpose) 337,982.02$ 457,528.86$ 35.37

2.4 State/Territory/Local (other/grants) 56,239.85-$ -$ -

Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences -$ 3,186.40$ -

2.3 State/Territory/Local (own purpose) -$ 3,186.40$ -

Science 681,145.47$ 737,619.28$ 8.29

2.1 Commonwealth (own purpose) 554,591.58$ 614,801.79$ 10.86

2.2 Commonwealth (other/grants) 85,000.00$ 30,821.30-$ -136.26

2.3 State/Territory/Local (own purpose) 41,618.00$ 153,638.79$ 269.16

2.4 State/Territory/Local (other/grants) 64.11-$ -$ -

Category 3 Industry and Other Funding for Research 1,069,702.39$ 877,079.88$ -18.01

Research Centres 591,901.59$ 457,969.21$ -22.63

3.1 Australian for-profit organisations 478,394.32$ 384,255.31$ -19.63

3.2 Australian not-for profit organisations 63,581.27$ 64,184.68$ -19.68

3.4 International for-profit organisations 1,981.13$ -$ -

3.5 International not-for profit organisations 4,091.89$ 6,308.49$ 54.17

3.7 International government (own purpose) 20,459.16$ 3,220.74$ -84.26

3.8 International government (other) 23,393.82$ -$ -

Science 472,800.80$ 419,262.19$ -11.40

3.1 Australian for-profit organisations 106,809.09$ 128,232.79$ -11.32

3.2 Australian not-for profit organisations 45,452.50$ 99,603.31$ 20.06

3.4 International for-profit organisations 200,000.00$ -$ 119.14

3.5 International not-for profit organisations 8,620.00$ 16,659.76$ -

3.8 International government (other) 111,919.21$ 174,766.33$ 93.27

Category 4 Cooperative Research Centre Funding 57,234.19$ 260,368.66$ 56.15

Research Centres 35,590.52$ 203,670.83$ 354.92

4.1 CRC income derived from Australian Government grants to CRCs28,120.96$ 159,562.83$ 427.26

4.2 CRC income derived from private industry participants of CRCs 4,355.73$ 27,391.86$ 467.42

4.3 CRC income derived from other sources 3,113.82$ 16,716.14$ 528.87

Science 21,643.67$ 56,697.83$ 161.96

4.1 CRC income derived from Australian Government grants to CRCs17,299.67$ 47,965.88$ 177.26

4.2 CRC income derived from private industry participants of CRCs 2,040.67$ 4,462.88$ 118.70

4.3 CRC income derived from other sources 2,303.33$ 4,269.07$ 85.430

418



2.3. HERDC income by School

External grant income by School was examined as an indicator of research impact with significant variation in research income performance when examined by the unit organisational code of the Chief Investigator (Figure 13 – 23). The largest quantum of research income was associated with Chief Investigators located in SAWS, SAVS and SES. This is likely to do with the longevity of research activity in some Schools (SAWS is an excellent example of a school with a significant history of research activity at Charles Sturt), and staff research-active demographics (Figure 3).

HERDC reportable income to all Schools, the UDRH, Technical Teams and the Veterinary Clinical Enterprises is shown below. Note that 2020 is a partial reporting period in all cases.

Figure 13. Research income by school - SAWS

Year





2016 $1,596,552.20 $213,416.51 $250,007.49 -

2017 $1,948,972.37 $266,064.78 $142,640.99 -

2018 $1,845,936.05 $2,234,552.60 $202,659.88 $23,952.00

2019 $974,140.19 $693,592.69 $149,228.28 $51,983.34

2020 $715,723.47 $501,127.60 $88,780.88 $146,955.47

$-

$500,000.00

$1,000,000.00

$1,500,000.00

$2,000,000.00

$2,500,000.00

$3,000,000.00

$3,500,000.00

$4,000,000.00

$4,500,000.00

$5,000,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

SAWS

1 - Australian Competitive Research Grants 2 - Other Public Sector Research Funding

3 - Industry and Other Funding for Research 4 - Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) Funding

419



Figure 14. Research income by school - SAVS

Year 1 - Australian Competitive

Research Grants




2016 $ 313,048.68 $26,359.89 $307,976.15 $11,656.26

2017 $ 415,744.86 $416,207.92 $947,897.74 $34,349.06

2018 $ 626,232.68 $568,894.22 $405,920.29

2019 $192,295.39 $317,319.23 $665,742.01

2020 $503,956.04 $686,055.36 $443,147.51

Figure 15. Research income by school - SES


Research Grants




2016 $ 282,384.46 $ 787,194.78 $ 462.63

2017 $ 463,276.85 $ 422,171.35 $ 9,000.01

2018 $ 453,966.36 $ 1,102,794.70 $ 262,680.59 $ 6,264.50

2019 $ 398,839.17 $ 991,920.22 $ 101,018.71 -$ 1,589.82

2020 $ 229,817.72 $ 1,498,170.38 $ 20,311.40 $ 46,864.91

Figure 16. Research income by school - SBMS

$-

$500,000.00

$1,000,000.00

$1,500,000.00

$2,000,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

SAVS



$-

$500,000.00

$1,000,000.00

$1,500,000.00

$2,000,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

SES



420




Research Grants




2016 $ 374,172.63 $ 24,934.49 $ 79,217.29

2017 $ 596,227.71 $ 89,733.32 $ 17,499.99

2018 $ 357,583.43 $ 56,191.33 $ 133,400.01

2019 $ 352,785.46 $ 28,333.33 $ 76,049.71 $ 6,840.67

2020 $ 251,896.14 $ 40,400.00 $ 233,307.78 $ 66,548.27

Figure 17. Research income by school - SBMS

Year 1 - Australian Competitive Research

Grants




2017 $ 4,520.00 $ 5,095.67 $ - $ - 2018 $ 30,482.00 $ - $ - $ - 2019 $ 106,749.52 $ 20,919.17 $ - $ -

2020 $ 133,238.79 $ 30,071.32 $ - $ -

$-

$100,000.00

$200,000.00

$300,000.00

$400,000.00

$500,000.00

$600,000.00

$700,000.00

$800,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

SBMS



$-

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

2017 2018 2019 2020

SCH



421



Figure 18. Research income by school - SDHS


Research Grants



4 - Cooperative Research Centre

(CRC) Funding

2016 $ - $20,934.50 $ 74,051.55 $ -

2018 $ - $ - -$40,553.75 $ -

2019 $ - $ - $ 16,443.00 $ -

2020 $ - $ - $ 14,448.00 $ -

Figure 19. Research income by school - SESSH


Research Grants




2016 $ - $ 8,005.00 $31,818.18 $ -

2017 $ - $ 503.00 $ - $ -

2018 $ - $ - $ - $ -

2019 $ - $ - $ - $ -

2020 $ - $ - $ - $ -

$(50,000.00)

$-

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

2016 2018 2019 2020

SDHS



$-

$10,000.00

$20,000.00

$30,000.00

$40,000.00

$50,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

SESSH



422



Figure 20. Research income by school - SNMIH


Grants



4 - Cooperative Research Centre (CRC)

Funding

2016 $ 10,500.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 20,250.64 $ -

2017 $ 5,250.00 $ 93,572.00 $ 3,333.33 $ -

2018 $ 25,000.00 $ 39,584.62 $ 38,499.99 $ -

2019 $ - $ 179,579.15 $ 26,583.34 $ -

2020 $ - $ 8,186.40 $ - $ -

Figure 21. Research income – UDRH


Grants




(CRC) Funding

2017 $ - $ 5,833.33 $ -

2018 $ - $ 319,823.23 $ - $ -

2019 $ - $ 492,695.32 $ - $ -

2020 $ - $ 594,801.79 $ - $ -

$-

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$250,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

SNMIH



$-

$200,000.00

$400,000.00

$600,000.00

$800,000.00

2017 2018 2019 2020

UDRH



423



Figure 22. Research income – Technical teams


Grants




(CRC) Funding

2016 -$ 127,622.00 $ - $ - $ -

2017 $ 167,938.05 $ - $ - $ -

2018 $ 47,911.75 $ - $ - $ -

2019 $ 89,859.51 $ 23,850.00 $ - $ -

2020 $ 234,131.19 $ - $ - $ -

Figure 23. Research income – Veterinary Enterprises


Grants




(CRC) Funding

2016 $ 10,716.53 $ - $ - $ -

2017 $ - $ 17,480.75 $ - $ -

2018 $ 14,750.00 $ 2,294.00 $ 18,242.33 $ -

2019 $ - $ - $ 11,603.03 $ -

2020 $ 9,543.33 $ - $ 6,013.00 $ -

$(200,000.00)

$(100,000.00)

$-

$100,000.00

$200,000.00

$300,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Technical Teams



$-

$10,000.00

$20,000.00

$30,000.00

$40,000.00

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Veterinary Enterprises



424



3. ERA performance for the Faculty of Science – a prospective evaluation

In the previous ERA rankings FOSH Fields of Research (FoR) performed relatively well compared to other areas in the University, however maintenance or increase in world rankings for the FOSH is critical for some research areas related to our Fields of Education (FoE).

In the 2018 ERA exercise, Charles Sturt submitted more selectively than in previous rounds, but despite this concentration of submissions there were only a limited number of 4-digit FoRs for which FOSH met the minimum submission volume. In some areas our performance was based on a very small volume of submissions but of high value, in other areas both our volume and performance contributed to our ERA ranking. Compared to other RUN group Universities, our ERA performance is selective and not strong in a broad number of areas, further interrogation is required to determine how best to optimise our submission process to maximise ERA outcomes for FOSH for the future. It is of note that our current ERA performance will not be substantially altered by the new Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification (ANZSRC) 2020 FoR denominations, and indeed for some areas this new reporting structure might be more problematic.

With reference to the use of FoR and ERA performance two factors need to be taken into account:

1) Is the area currently at world standard or above, and requires continued investment to maintain or exceed our current ranking?

and;

2) Is the area currently below world standard, but an increase in performance is required to ensure that Charles Sturt meets or exceeds the minimum provider category requirements for research by 2030?

In comparing between the previous ERA reporting period and the current period, there have been marginal increases in Q1 journal publications in 05, 06, 07, and a greater increase for 09 under the previous FoR coding system. Q1 outputs were static for FoR 11 and mainly supported by the area of exercise and sports science. There is also a great disparity between the highest performing FoR codes in terms of quality of publications and citations, and the poorest performing codes. The top performing areas in terms of publication outports and citations were related to Physical Sciences 02 (52%); Environmental Sciences 05 (32%); Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences 07 (32%); and Engineering 09 (34.5%).

The lowest performing publication areas for FOSH at the 2-digit level are 11 Medical and Health Sciences (14%) - the majority of which are related to 1106 Human Movement and Sport Sciences which conversely shows strong output performance in terms of ERA rankings. For other reportable areas, 03 Chemical sciences (8%) and 06 Biological Sciences (19%) represent the lowest areas of reportable outputs. An increase in publication performance is required for these areas if sufficient ERA rankings are to be achieved and or maintained by 2030.

Each domain of ERA reporting, including consideration of the future reporting structures under the previous and new ANZSRC coding system will now be considered.

3.1. 02 Physical Sciences

Overall ERA 5 – Exceeds World Standard

Currently Charles Sturt only reports in 1 four-digit FoR under 02 – 0201 - Astronomical and Space Sciences which met the threshold in 2018. In this single reporting category, we currently attain a rank of ERA 5 – exceeds world standard.

0201 Astronomical and Space Sciences represented one of our highest performing ERA domains in the 2018 ERA exercise. However, this ranking is related to a very small number of staff, and some individual high ranking citations. Although this area is noted as Physical ‘Sciences’, staff continuing to this domain reside primarily in FOBJBS

425



No specific requests related to this area were received from Schools. Future reporting for FOSH could be achieved in the physical sciences under the new ANZSRC coding system as 51 Physical Sciences which also encompasses the FoRs of 5101 Medical and Biological Physics and 5106 Nuclear and Plasma physics, both of which are potential reporting FoRs for medical radiation science.

3.2. 03 Analytical Chemistry

Overall ERA - not assessed

0301 ERA 3 in 2012, not assessed in 2015 and 2018 – a dramatic reduction in reportable outputs from 2012 to 2018 resulted in a drop from 51 to 7 and a loss of ERA status.

The FoR of 0301 Analytical Chemistry previously represented an area of ERA strength for CSU. It is possible that this code was dissipated across other discipline areas for the ERA 2018 exercise as and although the low volume threshold was met, Charles Sturt was not assessed for this FoR. Despite this, analytical chemistry crosses a number of discipline domains and represents an analytical tool for a number of areas of ERA strength (05, 06, 07, 11). Charles Sturt also possesses significant infrastructure for this purpose, that have significant and ongoing support and maintenance costs.

Retention of the specialist laboratory officer related to the analytical chemistry and functional metabolomics equipment located in the NaLSH was also noted in the recent OR2 restructure. As such, Charles Sturt continues to provide support and investment in this area and ongoing purchase of new equipment. Upgrade of existing equipment will be required to maintain this area of ERA-supporting activity. Analytical chemistry equipment is also fundamental to projects sitting within the Centres, particularly biochemical flavour work for grape and wine; meat flavour; analysis of biochemical constituents of crops, plants and soils; and biomedical analytical chemistry. Maintenance of strength in this area will be critical to provide expertise and support for biomedical research related to the new School of Rural Medicine. Activity in this area will become increasingly important for CSU when, under the new ANZSRC FoR code structure, Medical Biochemistry and Metabolomics (3205) rests under the code for Biomedical and Clinical Sciences (32). Work in this area may well be pivotal to ensuring a future ERA ranking under the new coding system.

3.3. 05 Environmental Science

Overall ERA 3 – At World Standard

Environmental Science is a recognised area of research strength at CSU. Outputs under 05 have doubled from 2012 to 2015. Within 05, only one area reached reporting threshold - 0502 Environmental Science and management – that achieved an ERA 4 in 2018, increasing from a rank of 3 in 2015. Research in this area covers both terrestrial and aquatic ecology and management and, in addition to 07 represents one of the largest external grant income areas for FOSH.

All areas reported currently under the previous FoR system will fall under the new ANZSRC code of 41 Environmental Sciences. As such it is of critical importance that our research footprint in this area continues to grow is not diminished.

3.4. 06 Biological sciences

Overall ERA 2 - Below World Standard

The code 06 Biological Sciences is a moderate area of research strength for CSU, although is fundamental to many other FoR codes for both 05, 07 and 11. Overall there has been a drop in reportable outputs (269 to 178) between 2015 and 2018, and an ERA ranking of ERA2 has remained unchanged. There has been a single output rise for 0601 Biochemistry and Cell Biology, all other 4-digit codes have dropped and were not-assessed in 2018. Although CSU has previously reported on the 4-digit code Plant Biology 0607 (2012 -ERA3), this area did not meet low volume threshold in 2015 or 2018.

At a 2 digit level, 0601 Biochemistry and Cell Biology showed a modest increase from ERA 2 to 3 in 2018 with a commensurate increase in outputs (29 in 2012 to 62 in 2018). This represents areas of research carried out at both Orange and Wagga campuses.

426



To continue the growth of the area at Orange the following infrastructure requirements should be addressed. These requests are also in alignment with the desire to grow a footprint of biomedical research on the Orange Campus specifically. Investment in this area is required if staff are to develop higher quality research outputs under the new ANZSRC FoR 3214 Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences to support research performance for the new FoR 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences.

Significant support for this area of research also encompasses equipment located in the NaLSH complex. As most of the equipment located in the NaLSH was purchased from 2010-2012, a significant proportion of this equipment is now at end-of-life status. As the ‘flagship’ research laboratories for the university, this represents a risk to our ongoing research operations and outputs. This list is provided as an attachment.

It will be important that we maintain a presence in this area. Under the new coding structure 31 Biological Sciences contains few codes under which we report currently, 3101 Biochemistry and Cell Biology is likely to be critical to our performance for future ERA exercises.

3.5. 07 Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences

Overall ERA 4 – Above World Standard

This is an area of both significant quality and quantum of outputs for FOSH. It shows our strength in the agricultural and associated sciences and is an area that must be critically maintained for future ERA consolidation and performance. Under the new ANZSRC structure few FoRs have changed in the FoR for 30 Agriculture. 3003 Animal Production, 3002 Agriculture and Farm Management, 3008 Horticultural Production and 3009 Veterinary Sciences all rest under this new FoR. Maintaining existing research footprint and expanding this footprint will be essential to maintain and increase our current ERA ranking. The quantum of research outputs for single 2 digit FoR rose to 778 in 2018, from 251 in 2012.

0702 Animal Production – increased in outputs from 2012 to 2018. This 4-digit code was ranked as ERA 3 in 2015 and 2018, although outputs specifically in this area decreased in 2018 by 19%. It is possible that some outputs from this area were considered under 0707 FoRs. However, this is a strong area of industry focus for CSU and is strongly aligned with the AgriPark development and community partnerships. As an area of research that CSU has been operating in for more than 100 years, it is important that our footprint is maintained.

0703 Crop and Pasture Production is also a longitudinal research domain for CSU. Although FOSH saw a plateau in outputs (256-275) from 2015 to 2018, this FoR has ranked continuously for CSU at ERA 3 in 2015 and 2018. A decrease in outputs in 2018 (down 34%) is likely driving static ERA ranking and may be linked to a stronger focus on biosecurity and pest management than pure crop science. However, there are strong synergies for us with this FoR and development of the AgriPark and its intended and current partnerships.

0706 Horticultural Production is one of our highest ranked despite a modest output, this signalling high quality of the outputs in this area (131 outputs in 2018 up from 20 in 2012). 0706 has ranked ERA 5 for CSU in both 2015 and 2018 and is a ranking that must be maintained. The majority of outputs in this area are related to horticultural pest management and wine and grape science.

Veterinary sciences is an area of research strength at CSU given the relative youth of the School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences compared to other veterinary schools in the country. CSU was ranked ERA 3, rising to 4 in 2018. It is a strong area of research growth with outputs up 65% over this period.

Molecular microbiology in animal and plant biosecurity are areas of research strength at CSU. They contribute both to ERA rankings for 0707 Veterinary Science, and 0706 Horticultural production, as well as across other domains (06).

This area of research, and its cross-disciplinary nature into the future ANZSRC code of 3207 Medical Microbiology, will also be of critical importance to support future ERA ranking for 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences under the new reporting structure.

Wine and grape science contributes to the majority of our ERA 5 performance for 0706 Horticultural production. The majority of this activity is on the Wagga campus, although there is also a strong emerging footprint in this research area at the Orange Campus. It will be critical to maintain this activity moving forward.

427



3.6. 09 Engineering

Overall ERA 2 – Below World Standard

0908 Food Sciences first assessed in 2018 and ranked at ERA 2. The steady growth in outputs is likely driven by the ARC Functional Grain Centre and GC partnership. ERA 2, outputs are up 16% from 2015 to 2018, but decreased in ERA from 3 to 2. Under the new ANZSRC FoR codes, reporting for 3006 Food Sciences will fall under code 30 Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Sciences. This will reduce the number of overall FoR we report into under the new structure and will add quantum to FoR 30. There may well be ramifications for a reduction in reportable FoR domains for CSU.

Despite a drop in ERA rankings this is a strong area of industry engagement. Development of the food pilot plant has facilitated externally funded research with industry, and maintenance of this area should be an area for continued growth.

3.7. 11 Medical and Health Sciences

Overall ERA 2 – Below World Standard

Despite representing the single FoR with the greatest number of outputs across the Faculty of Science, likely a function of the large number of staff employed to work across these FoR codes, our ERA ranking in this area falls below world standard with a few notable exceptions. However, a drop in reportable outputs was also observed in 2018, therefore rectification of both quality and quantum needs to be managed for our future ERA performance.

A number of 4-digit FoRs met minimum reporting threshold in 2018. 1102 Cardiovascular Physiology was newly assessed in 2018 and received a ranking of ERA1. 1103 Clinical Sciences represented the largest volume of reportable outputs – 236 in total and showed an increased ranking from ERA 1 to 2 in 2018.

1106 Human Movement and Sport Science has retained an ERA rank of 2 from 2012 to 2018 with approximately 90 outputs per year. Despite a relatively small quantum of publications, this represents an area of strength for the FOSH. Although there has been no substantial increase over time, likely due to the relatively small number of staff working in this area, this single FoR outperforms others in FoR 11 in terms of Q1 journal publications, which is likely continuing to the sustainability of our ERA performance in this area. As such, 1106 represents an area for both potential ERA growth for CSU.

Under the new ANZSRC coding system 4207 Sports Science and Exercise rests under the new 42 code Health Sciences. Continued high quality research and outputs will be necessary for CSU to support this FoR into the future under the new coding system. This will cross reference with good ERA capacity in 4205 Nursing, and allow cross-disciplinary reporting support for poorer performing areas such as 4201 Allied health and rehabilitation science: 4203 Health Services and Systems and 4204 Midwifery.

1110 Nursing has shown an increase both in quantum of outputs and ERA ranking from 2012 – 2018. ERA ranking rose from 2 to 3 in 2015, maintaining a 3 in 2018. This is an area of growth for CSU and does not require significant financial investment in equipment to be maintained / increased. Work in this area requires support from IT services and subscriptions, plus human infrastructure support for research assistant time and project management.

1115 Pharmacology reached ERA assessment threshold in 2018 for the first time. This area reported an ERA 1 in 2018 – well below world standard – which may simply be reflective of minimal strength and capacity for FOSH in this area. Movement of this FoR into 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences requires either support or discontinuation of research in this area to allow quantum and quality to reach world standard by 2030.

1117 Public Health resulted in ERA1 well below world class ranking over time (ERA1 from 2012 – 2018). This suggests that generally our performance in this area has been low, without any increase in quality over time.

1105 Dentistry

Currently Charles Sturt does not meet low volume threshold for research outputs in the field of dental research. We have no current ERA ranking for Dentistry. This is an area in which we need to grow a

428



quantum and quality of research as this will support future reporting under the new ANZSRC system as Dentistry falls under 32 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences. An increase in research outputs in this area will assist CSU to meet provider category status for this FoR. As such, investment in infrastructure for research in dentistry and medical radiation sciences is warranted. Building research activity in this area could increase quantum of reporting under ANZSRC for 3203 Dentistry and 3101 Biochemistry and Cell Biology.

Overall, FoR 11 has been a problematic reporting code for Charles Sturt ERA. This situation will not change under the new ANZSRC ranking system. Although volumes of outputs are increasing, quality threshold for areas is low, with only the FoR for Nursing seeing an increase in ERA ranking over time. Clinical sciences is an emerging area of research for FOSH however our performance is well below world standard, although the volume of outputs is relatively large suggesting low quality or impact overall. Development of this area through facilitated research training and / or recruitment of research active staff, as well as strategic development of infrastructure and facilities, will be required to lift performance in the clinical sciences for Charles Sturt to meet provider category research targets for 2030.

Historical and predicted performance for FOSH-related FoR codes at the two and four-digit level is shown in Table 9.

3.8. Research active status by Field of Education (FoE)

Academics within FOSH teach into four broad Fields of Education (FoE) of the 12 recognised by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. These are:

• 01 Natural and Physical Sciences: containing the narrow fields of 0105 Chemical Sciences, 0109 Biological Sciences, and 0199 Other Natural Sciences;

• 05 Agriculture, Environmental and Related Studies: containing the narrow fields of 0501 Agriculture, 0503 Horticulture and Viticulture, 0507 Fisheries Studies, 0509 Environmental Studies, and 0599 Other Agricultural, Environmental and Related Studies;

• 06 Health: containing the narrow fields of 0601 Medical Studies, 0603 Nursing, 0605 Pharmacy, 0607 Dental Studies, 0609 Optical Science, 0611 Veterinary Studies, 0613 Public Health, 0615 Radiography, 0617 Rehabilitation Therapies, 0619 Complementary Therapies, and 0699 Other Health Studies;

• 07 Food and Hospitality: containing the narrow field of 1101 Food and Hospitality*

Using the previously identified ERA performance criteria at a 2 and four digit level, FOSH has potential to meet the minimum provider standards for research in FoE 05 and 06, dependent on maintenance of current ‘world class’ or ;’above world class’ performance under the new ANZSRC coding system. It is less clear that thresholds will be met for 01 and 07.

*Contains subdomains for Butchery (110105), and Food hygiene (11011).

429



Table 9. Past ERA performance and future predicted performance for FoR codes related to FOSH research.

FoR code FoR name LVT-2012 LVT-2015 LVT-2018 Rank-2012 Rank-2015 Rank-2018 Prediction

02 Physical Sciences 24.2 41.1 63.7 Not assessed Not assessed 5 New

0201 Astronomical and Space Sciences 20.4 40.8 62.0 Not assessed Not assessed 5 New

0202 Atomic, Molecular, Nuclear, Particle and Plasma Physics 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0203 Classical Physics Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0204 Condensed Matter Physics Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0205 Optical Physics 1.8 0.4 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0206 Quantum Physics 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0299 Other Physical Sciences 1.0 0.3 0.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

03 Chemical Sciences 104.2 32.1 38.4 2 Not assessed Not assessed

0301 Analytical Chemistry 51.7 4.5 7.1 3 Not assessed Not assessed

0302 Inorganic Chemistry 1.0 3.0 3.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0303 Macromolecular and Materials Chemistry 4.5 1.3 1.5 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0304 Medicinal and Biomolecular Chemistry 3.0 1.3 3.9 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0305 Organic Chemistry 8.5 4.0 3.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0306 Physical Chemistry (incl. Structural) 29.5 13.0 13.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0307 Theoretical and Computational Chemistry 4.0 5.0 3.5 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0399 Other Chemical Sciences 2.0 2.7 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

04 Earth Sciences 10.2 3.9 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0401 Atmospheric Sciences Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0402 Geochemistry 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0403 Geology Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0404 Geophysics Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0405 Oceanography Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0406 Physical Geography and Environmental Geoscience 8.2 3.9 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0499 Other Earth Sciences 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

05 Environmental Sciences 101.5 293.0 412.0 4 3 3 No change

0501 Ecological Applications 2.0 40.0 35.5 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0502 Environmental Science and Management 93.0 250.5 368.7 4 3 4 Increase

0503 Soil Sciences 5.5 2.5 6.8 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0599 Other Environmental Sciences 1.0 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

06 Biological Sciences 269.9 136.8 178.4 2 2 2 No change

0601 Biochemistry and Cell Biology 29.5 59.5 62.3 Not assessed 2 3 Increase

0602 Ecology 37.3 9.8 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0603 Evolutionary Biology 3.0 13.8 14.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0604 Genetics 4.3 4.5 22.5 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0605 Microbiology 82.8 12.5 9.8 1 Not assessed Not assessed

0606 Physiology 7.8 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0607 Plant Biology 67.0 20.8 28.3 3 Not assessed Not assessed

0608 Zoology 46.0 25.8 23.6 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0699 Other Biological Sciences Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

07 Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences 251.7 594.2 778.3 3 3 4 Increase

0701 Agriculture, Land and Farm Management 16.5 1.3 23.5 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0702 Animal Production 21.0 87.0 111.5 Not assessed 3 3 No change

0703 Crop and Pasture Production 67.0 256.8 275.0 2 3 3 No change

0704 Fisheries Sciences 2.0 4.0 4.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0705 Forestry Sciences 1.0 4.8 6.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0706 Horticultural Production 22.0 87.6 131.6 Not assessed 5 5 No change

0707 Veterinary Sciences 119.2 150.8 226.1 3 3 4 Increase

0799 Other Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences 3.0 2.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

09 Engineering 19.0 79.1 168.2 Not assessed 3 2 Decrease

0907 Environmental Engineering 0.5 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

0908 Food Sciences 18.5 78.1 149.4 Not assessed 3 2 Decrease

10 Technology 8.3 4.0 15.9 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1001 Agricultural Biotechnology 1.0 3.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1002 Environmental Biotechnology Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1003 Industrial Biotechnology 0.5 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1004 Medical Biotechnology 1.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1005 Communications Technologies 5.8 2.0 5.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1006 Computer Hardware Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1007 Nanotechnology 1.0 7.6 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1099 Other Technology Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

11 Medical and Health Sciences 538.5 690.2 868.4 1 2 2 No change

1101 Medical Biochemistry and Metabolomics 5.0 5.9 15.9 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1102 Cardiovascular Medicine and Haematology 13.0 37.8 59.5 Not assessed Not assessed 1 New

1103 Clinical Sciences 170.6 218.2 236.0 1 1 2 Increase

1104 Complementary and Alternative Medicine 14.5 32.9 12.4 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1105 Dentistry 2.0 23.3 23.4 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1106 Human Movement and Sports Science 99.7 87.7 96.4 2 2 2 No change

1107 Immunology 5.5 0.7 1.7 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1108 Medical Microbiology 9.5 16.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1109 Neurosciences 31.1 24.1 23.1 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1110 Nursing 52.8 88.8 141.4 2 3 3 No change

1111 Nutrition and Dietetics 4.0 4.8 6.7 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis 12.5 19.8 19.2 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1113 Ophthalmology and Optometry 1.0 1.0 2.4 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1114 Paediatrics and Reproductive Medicine 4.5 0.7 11.9 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1115 Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences 42.0 40.7 64.0 Not assessed Not assessed 1 New

1116 Medical Physiology 8.5 0.2 3.3 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

1117 Public Health and Health Services 71.9 91.2 133.3 1 1 1 No change

1199 Other Medical and Health Sciences 3.0 2.0 Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

430



4. Central Research Funding to FOSH 2020

4.1. DVCR Funds – Income and expenditure

Total income to FOSH from central funds was $1,383,449. The total activity under this funding code for End of Year 2020 was $1,421,952.

This budget included tuition support for 4 Higher Degree by Research (HDR) candidates (Paul, Hendricks, Clarke, Ma), plus tuition and stipend support for one HDR candidate (Munasinghe). The majority of these candidates are CRC- or other Category 1 co-funded with most located in Research Centres.

Funds were also expended for the final Faculty Post-Doc salaries, 2019 seed grants, as well as remaining expenditures on the Tri-Faculty publishing Scheme, HDR Symposium, Research Forum and other minor expenditures.

Leverage for existing, externally funded FOSH-led projects was also included, plus salaries for previously contracted co-funded staff (Whiteford – co-funded with Mid North Coast LHD, Smith – co-funded with NWGIC).

It is anticipated that a significant proportion of this expenditure will not be outlaid for the calendar year 2021.

In addition to the above amount, approximately $50,000 was spent on minor equipment repairs, plus an additional amount was requested from the DVCR (circa $330,000) for ongoing equipment maintenance contracts for high-end equipment for the NaLSH and other locations.

In addition, an annual charge of $12,143 was supported for staff and student access to the Australian National Synchrotron (https://www.ansto.gov.au/research/facilities/australian-synchrotron/overview) and $13,750 for our annual membership of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (https://www.ansto.gov.au/).

4.2. FOSH staff support through DVCR schemes

FOSH staff were recipients in several centrally run DVCR schemes. These included the Research Infrastructure support scheme for equipment costs greater than $40,000 (2021) and COVID19 Seed Grants (2020). Details and recipients are documented below.

2.10.1. Research Infrastructure Support Scheme (RISS)

A total of 11 RISS grants were submitted for Faculty assessment and ranking, with two funded through the DVCR scheme. Other FOSH-based equipment applications lodged through the Research Centres are shown in Table 10.

431

https://www.ansto.gov.au/research/facilities/australian-synchrotron/overview

https://www.ansto.gov.au/



Table 10. Research Infrastructure Support Grants – by organisational area, applicant, proposed equipment and amount of funding awarded.

Org Code Name of

Applicant Project Title Amount requested Approved Funding

GC Jonathan Medway

CSU Digital Farm Establishment $327,000.00 $168,000.00

GC Sergio Moroni Large capacity dehydrating oven, LECO CNS Analyser and Heating/Chilling Plates

$76,749.00 $48,749.00

GC Remy Dehaan Enhancing CSU's digital aerial measurement capacity with LiDAR

$81,920.00 $81,920.00

NWGIC Sandra Savocchia

Innovative tools for rapid diagnostics and molecular analysis of microbiological and plant samples

$91,900.00 $91,900.00

ILWS Lee Baumgartner Supporting Aquatic Research Infrastructure

$139,730.00 $94,730.00

ILWS Robyn Watts Equipment for supporting field-based water research projects at CSU

$88,634.68 $88,634.00

FOSH Forwood FPLC, -80 freezer and BioFlor $143,376.00 $42,993.00

FOSH Roby NaLSH virology lab $65,803.00 $52,451.00

TOTAL REQUESTED $1,015,112.68 $669,377.00

GC, Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation; NWGIC, National Wine and Grape Industry Centre; ILWS, Institute for Land, Water and Society; FOSH, Faculty of Science and Health.

2.10.2. COVID 19 Seed Grants

The current COVID-19 pandemic represents an unprecedented health crisis with wide-reaching impacts on our families, our communities, our health service and our national and global economy.

To respond to this extraordinary event, the University released $200,000 of internal funding to support projects focused on understanding the impacts on the health, wellbeing, business performance, communities and economy of Australia. Projects can be in any discipline area and with any deliverable outcome providing that these are focussed on:

• generating new knowledge regarding the impact of this virus on our people or communities;

• delivering solutions for post-COVID-19 resilience;

• economic rebuilding; or

• a combination of the above.

Applications were encouraged from all areas of the University for research teams to undertake novel research in the area of COVID-19 where clear, short term, quality outcomes could be delivered in the timeframe of this funding scheme. Projects based on multi-disciplinary teams were particularly encouraged.

A total of 64 proposals were received through this DVCR initiative in 2020, of which 11 were led by FOSH staff. Of the 12 proposals awarded, two were from FOSH teams, the first led by Professor Frank Marino (SESSH) entitled ‘Metabolic and inflammatory health in COVID19: a potential mechanism for alleviation of disease severity’; the second was led by Professor Julian Grant (SNMIH) investigating ‘COVID19 and regional racisms; have isolation an social distancing measures become sanctioned discrimination for culturally and linguistically diverse peoples?’. Professor Jade Forwood also received funding for COVID19 research investigating the potential for Ivermectin as a COVID19 therapeutic.

432



2.10.3. Early Career Research grants.

AN ECR support scheme was released by the DVCR in early 2021. FOSH staff developed 19 applications that were submitted for review and ranking by a Faculty committee of experienced researchers. Final rankings were put forward to the DVCR office. A total of 17 proposals were awarded funding across the three Faculties of which six were from FOSH staff (Table 11). Total amount awarded to FOSH projects was $130,547. These projects conclude at the end of 2021.

Table 11. Successful FOSH ECR grants awarded in 2021.

Applicant School Title

Shamsul Haque SAWS Evaluation of the impact of biochar and plant growth promoting bacteria on wheat rhizosphere microbial community and soil function

Jane Kelly SAWS Impacts of barley grass density on seed contamination levels and live weight loss in weaner sheep

Boris Budiono SCH The anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects of dietary phenolic compounds in hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome skin fibroblasts

Sarah Verdon SCH Talking children: Supporting rural children’s communication development in the early years

Richard Crabbe SES Leveraging Sentinel satellite imagery for real-time detection of African lovegrass in commercial farms of New South Wales

Alexandra Knight

SES Understanding mangrove responses to fire on the mid-north coast of New South Wales: a citizen science approach.

2.10.4. Australian Consortium for Social and Political Research Incorporated (ACSPRI) statistic course support

Australian Consortium for Social and Political Research Incorporated (ACSPRI) is a not-for-profit organisation that promotes social science research methods in Australia. To support staff research professional development and methods training a number of supported places were offered to staff across the University to attend ACSPRI methods courses. Four staff members from FOSH were successful in being awarded support to attend courses through this scheme with costs ranging from $1250 to $2500 per course.

2.10.5. Open Access Publishing Scheme

Based on the success of the FOSH Open Access Publishing Scheme and Tri-Faculty Publishing Schemes run in 2018 and 2019, the DVCR released the Tri-Faculty Open Access Publishing Scheme to all staff across the University. Applications were reviewed on a case-by-case basis until funds were extinguished. A total of 12 open access peer reviewed publications were supported for FOSH staff through this scheme in 2020, to a total cost of $25,637.

2.10.6. The Return to Research Scheme

Building on the importance and success of this scheme for FOSH, and in meeting our commitments under the Athena SWAN program, this initiative was adopted by the DVCR and extended across the University.

Two FOSH staff were awarded funding through this scheme to support their return to active research in 2020, to a total of $9,500.

433



2.10.5. The Sturt Scheme

The Charles Sturt University Sturt Scheme was released in mid-2021. The purpose of the scheme is to:

1. build research capacity through supporting new research groups across the University that will enhance our ERA performance;

2. build research capacity through creating additional research FTE;

3. facilitate the development of research questions that will attract external funding;

4. provide support where government or industry investment is likely.

The scheme will be funded from the DVC Research Portfolio with up to 6 proposals being supported from across the University. The purpose is to support new research groups who have the potential to contribute positively to the University’s research performance, particularly in relation to Excellence in Research Australia ratings.

In total 10 applications were considered by Faculty, of which 7 undertook the full EOI process including detailed feedback to applicants, with 9 proceeding to submission to the DVCR for final consideration. The outcome of this process is anticipated in August 202 and will be reported in the 2022 Faculty Annual report.

2.10.5. HDR Support

In 2020 the Tri-Faculty HDR support funding initiative was released for application by HDR candidates. The scheme was open to all candidates to apply for up to $1,500 to contribute toward the costs involved in undertaking their HDR project. Preference was given to candidates that were not in receipt of an AGRTP or other scholarship which provides operating funding. Approximately $20,480 was allocated to 15 HDR candidates in the Faculty of Science.

434



5. Higher Degree by Research Students

5.1. HDR enrolments and completions

Total HDR enrolments have stayed static for the period 2019-2020 with a marginal increase of 35 to 39

students as new enrolments (Figure 24). Successful completions declined in 2020 with 24 candidates

attaining award from 31 in 2019. It is likely that COVID19 influenced this success rate as a proportion of

candidates were awarded extensions in 2020, in addition to others taking Approved Leaves of Absence due

to restrictions on their ability to undertake their studies. Currently, 58 students are under examination.

Figure 24. HDR student enrolments, completions and graduations for FOSH 2019-2020.

5.2. AGRTP Scholarships

The number of Australian Graduate Research Training Program (AGRTP) scholarships awarded across all Faculties by Charles Sturt between 2014 – 2020 is a critical metric for future research performance. Figure 25 shows that the number of scholarships awarded, and FTE student equivalents (EFTSL) fell dramatically in 2020 after a peak in 2018-19. This is a concerning trend.

In FOSH, number of AGRTP scholarship awardees also fell sharply from 2019-2020 (Figure 26). Although a number of international scholarships were awarded 2020, no students have commenced due to COVID travel restrictions. International student scholarship numbers have remained low for the duration of the reporting period.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

New enrolments Completions Under examination Graduations

HDR

2019 2020

435



Scholarships Awarded – All Faculties (EFTSL)

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Domestic FT 28 33 30 25 45 47 32

AGRTP-Indigenous 4 4 2

Domestic PT (no-stipend) 10.5 1.5 9 14.5 1.5

International FT 8 11 11 10 8 3 8

TOTAL EFTSL 36 44 51.5 36.5 66 68.5 43.5

Figure 25. Number of students awarded ARTP Scholarships by category – Domestic Full Time (FT); AGRTP Indigenous awards; Domestic part-time (PT) and International Full Time.

Figure 26. Number of students awarded ARTP Scholarships by category – Domestic Full Time (FT); AGRTP Indigenous awards; Domestic part-time (PT) and International Full Time.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

CSU AGRTP scholarships awarded

Domestic FT AGRTP-Indigenous

Domestic PT (no-stipend) International FT

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2018 2019 2020

FOSH AGRTP Scholarships

Domestic FT AGRTP-Indigenous

Domestic PT (no-stipend) International FT

436



5.3. Changes in HDR Supervisory Teams

2020 saw a rise in the number of HDR students who experienced a change to their supervisory team. In

2019 there were 13 changes or additions to the supervisory team for FOSH candidates, this increased by

nearly 50% to 21 changed in 2020. These were primarily driven by loss of staff through Sustainable Futures

and the Organisational Review 2 separations.

5.4. Supervisory capacity and ‘Research Active’ status of HDR supervisors

Supervisory capacity is an emerging issue for CSU. In 2020 FOSH saw 183 academics registered as HDR

supervisors, of which 120 were Principal Supervisors and 63 as Co-supervisors (Figure 27). In addition, 58

adjuncts are identified as HDR supervisors. These numbers are relatively modest compared to the number of

Teaching / research staff in the Faculty. Particularly relevant in relation to the HESF standards for Research

and Research Supervision is the number of ‘Research Inactive staff’ who are registered as HDR supervisors

(Figure 25). Whilst we have observed a steady increase in the number of ‘Research Active’ supervisors the

number of ‘Research Inactive’ co-supervisors have not decreased proportionally. This represents some risk

regarding quality supervision of our HDR cohort with a 25% increase in Research Inactive co-supervisors

actively supervising students in 2020 (2019- 30 inactive co-supervisors, 2020 – 40 inactive co-supervisors).

A rise in the number of research-inactive supervisors is undesirable and this trend should be carefully

managed.

Figure 27. Research active status of FOSH HDR supervisors 2016 - 2020.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Research active status - HDR supervision

Research active Research inactive

437



5.5. HDR activities

4.3.1. 3 Minute Thesis (3MT) Competition

The CSU 3MT Heats were run during DocFest21 via Zoom 26 and 27 May. Of the 18 students entering the 3MT competition, 10 were from the Faculty of Science. Of these, five FOSH students were successful in going through to the final round which was held at the Charles Sturt University Riverina Playhouse on 23 June. 3MToutcomes resulted in FOSH student, Borkwei Ed Nignpense, being awarded the Runner Up title.

4.3.2. 2020 HDR Symposium

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Faculty of Science HDR and Honours Symposium could not be held face-to-face on-campus and therefore was held over Zoom from 26 August – 4 September 2020. Students were invited to present their research in the form of a written abstract and as an oral presentation over Zoom. A book of abstracts was presented as part of the program. In total, 64 students composed of 56 HDR students and 8 Honours students presented their research. The online platform also allowed external people to CSU (i.e. industry partners, collaborators) to attend. Overall, 234 unique attendees were recorded as attending the symposium (Figure 28).

During the symposium, four professional development workshops were presented by Dr Inger Mewburn (Director of Researcher Development, Australian national University). The workshops covered finding careers outside of academia, developing a learning plan and a networking strategy to assist with job placement. Prizes were awarded to students for their outstanding presentations based on feedback prepared by academics for each presentation.

The HDR Presentation Prize was awarded to Claudia Macleay (School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences), Runner-up Presentation Prize was awarded to Rebecca Smith (School of Community Health) and the Honours Presentation Prize was awarded to Bernard Higgins (School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences).

Feedback was requested from participants at the completion of the symposium;

- 96% of respondents reported that the symposium was very organised to extremely organised - 98% of respondents reported that the event was very good to excellent - 97% of respondents agreed to strongly agreed that the symposium provided the opportunity to

improve their presentation and public speaking skills - 32% of respondents reported that their preferred mode of delivery for the symposium was online,

40% preferred face-to-face and 28% would like to see the symposium alternated between online and face-to-face each year.

438



Figure 28. The virtual 2020 HDR Symposium. FOSH student present their findings.

6. Key findings

Key findings of note in this report, that are considered as current and future risks to the research performance of the Faculty are:

• There are high numbers of research inactive staff across a number of schools in the Faculty, and particularly in those schools associated with the health disciplines.

• The University and FOSH have observed only a marginal lift in research income from 2019-2020 although there has been a modest increase in Category 4 funding.

• There is highly variable research income performance across schools, with a small number of schools contributing to the majority of research income. In particular, the schools of Allied Health and Sports and Exercise Science have shown very little or no research income in the last few years.

• FOSH has observed an increase in grant application activity in 2020 reporting period indicative of a stronger focus on sourcing external funding.

• There has been a decrease in HDR AGRTP scholarships awarded across the University, which is reflected in new HDR student enrolment number and in FOSH in 2020.

• There has been an increase in the number of research-inactive HDR supervisors and increases in changes to supervisory teams post OR2 restructure, both of which are a concerning trend.

• Overall research outputs showed an increase in 2020 with predicted outputs to return to 2019 levels in 2021.

• Maintenance of current and lift in current ERA performance will require a targeted performance management and investment approach.

439



Recommendations

• A targeted approach is required to increase PhD-qualified staff in health-related schools through strategic recruitment and / or directed pathways to PhD within minimum candidature.

• A management approach is required to support research-inactive staff in all areas to meet baseline research performance goals with 12 and 24 month performance targets.

• Research income targets should be set for Schools to achieve a lift in research performance with aligned application and research management support at a School / Faculty / Divisional level.

• Areas of ERA risk and / or strategic importance should receive targeted funding for strategic recruitment, technical support, infrastructure support and staff teaching buy-out.

• Recommend a targeted research performance plan be developed for probationary and ECR staff (3 years since first academic appointment or 5 years since PhD completion) to support research development and growth internal capability.

• Ensure alignment of Faculty research plans with the University Research Strategy KPIs, targets and goals with aligned funding to achieve strategic goals.

Strategies to increase staff performance and ERA outcomes are required to consolidate research activity across the Faculty to meet the strategic requirements of the University Research Strategy 2020-2030.

For further information on this report, or other research of HDR related matters, please contact Associate Professor Jane Quinn ([email protected]) or Associate Professor Sandra Savocchia ([email protected]).

440

mailto:[email protected]

CONF

IDEN

TIAL

Item 15: Abridged report on Ethics and Compliance Breaches

PURPOSE

To provide a report on Ethics and Compliance Breaches that occurred in 2021

RECOMMENDATION


1. note the report on Ethics and Compliance Breaches that occurred in 2021.

KEY ISSUES

There has been only one occurrence of a breach of the Australian code for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes 8th edition. The matter has been investigated by the Presiding Officer in accordance with the CSU Research Misconduct Procedure and referred to the Vice Chancellor.

RISK ASSESSMENT


Charles Sturt University is committed to high level of compliance with relevant legislation, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures.

Charles Sturt University has a Very Low Appetite for any intentional behaviours which result in non-compliances with any of its relevant legislative requirements, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures.


The decision sits within the current risk appetite

ATTACHMENTS

A. Incidents report to FARC 2021

Prepared by: Miss Kate Organ, Manager Research Integrity, Ethics and Compliance Cleared by: Professor Michael Friend, Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor Research


441

https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/attachments/Australian-code-for-the-care-and-use-of-animals.pdf




Meeting date Reported to FARC

Incident Brief Description Date Committee Urgency Out come

Q2 2021 Australian code for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes 8th edition

An investigated by the ACEC Chair into the conduct an Academic staff member with respect to an approved animal research project, identified a number of breaches of the Code. Including

o Commencement of research without an authorityto use animals

o Failure to report adverse events as required.

o Discrepancies indicating that the ChiefInvestigator (CI) did not comply with the originalapproved protocol

o Failure to keep robust and accurate records,including records of monitoring of animal welfare.

19 April 2021

Animal Care and Ethics Committee

Higher Matter provided to the Vice Chancellor for investigation under serious research misconduct provisions of the Enterprise Agreement.

442








CONF

IDEN

TIAL

Item 16: Research Integrity Training Modules' completion rates among adjunct staff

PURPOSE

To provide the University Research Committee with information on the completion rate of research integrity training among adjunct staff (URC20/3).

RECOMMENDATION


1. note the completion rate of research integrity training among adjunct staff.

2. discuss the implication of these rates for research supervision.

KEY ISSUES

1. Background

The University has an obligation to provide training on research integrity requirements for staff undertaking research, teaching and research supervision. At CSU this is delivered via three ELMO training modules encompassing:

• Research Integrity• Animal Care and Ethics• Human Research Ethics

2. Current Status

• Adjunct staff are not currently enrolled into the ELMO system by the Division of People and Culture as standard practice as continuing staff are. Adjuncts are not enrolled as it has a considerable cost burden to the substantive school where adjuncts are located.

• Current adjunct enrolment is ad hoc and is generally as a result of the individual being a previous continuing staff member that was enrolled prior to transitioning to an adjunctappointment.

• There are a number of adjunct staff currently undertaking research and teaching functions and supervision or part of supervisory teams. ELMO completion rates are relatively low.

• The low rate of adjunct completion rates does pose a risk to the research supervision capacity at CSU.


Discuss the implications of low rate of training completion on research and research supervision.


443

CONF

IDEN

TIAL

COMPLIANCE


1. Standard 4.2.1 of the Higher Education Standards Framework2021

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with Research Policy https://policy.csu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=536

Academic Integrity Policy https://policy.csu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=387

RISK ASSESSMENT


Charles Sturt University is committed to high level of compliance with relevant legislation, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures.

Charles Sturt University has a Very Low Appetite for any intentional behaviours which result in non-compliances with any of its relevant legislative requirements, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures.


The decision sits within the current risk appetite

ATTACHMENTS

A. Adjunct risk report (7 pages)

Prepared by: Miss Kate Organ, Manager Research Integrity, Ethics and Compliance Cleared by: Professor Michael Friend, Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

444









Version 4 – 16/09/2021 Page 1

Adjunct Review ELMO training enrolments

Research Integrity, Ethics and Compliance Unit

Contents

Overview of Adjunct Presence at Charles Sturt University ................................................................................................. 1

Adjunct Module Completions ............................................................................................................................................... 2

Ethics Applications, Research Staff and Adjuncts .............................................................................................................. 4

Human Research and Ethics Applications ...................................................................................................................... 4

Human Research and Ethics and Adjunct Training ......................................................................................................... 4

Animal Care and Ethics Applications ............................................................................................................................... 4

Animal Care and Ethics and Adjunct Training ................................................................................................................. 5

Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Overview of Adjunct Presence at Charles Sturt University

As of the end of July 2021 a total of 1097 staff are listed as adjuncts by the Division of People and Culture. 112 of these are general staff and 985 are academic staff.

The work function description of 110 of the general staff appointed as adjuncts are classified as Other and 2 are classified as Research Focused.

The remaining 985 academic adjunct staff are classified* as either:

Table 1

*includes two Centre Directors and three Associate & Head of school.

308

73

196

340

70

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Research Focussed Teaching andProfessional

Teaching andResearch

Teaching Focussed Other

Academic Adjunct Staff Function

445

Adjunct Review | Version 4 – 16/09/2021

Research Integrity, Ethics and Compliance Unit Page 2

Adjunct Module Completions

The training modules launched in late August 2020 and by the end of the first reporting period at the end of September 2020:

• 25 adjuncts were either manually (requested & not identified by system) or self enrolled in the Research Integritytraining module with a 32% (8) completion rate.

• 19 adjuncts (76%) were either self or manual enrolled in the Animal Care and Ethics module with a 42% (8)completion rate.

• 21 adjuncts (84%) were either self or manual enrolled in the Human Research and Ethics module with a 33%completion rate.

• 7 enrolled (28%) had completed all three training modules.

Table 2

For the end of the reporting period of December 2020:

• Overall a total of 33 adjuncts were enrolled, an increase of 9 adjuncts who were previously staff.

• 33 adjuncts were either manually (requested & not identified by system) or self enrolled in the Research Integritytraining module with a 64% (21) completion rate.

• 26 adjuncts (78%) were either self or manual enrolled in the Animal Care and Ethics module with a 69% (18)completion rate.

• 29 adjuncts (87) were either self or manual enrolled in the Human Research and Ethics module with a 65% (19)completion rate.

• 4 adjuncts (12%) previously enrolled as staff completed of all the modules as staff

• 17 adjuncts (51%) enrolled had completed all three training modules.

• Overall completion of the three modules is 21 adjuncts (64%).

8 8 7

17

11 14

0

6 4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Research Integrity Animal Care & Ethics Human Research and Ethics

September 2020

Completed Not Started Not enrolled

446



Table 3

For the end of the reporting period of June 2021 (privacy settings were changed in ELMO for the March reporting period which removed the ability to identify adjuncts):

• Overall a total of 65 adjuncts were enrolled, an increase of 25 adjuncts who were previously staff and 9 newadjuncts.

• 15 adjuncts (23%) previously enrolled as staff completed of all the modules as staff.

• 65 adjuncts were either manually (requested & not identified by system) or self enrolled in the Research Integritytraining module with a 80% completion rate.

• 54 adjuncts (83%) were either self or manual enrolled in the Animal Care and Ethics module with a 81%completion rate.

• 61 adjuncts (93%) were either self or manual enrolled in the Human Research and Ethics module with a 82%completion rate.

• 18 (27%) adjuncts enrolled had completed all three training modules.

• Overall completion of three modules is 33 adjuncts (51%).

Table 4

The research integrity module is the only module with all adjuncts enrolled. This is followed by the Human Research and Ethics module (average 90% enrolment) and animal care and ethics module (average 80% enrolment).

2118 19

12

810

0

74

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


December 2020


5244

50

13

10

11

011

4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


June 2021


447



Ethics Applications, Research Staff and Adjuncts

Human Research and Ethics Applications

The Research Integrity and Compliance Unit (RIECU) has 296 human research ethics applications recorded in Research Master with an adjunct listed as an investigator. This is out of a total of 1367 applications recorded in Research Master, comprising approx. 21.6% of applications received by the HREC.

There is a total of 551 active ethics applications on record in Research Master with 160 of these having an adjunct listed as an investigator.

393 active applications do not have an adjunct listed on the ethics application and 57 active ethics applications have only an adjunct listed (not including general staff or students) on them (a total of 38 adjuncts). Of the 38 adjuncts on these ethics applications, 8 are enrolled in a research integrity and ethics module. 7 have completed the human research and ethics modules. 6 have completed all three modules and 1 is enrolled but not completed.

A further 103 active ethics applications having both an adjunct and Charles Sturt University staff member listed.

87 adjuncts are listed as investigators on one or more of the active applications, with the breakdown as follows:

Table 5

Human Research and Ethics and Adjunct Training

With 87 adjuncts listed as investigators on an active HREC application, twenty-two are enrolled in one or more of the integrity and ethics training modules. Fourteen adjuncts have completed the three integrity and ethics training modules. Eighteen adjuncts have completed the HREC training module and one adjunct is not enrolled in HREC module but is enrolled in the Research Integrity module.

Animal Care and Ethics Applications

The Research Integrity and Compliance Unit (RIECU) has 80 animal care and ethics applications recorded in Research Master with an adjunct listed as an investigator. This is out of a total of 487 applications on record, comprising approx. 16.4% of applications received by the ACEC.

There is a total of 182 active applications with 28 active applications having an adjunct listed as an investigator

154 active projects do not have a adjuncts listed on the ethics application and 28 active ethics application have both an adjunct and Charles Sturt University staff member listed.

43

14 13

3

7

2 30

2

9

25

02 1 2

0 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

No o

f adju

ncts

Applications

Adjunct Human Ethics Application Numbers and ELMO enrolment

Adjuncts Enrolled

448



14 adjuncts listed as investigators on one or more of the applications, with the breakdown as follows:

Table 6

Animal Care and Ethics and Adjunct Training

1 of the 14 adjuncts listed as an investigator on an active ACEC application is enrolled and completed all three modules of training. This adjunct is listed on 9 active ethics applications. The remaining 13 adjuncts are not enrolled in any of the integrity and ethics training modules.

Summary

The inclusion of adjuncts in the training cohort is by approval of the VCLT. There is no current trigger to enrol adjuncts and they are either self enrolling or enrolment is at the request of a source within the University.

The completion and enrolment rate has increased steadily over each quarter due in part to the shift of employment to adjunct status of staff where staff have completed the modules as staff. However enrolment is still low in comparison to the overall adjunct roles recorded by People and Culture (Table 1).

The Research Integrity training module is the base line for the enrollment and completion rate.

Although only one of the fourteen adjuncts is enrolled and completed all three of the integrity and ethics modules, none of the animal care and ethics application projects are solely managed and lead by an adjunct, a Charles Sturt academic is named in all projects with an adjunct listed.

Thirty-eight adjuncts are identified as being on active human research ethics applications without the co-supervision of a Charles Sturt University academic. Seven have completed the human research and ethics training module.

Completion at the last reporting period across the three modules is similar (approx. 80%) with enrolment figures varying for each module.

For the purposes of this report, ‘investigator means person listed on an ethics application, as part of the ethics team’.

Active application – approved in the Research Master system with end date post 30 June 2021.

7

2 2

1

0

1

0 0

1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

No o

f adju

ncts

No of applications

Adjunct Animal Ethics Application Numbers and ELMO enrolment

Adjuncts Enrolled

449



Source: Charles Sturt University Enterprise Agreement 2018-2021

* Clause 30.10

Teaching and research academic staff:

(i) teaching and teaching related activities (including scholarship of teaching and learning) - a maximum of 60%(that is, one thousand and thirty five hours (1035) hours per annum, with teaching limited to no more than two(2) sessions per year), unless otherwise agreed by the employee;

(ii) research and/or creative activity - a minimum of 30%; and(iii) contributions to academic administration and management/leadership both internal and external to the

University, professionally related engagement within the professions/disciplines and the community - aminimum of 10%.

Teaching and professional academic staff:

(i) teaching and teaching related activities (including scholarship of teaching and learning) – a maximum of 60%(that is, one thousand and thirty five hours (1035) hours per calendar year, with teaching limited to no morethan two (2) sessions per year), unless otherwise agreed by the employee;

(ii) professional activity - a minimum of 30%; and(iii) contributions to academic administration and management/leadership, professionally related engagement

within the professions/disciplines and the community - a minimum of 10%

Teaching focussed staff

(i) teaching and teaching related activities (including scholarship of teaching and learning) – a maximum of 80%(that is, one thousand three hundred and eighty (1380) hours per calendar year) which may be spread overthree (3) sessions per year; and

(ii) contributions to academic administration and management/leadership, both internal and external to theUniversity, professional related engagement within the profession/disciplines and the community– a minimumof 20%. In this category of work function it is expected that teaching focused staff will be given time to keepup to date with relevant developments in their discipline.

Research focussed staff

Clause 21.6

(ii) “Research” means work activity by a person engaged on research-only functions.

Other

Division of People and Culture

Position is classified as ‘other’ if it differs from those under clause 30 of the Enterprise Agreement.

30.23 For the purpose of this clause, teaching and related duties will include, but will not be limited to:

(i)

(i) Preparation of teaching materials for all modes of delivery;(ii) Subject development and revision, including online, off-campus and offshore learning materials;

(iii) Delivery of lectures, tutorials, seminars, studio sessions, laboratory classes, workplace learning activities,practicums and clinical education;

(iv) Delivery of all forms of synchronous and asynchronous online learning;(v) Delivery of off-campus, off-shore and online education;(vi) Travel associated with international teaching (up to a maximum of seven and one half (7.5) hours per day);(vii) Subject coordination and convening;(viii) Supervision of teaching staff, including casual and sessional staff;(ix) Supervision of honors and postgraduate research and other projects;(x) Supervision of undergraduate students undertaking research projects, clinical instruction and workplace

learning activities;

450



(xi) All aspects of student assessment, including preparing, marking, moderating, and providing feedback onstudent assessment tasks, and all administrative aspects of marking, recording and finalising student grades;

(xii) Student consultation;(xiii) Travel between campuses or to remote locations for the purposes of teaching related duties;(xiv) Teaching-related professional development to sat

451

Item 17: Principles for Draft Guidelines for HDR Supervisory Loads

PURPOSE

To provide points for discussion to the University Research Committee on the principles that could be used to draft guidelines for HDR supervisor loads for academic staff.

RECOMMENDATION

The University Research committee resolves to:

1. note the report; and

2. endorse the principles that should be used to draft guidelines on HDR supervisory loads.

KEY ISSUES

While the Higher Education Standards Framework and TEQSA Guidance Note: Research and Research Training refer to “adequate supervision” no specific requirement is outlined in relation to load. However, the TEQSA guidance note references the Australian Council of Graduate Research including their Graduate Research Good Practice Principles.

1. Background

The Australian Council of Graduate Research suggests as part of its Good Practice Principles that • The University provides guidance on the management of supervisor appointment, expected

level of experience, supervisory loads, and appropriate supervisory conduct.

2. Current Status

There are currently no supervisory load guidelines in policy or procedure at Charles Sturt University.


Following discussion draft guidelines would need to be drafted and provided for comment.

COMPLIANCE


1. Standard 4.2.2 of the Higher Education Standards Framework2021

Policy Alignment This decision would be made under the Higher Degree by Research Policy

RISK ASSESSMENT


Charles Sturt University has a Low Appetite and willingness to take risks with the potential to compromise the University course delivery, accreditation of courses, academic integrity and educational standards.


452

https://www.teqsa.gov.au/latest-news/publications/guidance-note-research-and-research-training


https://www.acgr.edu.au/good-practice/graduate-research-good-practice-principles/









ATTACHMENTS A. Supervisory Load Settings B. HDR Supervision Load Collated Feedback

Prepared by: Jason White, Acting Pro Vice Chancellor Research and Innovation Cleared by: Michael Friend, Acting Deputy Vice Chancellor Research

453

Advice on Higher Degree by Research Supervisory Loads

While the Higher Education Standards Framework and TEQSA Guidance Note: Research and Research Training refer to “adequate supervision” no specific requirement is outlined in relation to load. However, the TEQSA guidance note references the Australian Council of Graduate Research including their Graduate Research Good Practice Principles.

As part of their Good Practice Principles there is specific advice around Graduate Research Supervision (reproduced below)

ACGR Principles for Graduate Research Supervision

Key Principle

Supervisors must provide guidance to graduate research candidates in the design, conduct and timely completion of the research project and support in publication and dissemination of research findings.

Supervisors also play a critical role in the development of both research and transferable skills to equip candidates with graduate attributes relevant to the breadth of employability opportunities open to post doctoral candidates.

Sub-principles

1. There must be at least two academic staff members providing supervision for the duration of each candidature.

2. Supervision is appropriately attributed and recognised as a specialised, workload-bearing academic function that has educational and research dimensions.

3. Supervisors are active researchers who possess relevant scholarly expertise.

4. The University has appropriate eligibility criteria for all categories of supervisors.

5. When appointing supervisors the University considers the expertise of the person, the duration of their appointment, other work tasks and any conflict of interest or privileged relationships.

6. The University provides guidance on the management of supervisor appointment, expected level of experience, supervisory loads, and appropriate supervisory conduct.

7. The University provides necessary and appropriate professional development and performance review for supervisors.

Further in response to the ACOLA Implementation Plan ACGR provides the following recommendation under “Policy and governance”

• Advice and guidance is provided on appropriate supervisory workloads.

454



https://www.acgr.edu.au/good-practice/graduate-research-good-practice-principles/

Currently Charles Sturt University does not provide any specific guidelines on supervisory workloads. Charles Sturt University would appear to be out of step to most of the sector in this respect. Table 1 outlines some initial benchmarking which shows some variation in the policy settings across the Universities examined. There is also variation on whether these are captured in University policy, procedure or guidance notes

Table 1. Comparison of HDR Supervision Guidelines

An initial proposal was sent to Faculties for comment and the consolidated feedback indicated a general lack of support for the model proposed (the consolidated feedback is attached as Appendix 1). In summary the main concerns raised could be categories as

• Lack of clarity between guidelines and the enterprise agreement • Issues with the benchmarking process • Problems with the time allocation (or inconsistency across Schools) • Too much focus on PhD supervision • Attribution to principal or co-supervision roles

455

University Research Committee requested that consultation occur with the Academic Portfolio leadership and then generation of a set of principles that would inform the development of a guideline.

Suggested principles that should be included in a Charles Sturt University guideline on HDR supervisory loads

• Heads of School, or equivalent, should retain discretion, taking into account factors such as supervisory experience and track record, and supervisory team capacity

• Include maximum loads for academic staff based on level of appointment (based on candidate FTE)

• Limit the number of principal supervision roles for staff who have not taken a candidate to completion

• Take into account study mode (full time vs part time) • Assume 120 hours per student (FTE)

456

Appendix 1 ~ Example extracts from HDR Policies/procedures of other Universities

Central Queensland University

4.34 The University’s Enterprise Agreement sets out key principles for the calculation of workload allocation for RHD supervisors. This includes information about workload for CQUniversity employees undertaking principal and associate supervision roles, noting that:

• a part-time candidate shall attract half the workload allocation of a full-time candidate

• a candidate who is under examination or on leave does not attract EFTSL for workload calculation purposes.

The relative proportion of workload that is allocated across the associate supervisors should be agreed to by all member of the supervisory panel, in writing, and notified to the Research Division.

4.35 Any registered supervisor may not exceed 12 EFTSL in active candidate load, or a maximum of 14 RHD candidates in total, unless by joint permission of the Dean School of Graduate Research and relevant Dean of School (or senior role within the organisational area, for supervisors who are not based in Schools). In considering an appropriate workload allocation for an individual supervisor, line managers should take into consideration:

• the appointment type (e.g., academic level and appropriate teaching/research workload category)

• the nature of their supervisory roles (e.g. as mentor, principal, or associate)

• the candidature stage of the supervisor’s enrolled students (e.g. whether one or more of the cohort are approaching intensive phases of data collection or thesis drafting), and

• the complexity of existing candidatures (including, but not limited to, distance candidates; candidates who are required to deliver outcomes for industry partners; over-time candidates; and candidates with a history of poor progress or challenging projects).

University of Wollongong

1. UOW academic staff are subject to limits on their HDR supervisory loads. Professors and Associate Professors (Level D and above) can supervise a HDR load of up to 15 EFTSL at any one time, while other academic staff (Level C or below) can supervise a HDR load of up to 10 EFTSL at any one time.

2. Additional details are:

a. Supervisory limits include HDR load associated with both principal and co-supervisor roles with no pro-rata allocations. Examples: A full time HDR student will contribute 1.0 EFTSL towards the annual loads of all the Principal and Co- supervisors. A part-time HDR student counts 0.5 EFTSL towards the loads of all supervisors.

b. PhD(I), MPhil, MRes and Professional Doctorate students also enrol in coursework or research training subjects, for part of their studies. The EFTSL associated with non-thesis subjects are excluded from the calculation of HDR supervisory loads.

457

c. Distinguished Professors often lead large research groups of academic staff and HDR students. Due to their special circumstances they can negotiate their own individual maximum supervisory loads with the DoR.

d. Associate supervisory roles do not count towards the supervisory limits.

3. To ensure effective and efficient supervision of new HDR candidates the capacity of a proposed supervisor should be considered by the HPS and ADR. Relevant criteria include:

a. The time available for new supervisions, taking into account teaching, research, current (HDR, Honours and Coursework Masters) supervisory load and administrative responsibilities.

b. Disciplinary differences, relating to appropriate HDR supervisory loads c. The supervisors track record of past supervision and successful timely completions any other

workplace performance issues.

4. In cases where the HPS and ADR have concerns relating to the appointment of a supervisor they should consult with the DoR, who can veto a proposed supervisory appointment or vary the supervisory limit on a member of the academic staff.

James Cook University

Deakin

Supervision load limits

(37) Principal, executive and co-supervisors will be limited to a supervisory load not exceeding seven full-time equivalent HDR students, and not more than ten individual HDR students.

458

(38) Co-supervisors (including executive supervisors) share the supervision load between them and count 50 per cent toward the supervision load limits specified above. Workload recognition and recognition of successful completions are also shared.

(39) A principal supervisor who has not yet acted in the role of principal, executive or co-supervisor of a student who has successfully completed their HDR will be limited to a supervisory load not exceeding three full-time equivalent HDR students, and not more than five individual HDR students.

(40) In addition to the above limits, an associate supervisor will be limited to six full-time equivalent HDR students, and not more than ten individual HDR students.

459

1

HDR Supervision – Proposed Load Guidelines

Collated Feedback on Discussion Document Feedback provided by FoAE, FBJBS, FoS & Key Researchers’ Forum

Contents General Feedback ................................................................................................................................... 2

1) Staff appreciation and participation ........................................................................................... 2

2) Should these guidelines be in the workload policy/enterprise agreement. ............................... 2

3) Issues with the Benchmarking Process ....................................................................................... 2

4) Recommended load of 7 EFTSL and 10 RHD candidates (headcount) too limited ..................... 2

5) Supervisory time as measure of optimum load instead of EFTSL ............................................... 4

6) Supervisory time allocation seen as problematic ....................................................................... 5

7) Primary supervisor vs co supervisor contribution ...................................................................... 6

8) Recommendation for inclusion of context of supervision .......................................................... 6

9) Too much focus on PhDs to the exclusion of others .................................................................. 6

10) No mention of level B academics ............................................................................................ 7

11) Comments and concerns with the proposed model ............................................................... 7

12) Other considerations .............................................................................................................. 9

Specific Feedback ................................................................................................................................. 11

13) High workload vs quality of supervision ............................................................................... 11

14) Inconsistencies with allocation per student based on 128 hours per HDR candidate ......... 11

15) Specific comments on candidate load of 7 EFTSL or 10 RHD headcount ............................. 12

16) Clarification of “no pro-rata allocations” .............................................................................. 13

17) Workload assumption validity .............................................................................................. 13

18) Relevance of students also enrolled in coursework or training subjects ............................. 14

19) Additional considerations for workload allocation ............................................................... 14

20) Additional considerations for less experienced principal and co-supervisors ...................... 15

21) Workload allocation for students who exceeds minimum and maximum candidature ...... 15

22) Table 2 fundamentally flawed .............................................................................................. 15

Administrative Feedback ..................................................................................................................... 16

23) Are we using RHD or HDR? Need to be consistent. .............................................................. 16

24) Table 1 vs JCU Table 1 is confusing. Maybe rename? ........................................................... 16

25) EFTSL & MRes - provide abbreviations / write out in full initially ........................................ 16

26) Table 2 requires a key and/or a footnote ............................................................................. 16

460

2

General Feedback

1) Staff appreciation and participation I. Staff appreciated the attempt to develop clear guidelines for Charles Sturt Supervisory Load.

II. Guidelines are required and this seems a sound approach. Staff look forward to assisting in discussing and developing the guidelines further.

III. The Key Researchers’ forum would welcome the opportunity to engage further in the development of these guidelines.

2) Should these guidelines be in the workload policy/enterprise agreement. I. Staff wondered whether these guidelines dovetail well with other policies of the university

such as Enterprise agreement and Research Productivity Index. II. We believe the workload Guidelines should clearly link with other documents and policies

related to quality supervisor at Charles Sturt to ensure consistency. III. Consider relationship with current School policies.

3) Issues with the Benchmarking Process I. Bench-marking with the selected universities in the table was seen as problematic, as they

do not have similar well-developed workload calculation system and the proportion of workload distribution across teaching, research and administration may not be similar or uniform.

II. Bench-marking should reflect resource allocation. III. Why is CSU adopting highly selective approaches from other universities without a critical

evaluation of those other uni processes? Just because it’s in their EAs does not mean those processes are effective, have better outcomes for students, academics or the university.

IV. More work is needed to determine when academics can take on principal supervisory roles. V. The document has some good elements and some poor elements, and perhaps as stated by

others, the benchmarking of external policies does not really reflect how supervisors operate at CSU. One common comment of HDR students, particularly internationals, is the level of “pastoral care” experienced at CSU compared to other organisations they may have attended. So one basic element missing in preparing the document is the benchmarking of CSU supervisory teams and the time/type of input that is invested in students by them. Of course, this will vary with discipline, personality etc., but I am unable to determine where this has been considered.

VI. The benchmarking analysis has not been undertaken to determine what hours a functioning supervisory team puts in….so we agree with other statements that the policy needs to be started fresh.

4) Recommended load of 7 EFTSL and 10 RHD candidates (headcount) too limited I. It was suggested that we do not have any criteria against which to assess the proposed

optimum load. i) Consider mentoring and capacity building aspects.

461

3

II. Some disciplines may have limited teaching and research focused staff. If such a discipline receives more than 10 valid and enrollable HDR applications over a typical three-year period, Charles Sturt may not be able to get those students under the proposed guidelines.

III. Looks like we are going to accept Deakin's model of 7 EFTSL and 10 headcount which is near average number from 11 Australian Universities. We may require extra flexibility (or number) compared to the proposed limit. However, UOW model (15 EFTSL but no headcount) may be too high to manage unless the academic has research only (or near research only e.g. >=80% research workload- ARC Fellowship or CSU Fellowship, etc.) type position.

IV. A robust approach would be a more realistic limit of EFTSL (7 is a bit low) with some guidelines around any exceptional circumstances to be managed by HoS. i) Keep EFTSL flexible and leave it to HoS to decide on the basis of the priority of the

project/research. However, there could be an upper limit as used in UoW or CQU. ii) In my opinion the proposed restrictions on the max allowable headcount and EFSTL are

too tight. For example, I can see on Page 8 of the attached document that the maximum EFTSL for Level E Teaching and Research will be 6.5 with max 7 headcount. I would suggest to leave this flexible for the HoS to decide with a much higher upper limit such as the one used by UOW i.e. 15 EFTSL for Level E and D and 10 EFTSL for others.

iii) We need to impose some kind of limits (under the flexibility controlled by HoS and others in special circumstances). The quantity of supervision should be based on the experience and level.

iv) The role of the HoS has been indicated, but needs to be strengthened. The document proposes that joint permission for a higher student count cannot be provided “unless by joint permission of the Dean of Graduate Studies, relevant Sub Dean Graduate Studies and Head of school.” It should actually be the HoS in the first instance, who then recommends and supports this through to the Sub/Dean of Grad Studies. The erosion of the HoS as a leader who understands their school and staffing capabilities continues in this document!

V. The restrictions are too tight. At least for our school, this may not be feasible for assigning supervisors to HDR students (we have 52 enrolled in 202130 session and at least 3-5 will be starting too). It will also affect the grant applications where PhD scholarships are sought.

VI. Propose that we limit EFTSL (say 10 for Level E, 8 for Level D, etc.) but not headcount. Relaxing headcount may give us extra flexibility to accommodate individual School level scenario.

VII. Some universities base load on track record – the more students who have been successfully supervised to completion, the higher the allowable load. That makes sense to me. Hence, staff who have supervised many to completion, and won excellence awards for their supervision, should be permitted a higher load.

VIII. Inter-discipline differences need to be taken into account. IX. The workload allocations presently based on EFTSL are inappropriate. It’s a typical bean

counter accounting approach that really doesn’t have any nuance. They do not take into account the differences in requirements for things like training and in-person supervision in areas like laboratories or field trips, that may be a large time commitment. I have been unwilling to take on a student for this reason. Unless we want to just have students completing survey-based research and systematic reviews, and run students with just the regular weekly what have you been doing meeting. Supervision needs to also account for the time spent actually training students in a semi-apprenticeship model for many of our research areas. At present much of this is just done as extra unpaid workload. I’m not as

462

4

concerned about having caps, this should be dependent on the available workload for supervision. If the supervisor has sufficient workload to take on more students then that’s fine. If not then caps might prevent the students receiving less supervision than we should expect. Basically if we fix the workload allocation model then this could provide a reasonable basis for determining how many students a supervisor can effectively manage.

X. Some time ago we had a supervisor shortage, as a result of which several of us had to take on students not directly in our research areas. Such a situation may be upon us again, given the voluntary redundancies and other changes at CSU recently. We have a duty of care for CSU students whose supervisors have left, and that potentially means exceeding HDR supervision load in order to meet such obligations.

XI. There is a serious conflict in management approaches at CSU. At the same time as academics are being told to proactively attract and supervise HDRs, we are being told there is a limit, and yet there is a dearth of suitable supervisors. What this will do is turn off potential HDR applicants – CSU risks becoming a non-starter in the HDR attraction stakes.

XII. Focusing on the number of students per staff member may obscure quality aspects for both students and staff i) The workload aspects of supervision need to be articulated because of

(1) Fairness to the students (2) Burnout of supervisors (3) Management of resources (4) Spreading the opportunity for supervision among staff

ii) Load on early supervisors (1) Being primary supervisor of 3 RHD students is too much for early supervisors

iii) The proposed upper limit of 10 is too many for most situations, but note (1) The right load will vary with the student, the supervisory team and the context (2) Around 5-6 per academic seems more reasonable in most situations

(See section 15 for specific comments/questions on candidate load of 7 EFTSL or 10 RHD headcount)

5) Supervisory time as measure of optimum load instead of EFTSL I. A model that allocates the appropriate amount of time for supervision that is managed

within the current workload models is more likely to be successful II. The discussion needs to be around how many hours we should give supervisors, rather than

the total number of students we should allow them to supervise. Leaving this to be managed by schools is not working. The schools, understandably, are sticking to the recommended maximum hours and dividing that by the number of supervisors (with some sensible discussion – I’m just saying that nobody is addressing the need to assign more hours to supervision).

III. The focus should be on time for supervision, rather than EFTSL i) Using EFTSL instead of allocating appropriate time for supervision is not considered the

best approach. ii) Using EFTSL does not align with current school workload policies, which work on time,

not on headcounts. iii) Charles Sturt moved away from EFSTL model for undergraduate workload some time

ago. A similar approach should be taken for HDR supervision. (1) I am quite astounded that we continue to use an EFTSL model for measuring

supervisor load when we moved away from that that system for measuring

463

5

undergraduate workload many years ago. It seems the intention of this policy is to ensure supervision quality by limiting the number of students that an academic can supervise. This is a reasonable goal as under the current policy academics could conceivably supervise more than 20 HDR students and still not have a full teaching load. Placing a cap on student supervision numbers is not the solution. The solution needs to be to allocate a reasonable amount of workload time to supervision – something that actually reflects the time it takes to undertake this task. Workload should be related to time taken to complete a task, not how much money the university gets for the task. If we have a policy that caps the number of students an academic can supervise it doesn’t necessarily result in improved supervision quality as they are likely to also have a high undergraduate teaching load as well so would be unable to commit the required time to provide quality supervision. The solution as I see it would be come up with some clear guidelines that more accurately reflect the time taken to provide quality supervision. The system where a fixed amount of workload is shared between supervisors is ridiculous. This assumes that different tasks can be separately allocated to different supervisors and also discourages larger supervisory panels which is often required. Based on my experience I feel that full engagement with 10 HDR students in my discipline probably represents a full time teaching load. This might vary with other disciplines. Based on this assumption, each supervisor should be allocated approximately 100 hours of workload. This might vary a little depending on the role they play in the supervisory panel. If a policy such as this was implemented, there would be no need to impose caps as based on our existing workload policy, an academic would not be able to supervise any more than 10 students due to workload caps.

6) Supervisory time allocation seen as problematic I. Time allocation was recommended to be collegially developed in each school. As supervision

across the schools is common, division of workload is seen as posing a problem. II. Some schools have a cap on max number of hours – for SAVS for example is 256h. This is an

issue for highly research active staff members. What this leads to is a significant underestimation of the time that supervision requires.

III. Schools don’t stop allocating supervision load if the student takes longer. IV. In the rationale it is outlined that for some of us with high HDR loads there is a tendency to

feel over-worked. Specifically, that the time allocated may not cover the actual time taken to supervise, especially for students at certain stages of progress (e.g. the start). Then, the analysis and end result talks about the maximum loads allowed by other Universities and recommends a maximum load here at CSU. While this is useful, it does not address the problem. That is, the current allocated time to supervision is not always sufficient. The report needs to discuss: i) When multiple supervisors are all active and share the workload allotment, overwork is

highly likely (e.g. PS with 2 co-supervisors, need to divide workload by 3). ii) When a supervisor has students at high workload times (e.g. start or end are the most

obvious, but there are other high workload times) iii) When a supervisor has a student who is problematic. We can’t keep pretending this

doesn’t happen or that our processes (which are excellent) mitigate the increased workload for supervisors.

464

6

(See section 14 for specific comments on allocation of 128 hours per HDR candidate)

7) Primary supervisor vs co supervisor contribution I. The kindergarten approach of the PS does more than everyone else is a myth in most

functioning teams, and these functioning teams tend to have upfront discussions on who will be putting in most effort when. There will always be times when the PS is not putting in 3 hrs per week on a student, and times when they will be putting in 20. The same is generally true for all supervisors!

II. We question whether a co-supervisory allocation is equivalent to a primary contribution. To initiate this would be quite limiting in allowing more junior (emerging?) supervisors to contribute to multiple student programs – potentially resulting in a reduction in career development opportunities. The way we read point a)i) below is that both the primary and co-supervisor would be subject to a full allocation of hours if we were to equate the attributable workload with the EFTSL model. The proposal is ambiguous, if not contradictory, when later noting the details in Point 3.

III. Allocating the same EFTSL to principal and co-supervisor is not right or fair on principal supervisors – some co-supervisors would only provide a small proportion of their time for co-supervision).

8) Recommendation for inclusion of context of supervision I. The lack of context leaves out the whole possibility of mentoring and capacity building. Thus,

we recommend including the context of supervision. II. There is an issue in terms of disciplinary supervision – science, for example, run their labs

with PhDs, Masters, Hons, Post-Docs, which is more intensive than, e.g., humanities/social sciences. Disciplinary context is required. From the Doctor of Public Safety perspective, each member of the supervisory team, whether principal or co supervisor, is expected to be prepared and turn out to each meeting, to contribute equally in the feedback on student documents and to collegially discuss with the student the various options available on an issue. The principal supervisor does not take control or direct final decisions, the student is responsible.

III. It is quite realistic that HDR supervision needs will vary from discipline to discipline and from year to year. When necessary, some sorts of school level determination flexibility would be very practical.

9) Too much focus on PhDs to the exclusion of others I. The whole thing is about PhDs. Other than mentioning the course work exclusion in 2c p3,

and 2b p6, there is no mention of professional doctorates. That has the potential to disadvantage our school and others. Even though the DIT has not lived up to the high enrolments that were forecast upon its creation, the fact that we have such a potential pathway is no doubt one of the attractions to our masters students. In some years the DIT supervisory load will be higher than others, and our school may then be adversely affected by such restrictions (arguably that also reduces income to the university at a time where we are trying to make every dollar count).

II. Honours supervision impact: When considering the appropriate workload allocation for an individual supervisor, it was recognised that line managers also need to consider the

465

7

reinstatement of Honours programs. Honours supervision was referred to as just as intensive (perhaps more so) than supervising Masters students. Yet it was identified that Honours supervision was excluded from the HDR headcount too.

III. We should also note that Honors student supervision falls outside the proposed policy. This aligns with the lack of recognition of honors candidates as research students on the part of the research office. We contest that an honors student requires more intensive supervision than a graduate student – without any consideration of this any model relating to research supervision loads is badly flawed.

IV. The HDR workload should be considered in conjunction with Honours supervision.

10) No mention of level B academics I. Does it mean level B academics cannot supervise HDR candidates? If that is true, it would

make the scenario worst.

11) Comments and concerns with the proposed model I. While the attribution of time to student supervision is becoming more necessary, it does

seem like the document lacks a lot when it comes to the rationale of even undertaking the activity – from what we can see it would appear to be an activity undertaken because other universities have policies. This fails to capture a key fact – we are not other universities! One should consider the rationale behind a policy that is likely to apply to just a handful of high load supervisors.

II. There are some concerns about the EFTSL model terminology (outdated), effort will be required to equate it to actual students supervised and associated time inputs.

III. The discussion fails to capture the possibility of more than a single co-supervisor – often fulfilling specific (and sometimes limited) roles. Similarly, the numeric constraint on students supervised may create a reluctance on the part of experienced supervisors to contribute in a supervisory role for more junior colleagues. This would actually be counter-productive in graduate training.

IV. A one size fits all model of this type fails to recognize differing supervisory capabilities. I would contest that a primary outcome for a graduate student would be publications. These are the currency through which the student will attract interest from postdoctoral supervisors – I would contest that a “supervisor” with no recent history of publication may struggle to adequately contribute to the supervision of a single student. Similarly, other factors such as alignment of projects with domain expertise of a particular supervisor is a more critical factor in supervisory quality than number of students. Obviously experience and research fraction should also be considerations. Perhaps the time must come where attributable workload is classified on a sliding scale according to types of supervisory input required and any constraints on students are directly linked to a supervisory rating – this being derived from previous supervisory outcomes, experience, domain relationship etc. One would hope that most staff members ask themselves realistic questions as to whether they can adequately supervise a student or number of students before committing to the task. There are some obvious exceptions, but these would be better dealt with through individual constraints rather than a policy. i) What is actually likely to be more impactful is to rigorously evaluate the capability of a

supervisory team in the context of a project and the environment in which that project will be carried out – this does not happen properly at the moment.

466

8

ii) Much of the problem stems from a necessity to ensure that staff do not exceed their “up to 60%” teaching fraction within enterprise agreements. Consequently, there has been a move to measure teaching attributable hours – the effect being personnel may treat supervision as a teaching offset to a large extent. It is beyond reasonable doubt that there is a strong teaching component to supervision of research and honors students. The problem, however, lies in the demarcation of teaching vs research contributions. This issue will remain until there is an attempt made to quantify attributable hours to all aspects of academic workload (especially the amorphous “administration” 10% which has, in many cases undergone massive unattributed growth in the last 5 years).

V. The proposal is missing consideration of some key points: i) Discussion of/ mechanism for managing academic staff who are funded from research

projects. Staff members have the main responsibility in managing these competing needs of their staff, but we note (1) these staff have same standards of research productivity as other staff, and have

professional development needs (2) unacknowledged subsidisation of university, for example ILWS is losing $100 000 pa

lost by subsiding University/ lost tuition fees ii) The proposal does not address supervision of non-CSU students. The workload

associated with co-supervision at other universities needs to be considered and included in workload allocations and summary tables such as Table 2.

VI. Students load should include a range of considerations not just EFTSL or predetermined hours. This proposal is an opportunity to consider i) Undertaking serious review of supervisions, supervisors and the student experience ii) There is risk that review of quality will actually be reduced with current FOS Change

Proposal as the Sub Dean position is leaving VII. Document appears to treat the symptom (perceived poor supervision) rather than the cause

(insufficient time allocated for supervision) VIII. A “one size fits all model” is unlikely to be effective

i) One size most certainly does not fit all with supervision. Some Projects might be supervised from the office. I have spent many many hours with my students …. Activities that the students couldn’t do on their own, no matter how skilled they became. All good fun, thankfully, but invisible. And having a fixed number of hours to be shared across a supervisory team is a major disincentive to assembling a good supervisory team. If someone is brought into the team to deal with some aspect of the study generally does not reduce the number of hours that a supervisor spends on the study and we get the situation where people are loath to do that because they have to reduce hours from their own teaching allocation. I find ridiculous the idea that people are upset that others might be filling their teaching load with HDR supervision because it stops them doing the real teaching. HDR supervision IS teaching. Perhaps less valued by some elements of the university but teaching nonetheless. At the same time the university wants us to increase our research output. Unless you have the resources to fill a lab full of post-docs, supervising PhD students is really the only way that most of can be productive in research. We need to value this as an academic ideal not an impediment.

IX. There are fundamental logic issues which would be best addressed by redrafting the document rather than modifying the current draft.

467

9

i) My recommendation would be to start the proposal again, removing the basic logic flaws, as engaging in changing the current version yet maintaining the logic flaws is counterproductive. For instance, the proposal suggests that some with high supervisory loads cannot complete the work within the allotted time. Instead of addressing the cause (the amount of time given for supervision) the proposal goes on to benchmark caps on the number of students we can supervise. Treating the symptom rather than the cause will not help.

X. The biggest concern about Table 2 is the complete lack of any decent size groups within this University. This needs to be addressed as the absolute highest concern.

XI. The document should clarify: i) how this document is to interact with School workload allocations ii) if proposed loads are intended to come from a staff member’s teaching or research

fraction (1) The Enterprise Agreement notwithstanding, staff in SES want to continue having

HDR supervision attributed to the teaching fraction iii) how the relationship between workload and student load is being considered, and the

implications of this

12) Other considerations I. Monitoring supervisory workload and limits based on the proposed guidelines may be

complicated and increase workloads staff, schools and FoS in keeping track of who is eligible to supervise, what students they can supervise, and the number of students they are supervising etc (i.e. the JCU supervisory loads system would create a considerable amount of work for the SDGS or ADR). It is unclear in the proposed guidelines who at CSU will be responsible for this? Although it may be stated in other policies, the EBA etc…

II. Funding for HDR student completion doesn’t always go to where supervision was undertaken (eg faculty rather than research centres) which complicates workload models. These issues need to be resolved before a fair policy can be implemented. i) The CSU distribution model stipulates that the portion of tuition fees to support

supervisor salaries flows to the school the student is enrolled in, and not to the location where the supervisor is employed. So I am in the situation where all HDR’s I supervise are located in the faculty (hence the flow of tuition fees there), but my salary is drawn from R-codes …. There is no incentive for me, or my staff, to supervise students as we get no salary support for it. Yet it is expected as my role as a Level E…..so any HDR supervision is “free’ time.

III. There are probably more pressing issues to resolve at the moment, hence, there may be some value in delaying this discussion for a later time. i) For example, the pathway for many of the health disciplines to PhD is following masters

or honours and into a part time off campus PhD. The pathway is tenuous and difficult to navigate with few real opportunities. I have a class 1 honours graduate from 2020 who applied in November for part time PhD while she worked full time in a clinical practice that will support her PhD research. She doesn't need a stipend, doesn't need funding but 3 other Universities are offering her a fee waiver. CSU will not provide any opportunity for a fee waiver. Yet loyal to me as her honours supervisor she has persevered and here we are, 18 February and she still does not have an offer! I had to chase the application after Christmas because it didn't progress, signed it and sent it off more than 2 weeks ago and it still isn't approved. So as things stand, with the emphasis on full time on

468

10

campus PhDs and little understanding of the unique needs and challenges of the part time off campus full time employed candidates that make up so much potential, I have no one to supervise anyway. I had 4 PhD candidates going 10 years ago, now we do not even get enquiries - no marketing and a difficult pathway most people give up on when they get here, especially when they can slot into a fee waiver at 3-4 competing Uni’s. We simply are not competitive.

469

11

Specific Feedback Comments on extracts from the CSU HDR Supervision Load Guidelines discussion document.

13) High workload vs quality of supervisionSummary and Background, Page 3, Point 4:

A number of supervisors have been noted as having high loads in recent reports to University Research Committee.

I. I think is important to understand why this is happening. We are not trying to solve the rootof the problem. We are thin on the ground in terms of staff members who are eligible tosupervise HDR students (and more importantly be a primary supervisor). Also where is theevidence that supervising large numbers of students has a negative impact on quality ofsupervision

II. The proposal suggests that supervision of large numbers of students is not appropriate,however, there are very good examples of where supervision of large numbers of studentsby capable researchers has been a very successful model.

III. The premise that supervising large numbers of students leads to poor outcomes is entirelyflawed. For some supervisors, 1 is too many. Some supervisors with excellent researchfunding support and good internal structures, >10 students can be supervised with fantasticsuccess for all concerned.

IV. It’s ridiculous that a very successful supervisor with a big research program, staff andfacilities would be limited in their capacity to take on new students.

V. A great concern is not that we have high load supervisors, but that we can only find 10-12 ofthese across the university. What we should be seeing here is whether there is any tangibleevidence that high load supervisors are delivering an inferior supervision product before adecision is made to address high loads. This should be approached on a case to case basis.In fact, larger groups can be highly advantageous in the graduate education model – moreadvanced students (and post docs) playing a critical role in the development of newerstudents working in similar areas.

VI. I’m concerned when I hear comments like this point suggesting that this is a bad thing. Ioften hear comments indicating that it is not OK to have a full time load that consists of HDRsupervision suggesting that it is not an important activity. It is an important activity. It is partof our core business and is an activity that needs more attention.

14) Inconsistencies with allocation per student based on 128 hours per HDR candidateSummary and Background, Page 3, Point 2:

Supervision loads are managed at School level with varying policies. The primary means of allocation per student is based on 128 hours per HDR candidate. This is based on 2 hours per credit point per offering thus 192 points x 2 hours = 384 hours for 3 years = 128 hours per year.

I. There is a need for consistency across all schools / faculties.II. It was suggested that total hours in some FoAE schools were never calculated per HDR

candidate – it just went by session of enrolment with overall allocation of 140 hours FT/70hours PT.

III. Need to specify that the ‘per year’ allocation is based on two sessions of enrolment per year.

470

12

IV. Is this what is staying? Does this include DBA and Honours or just PhD? Does not add up with “Prof Doc and Honours workload 2021” circulated by Val Ingram 18th Jan 2021. Clear distinction of any difference between the 3 courses should be highlighted somewhere in this document.

V. 380 hours underestimates the load for PhD supervision by a principal supervisor VI. There is a massive naivety in this model. If students work in similar areas, there is actually

an “economy of scale”, effectively lessening the time input per student. The only time that we would be thinking that large groups of students are problematic would be where there are no linkages between training intensive projects. One could ask the question in this instance whether a supervisor was actually contributing sufficient domain expertise across non-aligned projects – consequently rendering supervision inadequate. Obviously the team based approach to supervision could mitigate this thought. On a similar bent, not all projects are equally supervised (on the assumption of equivalent quality). Projects requiring training in multiple hands on techniques can be incredibly supervision intensive – particularly when the student is NOT part of a larger program. We (perhaps with an element of bias here) would contest that a lab (or field) based program probably requires a more intensive level of supervision than some other projects – the supervisor not only having to train a student but ensure their safety / compliance with regulations etc. Consequently, in the early portions of many projects, supervisor and student effectively function as co-workers. Additionally, the more complex and varied the technique basis, the more intensive the early relationship becomes. A project that involves mining of existing data and interpretation thereof would be likely to require a lesser supervisory input – at least in terms of directly attributable training aspects. So the question must be asked as to whether a single level of attributable hours for all projects is appropriate or whether there should be a more holistic appraisal of actual supervisory input by project type.

VII. The work load allocation of 128 hours is fine – assuming that it comes out of the teaching and not the research fraction. This was not entirely clear in the policy document and is something that needs to be clarified. At present some schools include workload for HDR as part of the 1030 hour teaching fraction with the hours split between supervisors. Under this model a supervisor could comfortably take on 10 + FT HDR students assuming 64 hours per student/year (128 hours spilt between 2 supervisors) and still technically have plenty of time on their hands. Full time research staff are a bigger issue as they are typically externally funded and despite making huge contributions in terms of HDR supervision get limited support or compensation from the University. The policy must include a fair provision for compensating workload (128 hours) for externally funded Researchers undertaking HDR supervision.

15) Specific comments on candidate load of 7 EFTSL or 10 RHD headcount Proposed Charles Sturt University HDR Supervisory Load, Page 3, Point 1:

Any registered supervisor may not exceed 7 EFTSL in active candidate load (not including candidates under examination), or a maximum of 10 RHD candidates (headcount) in total, unless by joint permission of the Dean of Graduate Studies, relevant Sub Dean Graduate Studies and Head of school. This is based on full time employment.

I. The 7EFT specification was endorsed by FoAE II. The capping of supervision workload including a headcount seems appropriate.

471

13

III. A clear process for approving supervisor workloads above the proposed limit should be included. This should include consideration of supervisory performance under the current load, with input from the Sub Dean/HDR Coordinators.

IV. In relation to SAVS, and considering the current HDR supervision activity and load at the school, the maximum limits are generous and unlikely to impact SAVS staff who can supervise. A significant issue is that this procedure does not align with current SAVS workload policy (currently under review), which specifies a maximum number of hours allocated to HDR supervision (256h per year per supervisor), instead of a maximum based on headcounts.

V. Are any cross-faculty level HDR supervision loads included in the proposed 7 EFTSL and 10 headcount, and how will students’ tuitions fees be allocated between faculties/schools?

VI. Need to clarify does the 10 HDR students refer to CSU students only? Or includes co-supervision of students from other universities and/or be linked to other organisations nationally and/or internationally?

i. Some consideration about supervision of students outside of Charles Sturt could be included. There is often a good collaborative, long term reasons to be part of non CSU supervision. This activity was approved by my HOS, but really the hours appear in the dark ledger of my workload, although CSU will be happy to claim part of any publications that come from this.

VII. The application of the 1 FTSL to the load of all supervisors needs to be made apparent. I took this to mean that a PS will receive a load of 1FTSL, and any co-supervisor/s will also receive a load of 1 FTSL. However, colleagues took this to mean that 1 FTSL will be divided across supervisors, which perpetuates the non-collaborative mentality.

16) Clarification of “no pro-rata allocations” Proposed Charles Sturt University HDR Supervisory Load, Page 3, Point 2:

Supervisory limits include HDR load associated with both principal and co-supervisor roles with no pro-rata allocations.

I. Does “no pro-rata allocations” mean that, for a PT student, instead of the principal and the co supervisor having 16 hours each per session for a part time student, they each have 32 hours? If that’s right, our supervision loads will double. This is not clear.

II. We are supportive that supervisory limits are not allocated pro-rata. However, should something be stated in relation to ensuring the number of students being supervised does not exceed the Supervisor’s absolute workload where a fractional appointment exists? For example, is ok someone working on a 0.5 FTE basis to be Principal Supervisor for 7 EFTSL students given the high workload and other tasks the staff member may need to perform (assuming they have 517 hrs of teaching available and a Supervision workload of 716 hours). This is unlikely to occur and would be managed at the school level. However, perhaps something needs to be included regarding expectations?

III. We are supportive that supervisory limits are not allocated pro-rata.

17) Workload assumption validity Proposed Charles Sturt University HDR Supervisory Load, Page 3, Point 2B:

A part-time HDR candidate counts 0.5 EFTSL towards the loads of all supervisors.

I. Warrants further investigation, staff believe the workload would be greater than this.

472

14

18) Relevance of students also enrolled in coursework or training subjects Proposed Charles Sturt University HDR Supervisory Load, Page 3, Point 2C:

MRes and Professional Doctorate candidates who also enrol in coursework or research training subjects, for part of their studies. The EFTSL associated with non-thesis subjects are excluded from the calculation of HDR supervisory loads. Once a candidate enrols in a thesis subject they will count towards load.

I. Students completing Masters dissertations/research projects should also be acknowledged. II. Clarify

i. 1.0 or 0.5 EFTSL? ii. Would these only be counted while enrolled in the research project/dissertation

subjects? III. HDR supervision is a part of the teaching continuum and supervision cannot be removed

from the teaching workload. IV. Supervisors of Prof Doc students are involved form the start of coursework, not just in the

thesis subjects. Supervisors have regular meetings, read drafts and provide feedback throughout the whole course.

V. This is contrary to the operation of the new RES subjects in BJBS, where the full supervisory team are active from the first coursework subject. I would suggest they should be included in the supervisors EFTSL count as there will an increased expectation on supervisors to provide feedback (mark assessments) and coordinate with the subject convenors.

19) Additional considerations for workload allocation Proposed Charles Sturt University HDR Supervisory Load, Page 3, Point 3:

In considering an appropriate workload allocation for an individual supervisor, line managers should take into consideration:

a. the appointment type (e.g., academic level and appropriate teaching/research workload category)

b. the nature of their supervisory roles (e.g. principal, or co-supervisor) c. the candidature stage of the supervisor’s enrolled candidates (e.g. whether one or

more of the cohort are approaching intensive phases of data collection or thesis drafting), and

d. the complexity of existing candidatures (including, but not limited to, distance candidates; candidates who are required to deliver outcomes for industry partners; over-time candidates; and candidates with a history of poor progress or challenging projects).

I. Add an extra layer to nature of supervisory roles: Consider discipline, methodology, etc. II. This point needs clarification because, say in AGSPS and Centre for Law and Justice, if they

‘take into consideration’ these points, can the RO, or someone in the RO, overrule them? If so, I think that needs to be clearly added to the policy (when can they overrule, on what grounds, etc).

III. This text is highly suggestive that the workload allocation and the number of students attributed would be variant and highly discretionary. This would not be equitable and may lay the university open to industrial action.

IV. The percentage workload among the supervisory team should be determined through negotiation among the team and their line management.

473

15

V. A limit based appointment type (i.e. supervision capacity and experience), supervisory role, etc is appropriate and is consistent with many other Universities.

VI. Appointment type needs to include the category of “externally funded or fixed”

20) Additional considerations for less experienced principal and co-supervisors Proposed Charles Sturt University HDR Supervisory Load, Page 4, Point 4:

A principal supervisor who has not yet acted in the role of principal of a candidate who has successfully completed their HDR will be limited to a supervisory load not exceeding three full-time equivalent HDR candidates, and not more than five individual HDR candidates.

I. Should text read as ‘principal OR co-supervisor’? II. Until when? Until one of the 3 or 5 completes?

III. There was suggestion that 3 EFT was generous and could be reduced, yet others noted the importance of being able to accommodate candidates, especially for staff that have strong research activity and for when more heavily loaded supervisors leave the university. There was a feeling that if a lower limit was there, this would unnecessarily restrict capacity in areas of demand for HDR supervision.

IV. A little more clarity is needed between point 1 and this point. Point 1 refers to all registered supervisors, point 4 refers to principals who have not yet had a completed supervision. Given these points both relate limitations on the number of candidates able to be supervised and many registered supervisors may not have yet had a completed supervision it might be worth thinking about creating categories associated with limits rather than point 1 being a general limitation and point 4 adding other limitations.

V. This point relating to staff member that has only recently completed their PhD and has no co-supervision experience to be the Principal Supervisor for up to three (3) HRD students is unclear. Does this limit refer to Principal Supervision only of up to three (3) students? Or three (3) students in total (Principal and/or Co-Supervisor)? Allowing a Supervisor with limited experience to be Principal Supervisory for three (3) HDR students may potentially lead to problems.

VI. I believe we need a more sophisticated policy regarding the developing/approving new supervisors. The current system is inadequate.

21) Workload allocation for students who exceeds minimum and maximum candidature

Proposed Charles Sturt University HDR Supervisory Load, Page 4, Point 5:

The above limits will be applied on a pro-rata basis for staff who are working at a reduced fraction.

I. What happens to workload allocation if the student exceeds minimum and maximum candidature?

22) Table 2 fundamentally flawed I. In the table at the end of the document there are increases in supervisory load for roles that

are ‘research focused’. This is not logical – if a role is research focused it contains a great proportion of research time. PhD supervision is teaching. Roles with a research focus therefore might need to have a reduced, not increased, maximum load.

474

16

Administrative Feedback

23) Are we using RHD or HDR? Need to be consistent.

24) Table 1 vs JCU Table 1 is confusing. Maybe rename?

25) EFTSL & MRes - provide abbreviations / write out in full initially

26) Table 2 requires a key and/or a footnote I. Table 2 needs a key to indicate what the yellow highlighting means (I think it means that

these people are “over load”). It may need a footnote to explain the recommended maximum load is considered in association with other teaching/research responsibilities.

475

Item 18: Read and Publish Agreements

PURPOSE

To brief the Committee on the new type of Read and Publish Agreements that combine traditional access to journal content with some limited opportunities to also publish open access papers in those journals

RECOMMENDATION

The URC resolves to:

1. note the briefing

KEY ISSUES

The Open Access publishing landscape is rapidly evolving. APCs are one part of the opportunities for Open Access publishing. R&P agreements provide some additional means of paying for some APCs. A full range of options to fund scholarly publishing are required at Charles Sturt so that we can reach our strategic goals.

1. Background

Open access publishing makes research outputs available globally on publication via the publisher’s platform. Read and Publish agreements are a form of transformative agreement designed to support the transition to an open scholarly publishing system.

2. Current Status

Charles Sturt Library is supplementing our traditional subscriptions by signing Read and Publish agreements with five publishers for 2022.


When the five agreements are in place, we will • communicate the details of each agreement to researchers

• include information about R&P agreements in the relevant workshops, training sessions andguides

• review the agreements to assess whether to continue in 2023

COMPLIANCE

Legislative Compliance This decision contributes to compliance with: Standard 4 of the Higher Education Standards Framework 2021

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with the Research Policy https://policy.csu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=536

RISK ASSESSMENT

Risk appetite Financial Viability and Sustainability: Charles Sturt University has a Medium Appetite and willingness to pursue activities which increase the likelihood of achieving a sustainable position of financial viability

URC24 5 November 2021 NOTING

476



according to the Risk Appetite Statement.

but which carry inherent risk to the University’s immediate financial wellbeing.


The agreements sit well within the risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS A. Read and Publish Agreements, 2022

Prepared by: Andrew Press, Manager Information Resources; Jacqueline Evans, Team

Leader Acquisitions; Helen Hobbs, Acting Exec Director, Division of Library Services

Cleared by: Helen Hobbs, Acting Executive Director, Division of Library Services.

477



Read & Publish Agreements, 2022 Division of Library Services

For further information please contact Helen Hobbs This paper written by Jacqueline Evans, Andrew Press and Helen Hobbs

478

|

Contents

Read & Publish Agreements, 2022 ................................................................................................................ 3 Background .................................................................................................................................................... 3 APCs at Charles Sturt .................................................................................................................................... 3 Sector discussion on APCs and Read and Publish Agreements .................................................................. 3 Renewal options for 2022 .............................................................................................................................. 4 How will researchers know that the APC option is available? ....................................................................... 4

Appendix 1 – CAUL information .................................................................................................................... 5

Appendix 2 – Further information .................................................................................................................. 6 Links to CAUL information on Open Access and Read & Publish agreements ............................................ 6 Further References ........................................................................................................................................ 6

479

|

Read & Publish Agreements, 2022 The Open Access publishing landscape is rapidly evolving. APCs are one part of the opportunities for Open Access publishing. R&P agreements provide some additional means of paying for some APCs. A full range of options to fund scholarly publishing are required at Charles Sturt so that we can reach our strategic goals.

Background

The Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) has been working with vendors to reduce costs for Universities. CAUL is also seeking to improve subscription options for 2022 for institutional access to journals. While one focus has been on 0% increases on the previous year’s subscriptions, CAUL have also been pushing vendors to provide ‘Read and Publish’ options, as part of their commitment to Open Scholarship.

Some open access journals do not require a subscription, whereas hybrid open access journals include a mixture of both open and restricted articles. Article Processing Charges (APCs) are payments made to the publisher to cover costs of publishing of the Open Access articles in their journal. ‘Read and Publish’ agreements combine the cost of subscriptions to hybrid open access journals with the cost of APCs. The aim of these agreements is to reduce the overall cost to institutions, whilst giving publishers appropriate income to pay for the costs of publishing scholarly articles.

Charles Sturt Library is working with several Read and Publish agreements for 2022:

• Cambridge • CSIRO • Oxford University Press • Springer Nature • Wiley

APCs at Charles Sturt

In order to pay for the costs of high-quality peer-reviewed publishing, some publishers use Article Processing Charges. At Charles Sturt APCs are currently paid through

• The Tri-Faculty Open Access Publishing Fund • A variety of researchers’ individual arrangements including using grant funding

The Read and Publish agreements will add to the ability of Charles Sturt researchers to publish in high quality journals.

Coordination of open scholarship initiatives and promotions, including coordination of reporting the costs of publishing, is not currently undertaken at Charles Sturt. This has been highlighted in DLS feedback to the Research Support change proposal.

Sector discussion on APCs and Read and Publish Agreements

Charles Sturt Library is strongly supportive of Open Access publishing and other Open Science initiatives to improve the visibility and impact of our research.

Debate around these emerging Read and Publish agreements indicate that it would be inappropriate to rely solely on them to reduce the University’s Open Access charges. Discussions include:

• Open Access publishing will become more prevalent and potentially the default in the next several years. We can therefore expect an increase in the need for APC payments.

• The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) has moved to prevent researchers using grant funds to pay for APCs.

480

https://cdn.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/3399834/Tri.Faculty-Guidelines-Open-Access-FINAL.pdf

https://cdn.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/3399834/Tri.Faculty-Guidelines-Open-Access-FINAL.pdf

https://libguides.csu.edu.au/OpenAccess

https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/open-science.htm

|

• Relying solely on Read and Publish agreements may “push” researchers to journals in these agreements.

• To counter the previous point, universities need to provide a range of avenues to pay for Open Access so that researchers can choose to publish in the most appropriate journal.

• Research institutions including universities should invest in smaller publisher Open Access schemes to mitigate the risk of monopolies in knowledge infrastructure

• The Office of the Chief Scientist is exploring a national Open Access strategy making it appropriate for us to enter into Read and Publish agreements on a 12 month basis whilst we monitor this space.

The Division of Library Services strongly recommends not diminishing the current Tri-Faculty Open Access Publishing scheme, or other means paying APCs. Rather, the Read and Publish agreements will supplement the existing means of payment. As Open Access becomes the default we will as a University need to be supporting and coordinating a variety of methods to support publishing to the quality Open Access journals needed to reach our research goals.

Renewal options for 2022

For each of these publishers, Charles Sturt has been offered an agreement that gives traditional read access to the journals, or an alternate Read and Publish agreement. The cost to Charles Sturt Library is the same for either agreement in 2022.

The details of which journals are included in the Publish aspect of the agreement vary from publisher to publisher. In particular, not all journals from that publisher have a hybrid open access model that fits with the concept of an R&P agreement. A journal edited by a scholarly Society may not have an Open Access option available.

CSIRO and Cambridge are including an unlimited number of APCs in their agreement.

Oxford, Springer and Wiley have a cap on the number of APCs available to the CAUL consortium as a whole, and these will be managed by CAUL on a strictly first come first served basis.

In each case, DLS have carefully investigated the agreement and discussed with our CAUL consortium partners. We are confident that the agreements represent an opportunity for Charles Sturt researchers to publish Open Access.

Entering into the Read and Publish agreements will improve discoverability, lead to more citations of published articles and have a greater impact for Charles Sturt research outputs.

How will researchers know that the APC option is available?

The Library will ensure information and support resources, but the key consideration is for researchers to publish in the right journal to give their outputs the best impact. Under each of these agreements, researchers are automatically contacted when they submit their paper, and are matched to the institution by either Ringgold ID or a relevant institutional email domain that the corresponding author uses.

As an example, once a paper is accepted for publishing by the CSIRO, papers are matched to the Read and Publish agreement in place via Scholar One flow to RightsLink system. At that time the author would be advised:

• their paper has been accepted for publishing • they have been matched to a Read and Publish agreement between Charles Sturt and CSIRO

Publishing • their paper will be published as OA under that agreement at no fee to them, the funding has been

supported by the Library.

For the agreements that have a cap on the number of APCs available, once the APC cap is reached, the system reverts to standard publishing processes as per traditional publishing. There will be no obligation to publish open access until the APC pool resets in the following year, and researchers can investigate other sources of funding.

481

|

Appendix 1 – CAUL information

482

|

Appendix 2 – Further information Links to CAUL information on Open Access and Read & Publish agreements

CAUL and Open Access Australasia recently submitted a poster to the 15th Berlin Open Access conference summarising progress on open in Australia over the last two decades. The poster, titled Connecting the dots: 20+ years of open in Australia, is available to download, along with supplementary information. The guide Read & Publish Agreements Negotiated by CAUL provides information about all things R&P and will be progressively updated with information about the new agreements for 2022. For an example of what this will look like, please choose the CSIRO link.

Further References

Aspesi, C., & Brand, A. (2020). In pursuit of open science, open access is not enough. Science, 368(6491), 574-577. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba3763

Achieving impact from Australian science (2021, March 17). Australia’s Chief Scientist. Retrieved from https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/news-and-media/achieving-impact-australian-science

New tools bring huge opportunity for geospatial industry, and science more widely. (2021, April 9). Australia’s Chief Scientist. Retrieved from https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/news-and-media/new-tools-bring-huge-opportunity-geospatial-industry-and-science-more-widely

Hersh, G., & Plume, A. (2016, September 14). Citation metrics and open access: what do we know? Elsevier. Retrieved from https://www.elsevier.com/connect/citation-metrics-and-open-access-what-do-we-know

OECD. (n.d.) Open Science. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/open-science.htm

483

http://antispam.csu.edu.au:32224/?dmVyPTEuMDAxJiY1NGJkMTc5OTFjZjlkOTQ3YT02MTcyNjNGQ182Nzg4M18xMjYwM18xJiYwOGQyMjk2M2ZlMTQ0NmE9MTMzMyYmdXJsPWh0dHBzJTNBJTJGJTJGY2F1bCUyRWxpYmd1aWRlcyUyRWNvbSUyRmNvbm5lY3RpbmctdGhlLWRvdHMtMjAteWVhcnMtb3Blbg==

http://antispam.csu.edu.au:32224/?dmVyPTEuMDAxJiY1NGJkMTc5OTFjZjlkOTQ3YT02MTcyNjNGQ182Nzg4M18xMjYwM18xJiYwOGQyMjk2M2ZlMTU1NjA9MTMzMyYmdXJsPWh0dHBzJTNBJTJGJTJGY2F1bCUyRWxpYmd1aWRlcyUyRWNvbSUyRnJlYWQtYW5kLXB1Ymxpc2g=

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba3763

https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/news-and-media/achieving-impact-australian-science

https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/news-and-media/new-tools-bring-huge-opportunity-geospatial-industry-and-science-more-widely

https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/news-and-media/new-tools-bring-huge-opportunity-geospatial-industry-and-science-more-widely

https://www.elsevier.com/connect/citation-metrics-and-open-access-what-do-we-know

https://www.elsevier.com/connect/citation-metrics-and-open-access-what-do-we-know



Item 19: Faculty of Arts and Education Report to University Research Committee

PURPOSE

To report to the University Research Committee on relevant research-related matters discussed at Faculty Board, and Research and Graduate Studies Management Committee for the period August to October 2021.

RECOMMENDATION


1. Note the report from the Faculty of Arts and Education on research-related matters for the periodAugust to October 2021.

KEY ISSUES

1. Committee Review of the Australian Council for Graduate Research Mental HealthGuidelines

Some of the points received for the Faculty Research and Graduate Studies Management committee in relation to the recently released ACGR Mental Health Guidelines were that there could be

o Further opportunities for HDR support outside of supervisors. More peer groupinteractions/collective mentoring.

o More streamlined processes for candidates to change their supervisor (vice versa)- if things werenot working.

o A more centralised system with opportunities for HDR candidates to receive research assistantsupport, to have opportunities to work with other university research staff

o More First Nations academics and mentors, cohort building for First Nations HDR candidates

o Better recognition of the impacts on the experience of and progression through HDR for mature-age candidates.

o In addition to workloads, candidate debt, uncertain futures (listed in guidelines)-there needs to begreater consideration/acknowledgement of isolation and competing demands for candidates. InFoAE, so many have the added mental strains from part-time work commitments, family, and havetaken long breaks between study commitments.

o Resourcing for and HDR candidates could be more adaptable to specific situations. A suggestionwas made to better accommodate the personal factors in relation to progress and support. Forexample, progression for mature-age candidates is suggested to not be as linear as HDRprograms are designed to be.

o To celebrate additional achievements throughout candidature. For example, more emphasis oncompletions of literature reviews, commencement, endorsement, draft chapters etc

o Dedicated additional resourcing when problems are emerging in supervisory relationships withfuture interactions. For example, more opportunities for the Sub-Dean or other representative/s tomeet with candidate to help support/create action plans. Dealing with sensitive progress situationswith supervisory relationships.

o Recognising that many HDR candidates are senior professionals in their fields. A suggestion forthe potential consideration of leadership development opportunities in a candidate’sprofessional/area of interest/expertise could be emphasised.


484

2. Upcoming FoAE Alignment with University Research Institutes

The Faculty Research and Graduate Studies Committee requested that further information and plans be detailed into how FOAE researchers can align themselves cross-faculty with the three major institutes for the phases ahead.

3. Intention to Submit Process for ARC/NHMRC Funding

The Faculty Research and Graduate Studies Committee agreed that the centralised Call for Intent to Submit for ARC/NHMRC funding should provide further transparency for researchers into the evaluative process steps that are involved and facilitated.

4. New Research Website Launched for the Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation

The Centre for Islamic Studies has launched a new research web page (https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/cisac/) with interactive components to assist in showcasing their research. For example, the site showcases research seminars, newsletters, recordings, research outputs etc.

5. Excluded Research Outputs

Discussion occurred at Faculty of Arts and Education Board that it would be useful to undertake further investigation of ‘excluded research outputs’. It was suggested that some staff could be ‘wasting research efforts’ via dissemination opportunities that were not fruitful for themselves or the university. Further detailing and breakdown of the excluded output types were seen as helpful towards future research planning.

6. Adjunct Staffing Research Contributions

There was discussion at Faculty of Arts and Education Board that it would be useful to undertake a deeper dive into the types of Adjunct staff that have been contributing towards research outputs/contributions in the Faculty. The high number of Adjunct staff and contributions were recognised as being helpful to University objectives, yet there was uncertainty of the specific types/profiling of Adjunct staff. For example, the level of alignment with the University, role functionalities and career positioning.

7. University Research Strategy

The Faculty Board agreed that concerns need to be raised that “social research’ is being lost and that this affects the reputation of the Faculty and how the University is perceived externally. The Faculty noted that the Sturt Scheme is an area for moderate support, yet acknowledged that social research is likely to be more hidden in the phases ahead by not being emphasised and reinforced by the University Research Strategy, despite being a major component of the University’s future. COMPLIANCE

Legislative Compliance This report identifies activities that are required to comply with University requirements under the Higher Education Standards Framework threshold standards for Part 4. Research and Research Training.

Policy Alignment This decision is made in accordance with The Research Policy; and The Higher Degree by Research Policy

485

https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/cisac/



RISK ASSESSMENT


Research Development, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Charles Sturt University has a High Appetite and willingness to take risks in high impact research and innovation activities that will support the University’s standing in research excellence, develop our strengths in key disciplines, foster significant third-party partnerships that will contribute value to the University industry and the community and contribute to research and innovation leadership at the University.



The report of research activities sits within the University’s current risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

A. NIL

Prepared by: Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman, Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Arts and Education

Cleared by: Associate Professor Brendon Hyndman, Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Arts and Education

486



Item 20: 2022 Meeting Schedule

PURPOSE

To provide the 2022 Meeting Schedule for the information of members.

RECOMMENDATION

The University Research Committee resolves to note the 2022 Meeting Schedule.

KEY ISSUES

The 2022 Meeting Schedule follows on from Council approving the 2022 meeting dates for its committees.

The development of the schedule attempts to synthesise the 2021 experience; Public Holidays; workflow changes due to course and subject approval changes and CDAP; and requests from specific committees relating to meeting times, dates and agenda close periods (not all of which are mutually compatible). The draft schedule was sent to committee Chairs for feedback.

A key point to note is the adoption of the Council norm for its committees of an agenda closing date of two weeks and two days before the meeting (apart from UCC, which will be three weeks as requested by the Provost).

RISK ASSESSMENT


Legislative and Regulatory Compliance: Charles Sturt University is committed to high level of compliance with relevant legislation, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures. Charles Sturt University has a Very Low Appetite for any intentional behaviours which result in non-compliances with any of its relevant legislative requirements, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures.



ATTACHMENTS A. 2022 Meeting Schedule

Prepared by: Tony Heywood, Director, Governance Cleared by: Tony Heywood, Director, Governance


487



University Council & Academic Senate Committee Meeting Schedule 2022 Papers for Council and its committees are due to Governance 3 days before agenda close

Page 1 of 5 Updated 9 September 2021

Date Meeting Time Venue Secretariat Agenda closes

JANUARY

Tue 18 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 10 Jan

FEBRUARY

Tue 1 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 24 Jan

Wed 2 Academic Senate 10.00am - 1.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 17 Jan

Mon 7 Faculty Board (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 20 Jan

Mon 7 Faculty Board (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Thu 20 Jan

Tue 8 Faculty Board (FOBJBS) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Fri 21 Jan

Wed 9 Finance Committee (Q4) 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 24 Jan

Thu 10 Audit and Risk Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Tue 25 Jan

Fri 11 Investment Committee (Q4) 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Tue 25 Jan

Tue 15 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 7 Feb

Mon 21 Faculty Courses (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Thu 3 Feb

Tue 22 Faculty Courses (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 4 Feb

Tue 22 Faculty Courses (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Fri 4 Feb

Wed 23 Faculty Assessment (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Mon 7 Feb

Wed 23 Faculty Assessment (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Mon 7 Feb

Thu 24 Faculty Assessment (FOAE) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Nicole Adler Tue 8 Feb

Thu 24 COUNCIL 9.00am - 2.00pm VC Natalie Nixon Tue 8 Feb

Fri 25 University Research Committee 9.30am - 12.30pm VC Nicole Adler Wed 9 Feb

MARCH Public Holiday - 14 (ACT/SA/VIC/TAS)

Tue 1 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 21 Feb

Mon 7 University Learning & Teaching Committee

9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 24 Feb

Tue 15 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 7 Mar

Mon 21 University Courses Committee 9.00am - 12.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Mon 28 Feb

Mon 21 Foresighting Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Thu 3 Mar

Wed 23 Faculty Assessment (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Mon 7 Mar

Wed 23 Faculty Assessment (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Mon 7 Mar

Thu 24 Faculty Assessment (FOAE) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Nicole Adler Tue 8 Mar

Mon 28 Faculty Board (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 10 Mar

488

of 5 Updated 9 September 2021


Mon 28 Faculty Board (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Thu 10 Mar

Tue 29 Faculty Board (FOBJBS) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Fri 11 Mar

Tue 29 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 21 Mar

Wed 30 Nomination and Remuneration Committee

10.00 - 12.00pm VC Natalie Nixon Fri 11Mar

APRIL Public Holidays – 15, 18, 25

Wed 6 Academic Senate 10.00am - 1.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 21 Mar

Mon 11 Faculty Courses (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Thu 24 Mar

Tue 12 Faculty Courses (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 25 Mar

Tue 12 Faculty Courses (FOAE) 1:00pm - 3:00pm VC Nicole Adler Fri 25 Mar

Tue 12 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 4 Apr

Wed 13 Joint Finance, Audit and Risk Committee (Annual Accounts)

10.00am - 11.00am VC Tony Heywood -

Thu 14 COUNCIL 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Natalie Nixon Tue 29 Mar

Tue 19 University Learning & Teaching Committee

9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 1 Apr

Wed 20 Foresighting Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Hannah Brimstone Mon 4 Apr

Tue 26 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Thu 14 Apr

Fri 29 University Research Committee 9.30am - 12.30pm VC Nicole Adler Wed 13 Apr

MAY Public Holiday – 2 (QLD), 30 (ACT)

Wed 4 Finance Committee (Q1) 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Thu 14 Apr

Thu 5 Audit and Risk Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Tue 19 Apr

Fri 6 Investment Committee (Q1) 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Wed 20 Apr

Tue 10 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 2 May

Wed 11 University Courses Committee 9.00am - 12.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Wed 20 Apr

Thu 19 COUNCIL 9.00am - 2.00pm PMQ Natalie Nixon Tue 3 May

Mon 23 Faculty Courses (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Thu 5 May

Tue 24 Faculty Courses (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 6 May

Tue 24 Faculty Courses (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Fri 6 May


Mon 30 Faculty Board (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 12 May

Mon 30 Faculty Board (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Thu 12 May

Tue 31 Faculty Board (FOBJBS) 1:00pm - 3:00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Fri 13 May

JUNE Public Holiday - 13

489



Wed 1 Academic Senate 10.00am - 1.00pm TBC Tony Heywood Mon 16 May



10.00am - 12.00pm TBC Natalie Nixon Mon 23 May

Tue 21 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Fri 10 Jun

Wed 22 University Courses Committee 9.00am - 12.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Wed 1 Jun

Fri 24 University Research Committee 9.30am - 12.30pm VC Nicole Adler Wed 8 Jun

Mon 27 Foresighting Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Thu 9 Jun


9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 9 Jun

JULY

Tue 5 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 27 Jun

Wed 6 Finance Committee (Revised Budget)

10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 20 Jun

Wed 6 Faculty Assessment (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Mon 20 Jun

Wed 6 Faculty Assessment (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Mon 20 Jun

Thu 7 Faculty Assessment (FOAE) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Nicole Adler Tue 21 Jun

Wed 13 University Courses Committee 9.00am – 12.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Wed 22 Jun

Mon 18 Faculty Courses (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Thu 30 Jun

Tue 19 Faculty Courses (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 1 Jul

Tue 19 Faculty Courses (FOAE) 1.00am - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Fri 1 Jul

Tue 19 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 11 Jul

Thu 21 COUNCIL 9.00am - 2.00pm VC Natalie Nixon Tue 7 Jul

AUGUST

Mon 1 Foresighting Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Thu 14 Jul

Tue 2 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 25 Jul

Wed 3 Academic Senate 10.00am - 2.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 18 Jul

Wed 3 Finance Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 18 Jul

Thu 4 Audit and Risk Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Tue 19 Jul

Thu 4 Faculty Assessment (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Tue 19 Jul

Thu 4 Faculty Assessment (FOAE) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Nicole Adler Tue 19 Jul

Thu 4 Faculty Assessment (FOBJBS) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Tue 19 Jul

Fri 5 Investment Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Wed 20 Jul

Mon 15 Faculty Board (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 28 Jul

490



Mon 15 Faculty Board (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Thus 28 Jul

Tue 16 Faculty Board (FOBJBS) 1:00pm - 3:00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Fri 29 Jul

Tue 16 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 8 Aug

Tue 23 University Learning & Teaching Committee

9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 5 Aug

Wed 24 University Courses Committee 9.00am – 12.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Wed 3 Aug

Thu 25 COUNCIL 9.00am - 2.00pm WW Natalie Nixon Tue 9 Aug

Tue 30 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 22 Aug

SEPTEMBER

Fri 2 University Research Committee 9.30am - 12.30pm VC Nicole Adler Wed 17 Aug


10.00am - 12.00pm VC Natalie Nixon / Kate Hayden

Mon 22 Aug

Mon 12 Foresighting Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Thu 25 Aug

Tue 13 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 5 Sep

Mon 19 Faculty Courses (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Thu 1 Sep

Tue 20 Faculty Courses (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 2 Sep

Tue 20 Faculty Courses (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Fri 2 Sep

Tue 27 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 19 Sep

Wed 28 Academic Senate 10.00am - 2.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 12 Sep

OCTOBER Public Holiday – 3 (excl. Vic)

Thu 6 COUNCIL 10.00am - 2.00pm VC Natalie Nixon Tue 20 Sep

Mon 10 Faculty Board (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 22 Sep

Mon 10 Faculty Board (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Thu 22 Sep

Tue 11 Faculty Board (FOBJBS) 1:00pm - 3:00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Fri 23 Sep

Tue 11 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Fri 30 Sep

Mon 24 Foresighting Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Thu 6 Oct

Tue 25 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 17 Oct


9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 13 Oct

NOVEMBER Public Holiday – 1 (VIC)

Wed 2 University Courses Committee 9.00am - 12.00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Wed 12 Oct

Fri 4 University Research Committee 9.30am - 12.30pm VC Nicole Adler Wed 19 Oct

Tue 8 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 31 Oct

Wed 9 Finance Committee (Q3) 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Tony Heywood Mon 24 Oct

Wed 9 Faculty Assessment (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Mon 24 Oct

491



Wed 9 Faculty Assessment (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Mon 24 Oct

Thu 10 Faculty Assessment (FOAE) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Nicole Adler Tue 25 Oct

Thu 10 Audit and Risk Committee 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Tue 25 Oct

Thu 10 University Research Committee Standing Committee (HDR Medals)

12.00pm - 1.00pm VC Nicole Adler Tue 25 Oct

Fri 11 Investment Committee (Q3) 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Kate Hayden Wed 26 Oct

Mon 14 Faculty Courses (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Thu 27 Oct

Tue 15 Faculty Courses (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Fri 28 Oct

Tue 15 Faculty Courses (FOAE) 1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Fri 28 Oct

Tue 22 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 14 Nov

Wed 23 Academic Senate 10.00am - 1.00pm BX Tony Heywood Mon 7 Nov

Fri 25 COUNCIL 9.00am - 2.00pm OAG Natalie Nixon Wed 9 11 Nov


10.00am - 12.00pm VC Natalie Nixon / Kate Hayden

Mon 14 Nov

DECEMBER Public Holidays – 25, 26, 27

Tue 6 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 28 Nov

Wed 7 Faculty Assessment (FOBJBS) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Verinnia Lansom Mon 21 Nov

Wed 7 Faculty Assessment (FOSH) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Mon 21 Nov

Thu 8 Faculty Assessment (FOAE) 9.00am - 11.00am VC Nicole Adler Tue 22 Nov

Mon 12 Faculty Board (FOSH) – can be adjusted due to graduation dates

9.00am - 11.00am VC Kim Sharp Thu 24 Nov

Mon 12 Faculty Board (FOAE) – can be adjusted due to graduation dates

1.00pm - 3.00pm VC Nicole Adler Thu 24 Nov

Tue 13 Faculty Board (FOBJBS) – can be adjusted due to graduation dates

1:00pm - 3:00pm VC Verinnia Lansom Fri 25 Nov

Thu 15 COUNCIL 10.00am - 12.00pm VC Natalie Nixon -

Tue 20 ELT 9.00am - 11.00am VC N/A Mon 12 Dec

Note: Committee papers for submission to the Council will be carried forward by Governance Services following the Committee meeting. Where amendments are required prior to submission to the Council, the due date for submission will be confirmed by Governance Services.

492

Item 21: 2022 Annual Plan

PURPOSE

To provide the 2022 Annual Plan for the information of members.

RECOMMENDATION

The University Research Committee resolves to note the 2022 Annual Plan.

KEY ISSUES

The Annual Plan for each committee outlines the core items of business to be presented to each meeting over the year. These items assist with managing the business of the committees and include requirements from various Rules, policies and procedures.

The 2021 Annual Plans evolved over the year as feedback from members was incorporated, and has been rolled over for 2022. Feedback on the proposed 2022 Annual Plans can be provided during the meeting, or to [email protected].

RISK ASSESSMENT


Legislative and Regulatory Compliance: Charles Sturt University is committed to high level of compliance with relevant legislation, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures. Charles Sturt University has a Very Low Appetite for any intentional behaviours which result in non-compliances with any of its relevant legislative requirements, regulatory compliance obligations and internal policies and procedures.



ATTACHMENTS A. Annual Plan

Prepared by: Tony Heywood, Director, Governance Cleared by: Tony Heywood, Director, Governance


493

mailto:[email protected]



Annual Plan

HES Policy Feb Apr Jun Sep 4-NovChair's Report Chair Each Meeting x x x x x

8.g Policy Reviews (relevant policies) Policy Owners 6.3.2 Policy Framework Policy

Schedule A - Governance and Legal Delegations

As required

8.a8.k.iii

Academic Risks (review of relevant risks) Chair 6.2.1 Risk Management Policy Each meeting x x x x x

HESF Compliance Director, Risk and Compliance

All As required x

Annual Report of Committee Performance against Membership and Terms of Reference (MToR)

Chair / Governance Officer

Annual x

8.d HDR Student Performance Report* (including progression, attrition, completion, load, student feedback by cohort, QILT national survey)

Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor

(Academic) / Associate Deans (Research) /

Office of Planning and Analytics / Director,

Research Services and Dean of Graduate

Studies

5.3.3 Course and Subject Policy Annual (final report due to

AS/CNL in Q1 for the previous year)

x

8.j Student Academic Integrity and Misconduct Report (including HDR)*

Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and

Teaching) / Manager, Ethics and Compliance

5.2 Academic Integrity Policy


Annual x

8.a8.g iii8.l9

Report on Research Training* (benchmarked every three years)


Graduate Studies

4.2 Annual x

8.c8.g.iii

Research Supervisory Metric Reports Director, Research Services and Dean of

Graduate Studies

Annually as required

x

HDR Medal (by Flying Minute) Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

Annually as required

8.e Comprehensive Course Reviews (Coursework and HDR) – Annual Review of Schedule and Progress

Manager, Course and Subject Accreditation /

Associate Deans (Research)


8.e Comprehensive Course Reviews (HDR) – Review Report for individual courses


5.3.1 Course and Subject Policy As required

2022 Meetings

GeneralAs required

Quality and Compliance

Student Matters

Courses

Category TOR Item Responsible OfficerAlignment 2021 Progress

CommentsSuggested Frequency

494
















8.b8.d

Annual Course Performance Health Check (Annual Summary Report)

Associate Deans (Academic) / Associate

Deans (Research) / Chair, Faculty Board

5.3 Course and Subject PolicyCourse and Subject Life Cycle ProcedureCourse and Subject Quality Assurance and Review Procedure

Annual x

Professional Accreditation Report (HDR courses)

Associate Deans (Academic)


Business Case Summary Report (Delegation E2) (new courses, new offerings of an existing course, suspension or phase out)

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

3.05.1


Schedule E - Academic and Research Delegations

As required

Notice of Intent for a new course or major change to a course


As required

Low Impact Course and Subject Changes (Minor Variations) (Delegation E4)




As required

8.f Course Approvals (HDR) – Report from Higher Degree Research Committee (HDRC) (E1)


1.41.53.15.1



As required

Higher Degree by Research Committee Report


Graduate Studies

Higher Degree by Research Committee' - Membership and Terms of Reference

Each Meeting x x x x x

Higher Degree Research Examinations Committee Report


Higher Degree by Research Examinations Committee' - Membership and Terms of Reference

After each Meeting

Higher Degree Research Scholarships Committee Report

Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and

Innovation)

Higher Degree by Research Scholarships Committee' - Membership and Terms of Reference

After each Meeting

8.h Report from the Director, Research Services and Dean of Graduate Studies to oversight HDR student matters: •Admission (E7)•Cancellation of Enrolment (E13)•Leave of Absence (E15)•Examination•Graduation


Graduate Studies

1.11.21.3

Admissions Policy

Enrolment Policy


Each Meeting x x x x x

Reporting

As required

As required

As required

As required

495














8.i Extracts from University Courses Committee Minutes regarding Honours and Masters Coursework courses with a research component

Governance Officer 5.1 Course and Subject Policy


After each UCC meeting as

relevant

8.k Receipt of Reports / Minutes relevant to University Research Committee from Faculty Boards (FB), Faculty Research Committee (FRC) and other bodies, demonstrating: -Policies and Procedures are being adhered to (especially in relation to the authority to approval final grades for subjects)-Monitoring against Higher Education Standards for: oOrientation and Progress oLearning Environment, Facilities, and InfrastructureoDiversity and EquityoLearning Resources and Educational SupportoAcademic Integrity

Associate Deans (Research) / Chair / Governance Officer

1.31.42.12.23.35.2

Admissions Policy


Academic Integrity Policy


After each FB or FRC meeting as

relevant

8.a Annual combined Faculty Research Report from Faculty Boards (research performance, gaps and issues, improvement plans)


/ Director, Research Services and Dean of

Graduate Studies / Associate Deans

(Research)

5.2 Annual x

8.j Staff Research Misconduct and Integrity Report

Executive Director People and Culture

5.2 Academic Integrity Policy

Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research, 2018

Annual x

Abridged Report on Ethics and Compliance Breaches (de-identified)

Manager, Ethics and Compliance

Annual x

8.g8.i8.l910

Items referred to and from Academic Senate, University Learning and Teaching Committee, University Courses Committee and other committees or officers

Chair 6.3 Membership and Terms of Reference

As required

Review of Annual Plan* Manager, Governance/Chair

Annual x

As required

496

Item 22: Graduate Research Experience Survey (GRES)

PURPOSE

To provide a report on the 2020 Graduate Research Experience Survey (GRES) and discuss the recommendations.

RECOMMENDATION

The Higher Degree Research Committee resolves to:

1. Note the report on GRES; and

2. Endorse the recommendations to improve the graduate research experience and update thesurvey tool for 2021.

KEY ISSUES

1. High levels of satisfaction overall in GRES data

The data from the 2020 GRES is overall very positive and suggests that in the main students are happy with the support they are receiving and the progress they are making. Key areas for improvement are the intellectual climate, communications and expectations, engagement, and professional development. The data provide a baseline for future annual surveys to measure the impacts of changes and new initiatives to improve the graduate experience.

2. Low response rate

The response rate to the first annual GRES in 2020 was 28% of the HDR cohort. This was below the original target of 50% and further work to promote and incentivise the survey will be needed to improve this rate in 2021.

RISK ASSESSMENT


Charles Sturt University has a Low Appetite and willingness to take risks in the strategic direction and management of research and innovation activities which might otherwise produce diffuse or limited outcomes in terms of impact,excellence and value to the University or are unaligned to key research disciplines.

Consequence of Committee decision in relation to risk appetite


ATTACHMENTS

A. 2020 GRES Report.pdf

Prepared by: Alison Matthews, Acting Director Research and Dean of Graduate Studies Cleared by: Jason White, Acting Pro Vice Chancellor Research and innovation


497



Graduate Research Experience Survey

2020 Report Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies

For further information please contact Jennifer Podesta

[email protected]

498

Graduate Research Experience Survey | 2020 Report

Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies Page 2 of 22

Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3

2. The survey ............................................................................................................................................. 4

3. The respondents .................................................................................................................................... 5

4. The findings ........................................................................................................................................... 6

Supervision ................................................................................................................................................. 6

Resources .................................................................................................................................................. 7

Intellectual Climate ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Progress and Assessment ......................................................................................................................... 9

Feedback and Resources ........................................................................................................................ 10

Research Skills ......................................................................................................................................... 11

Professional Development ....................................................................................................................... 12

Opportunities ............................................................................................................................................ 14

Overall Experience ................................................................................................................................... 15

Personal Outlook ...................................................................................................................................... 17

Paid Employment ..................................................................................................................................... 19

5. Discussion and Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 19

6. 2021 GRES Timeline ........................................................................................................................... 22

499



Graduate Research Experience Survey 2020 Report

1. Introduction

The Graduate Research Experience Survey (GRES) was developed as part of the implementation of recommendations from the Higher Degree Research (HDR) Review conducted in 2018 by Gaye Smythe (Smythe Review)1. The Smythe Review was primarily an evaluation of HDR training at Charles Sturt University in the context of national drivers, sectoral trends, internal research with stakeholders and recommendations from the Watt Review (2015) 2 and the ACOLA Review (2016) 3.

The final report from the Smythe Review initially put forward thirteen recommendations across the following four key themes:

• Supporting student success,

• Improving students experience,

• Providing equitable and flexible access to HDR Training, and

• Building partnerships and engagement.

The Smythe Review also identified the need to address the causes of high (compared to other regional universities) rates of attrition, particularly amongst part-time students late in their candidatures, although it provided very little clarity as to what the contributing factors to these rates were, pointing to a lack of data about the experience of HDR students during their candidature. Unlike undergraduate and other course work subjects where all students are routinely offered an anonymous and confidential Subject Experience Survey at the completion of each session, this was not the case for HDR.

Whilst the high attrition rates are a concern for a number of reasons, Smythe particularly noted the financial impacts:

…the block funding algorithm changed [in 2017] from including HDR enrolments, to HDR completions. Therefore, while late HDR attrition might be considered relatively low in raw numbers, the individual and institutional cost is potentially high.

In 2019 the Research Office (now Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies) employed a project officer (Dr Jennifer Podesta) to oversee the implementation of the recommendations from the Smythe Review. Ongoing work on this project has highlighted the following issues.

a) There is a general lack of data collected about the HDR student experience at Charles Sturt. This

lack of data means it is difficult for us to assess our current programmes, identify gaps or areas for

improvement, and to evaluate changes and implementations moving forward.

b) The limited amount of data collected from the 6-monthly progress reports is neither anonymous nor

confidential and primarily only covers aspects of the research project itself, not the broader student

experience nor the range of factors that may impact on that experience and the progress of the

candidature itself. No overall analysis is conducted of the responses in the progress reports other

than as a reflection of the individual’s responses for reporting purposes.

1 Smythe, G (2018), Review of Higher Degree Research Training: Final Report, Research Office. Wagga Wagga, Charles Sturt University 2Watt, I. (2015). Review of the research policy and funding arrangements. Canberra, ACT, Department of Education and Training. 3 McGagh, J., et al. (2016). Review of Australia's Research Training System- Final Report for ACOLA. Melbourne, Australian Council of Learned Academies.

500



c) Early exiting HDR students have previously not participated in the university wide Exit Survey offered

by Division of Student Administration as they routinely did not use the online process to

withdraw/cancel their enrolment that would invite them to complete that survey. Hence, very little is

known about why HDR students withdraw. The questions asked in the Exit Survey are not specific

to the HDR experience and as such even when students to do complete the survey it is likely it is not

fully reflecting the key issues experienced by HDR students.

d) Charles Sturt HDR students have participated in the national Graduate Outcomes Survey (GOS)

Postgraduate Experience Questionnaire (PREQ) but this is conducted at around 3 months after

completion. As such, it does not give an indication of the HDR experience of our current students

and is only offered to students who have successfully completed their HDR programme and is

therefore less likely to reveal areas of concern.

e) Due to the extended period over which a HDR candidature runs, a longitudinal research design may

be beneficial in capturing and understanding the factors that impact on students at different stages of

candidature.

The ability to collect and analyse data about our HDR student experience is a requirement under national best practice and quality assurance frameworks such as those detailed in the Australian Council of Graduate Research Good Principles Guidelines4 and Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Authority (TEQSA) research training standards.

The data collected from the GRES will be used to evaluate a number of changes and new initiatives planned across the HDR experience in response to the Smythe Review including:

• The requirement for an Expectations Alignment and Communications Plan as a probation milestone

• The addition of the Individual Development Plan and supporting resources

• The introduction of a Peer-to-peer mentoring programme

• The development of an Alumni and industry mentoring programme

• A review of website and online resources

• A review of the content, delivery, and access to professional development programmes

• HDR engagement initiatives such as HDR Connect, HDR Newsletter, Post-graduate Student Association

• The re-introduction of DocFest HDR Conference

• The addition of more rigorous management of the Supervisor register and compliance with professional development requirements

It is also intended that the data collected annually from GRES will be used to gain further knowledge about our student’s experiences of supervision, to identify groups more at risk of withdrawal and to understand the contributing factors to high attrition rates. It will also allow a granulated analysis of data to compare the experiences across faculties and modes of study in order to better support and respond to any gaps in training or supervision needs.

2. The survey

The survey tool used for the 2020 GRES was developed with an eye to other similar surveys including the UK Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) and the PREQ. This will allow some benchmarking of results against those surveys. Consultation was conducted with a range of Charles Sturt stakeholders including the Higher Degree Research Committee, Professional Development Manager and Gail Fuller from SPAN. The research proposal and survey tool were submitted to the Human Research Ethics Committee for ethics approval (Approval # H20209).

The survey tool was developed using the SurveyMonkey online platform and was offered to all enrolled HDR candidates from 19th November - 24th December 2020 and was accompanied with a plain language statement and informed consent information. It was sent initially via an email invitation and this was followed with a number of reminder emails and notifications via social media and the HDR newsletter.

4 Australian Council of Graduate Research (2018), Graduate Research Good Practice Guidelines, https://www.acgr.edu.au/good-practice/graduate-research-good-practice-principles/

501



The survey collected enrolment data to allow for some analysis based on enrolment variables and asked participants to respond to a number of statements across the following key areas:

• Supervision

• Resources

• Intellectual Climate

• Progress and Assessment

• Feedback and Responsibilities

• Research Skills Development

• Professional Development

• Opportunities

• Overall Experience

• Personal Outlook

• Consideration of withdrawal

• Paid employment

The 2020 survey questions and accompanying information will be revised following a review process and ethics approval will be sought for any subsequent amendments. It is intended that the revised GRES will be offered to all HDR candidates in November- December 2021.

3. The respondents

The 2020 survey link was sent to 423 HDR candidates with 117 respondents representing slightly less than 28% of the total cohort. This is substantially less than the original target of 50% but still provides a sufficiently representative sample. The response rate indicates further work is needed to promote the survey and incentivise participation with HDR candidates for future surveys. The survey was not compulsory, and care was taken not to make HDR candidates feel compelled or coerced to participate.

The survey respondents were enrolled as follows:

Approximate % of Actual Enrolment

Master of Philosophy (n=3) 2.6% 4%

Doctor of Philosophy (n=85) 72.7% 62%

Professional Doctorate (n=29) 24.8% 34%

Arts & Education (n=46) 39.7% 34 %

BJBS (n=39) 33.6% 30%

Science (n=31) 26.7% 36%

Part-time (n=69) 41% 54%

Full-time (n=48) 41% 46%

Domestic (n=95) 81.2% 96%

International (n=19) 16.4% 4%

On campus (n=38) 32.5% 36%

Distance or off-campus (n=79) 67.5% 64%

Early candidature (n=37) 31.6%

Mid-candidature (n=52) 44.4%

502



Late-candidature (n=20) 17.1%

Submitted or awaiting graduation (n=6) 5.1%

4. The findings

Following is the statistical data collected from the survey questions accompanied by the associated comments that have been summarised to reflect the main themes. The data in this report have not been filtered using enrolment variables except in questions Q22, Q31 and Q33.

Supervision

Q9. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your supervision in the past 12 months?

These results indicate an overall high level of satisfaction with supervision (Table 1). The results from the first three statements related to the knowledge, contact and feedback from supervisory teams is particularly encouraging with almost 90% of respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing. The slightly lower average scores for careers and skill development support indicate this as an area where more resources and training for supervisors may be valuable.

Table 1. Responses to Q9

Q10. If you have any additional comments about your supervision, please write them here. There were 31 written comments in this section providing additional insights about the supervisory experience and responses were fairly evenly split between positive and negative feedback. The positive responses included words like supportive, knowledgeable, wise, understanding, above and beyond, good interaction, flexible and encouraging, absolutely impressed and stress free. The negative responses provided more explicit examples of why there was dissatisfaction. These included themes such as lack of interest, lack of feedback, lack of specific HDR knowledge, failure to meet deadlines, and delays and issues with expectations around the roles and responsibilities of supervisory team. However, these appear to be isolated cases and are not Faculty specific. The introduction of the Expectations Alignment and Communications Plan early in the candidature should assist in addressing many of these issues.

503



Resources

Q11. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about resources and support in the past 12 months? The responses in relation to Resources (Table 2) were generally good, although 21% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that there was appropriate financial support for their research. Possible areas for continued improvement are in setting out minimum resource requirements for candidates and our responsiveness when approached for support, with some individuals reporting poor experiences (see Q12.) when dealing with the Research Office.


504



Q12. If you have any additional comments about resources, please write them here.

There were 13 responses to this question. The positive feedback focussed entirely on the Library services

and PD workshops although one respondent found the Library website ‘clunky’ and felt that they had not had

adequate access to online articles. Again, the negative responses appeared to be isolated and to reflect

poor individual experiences rather than a general trend. Themes included: lack of access to clear information

about what is available and the need to ‘push’ to get outcomes, lack of responsiveness from the Research

Office (RO) and not feeling connected to the RO, difficulty navigating the website to access things like travel

plans and software when working off-campus.

Intellectual Climate

Q13. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the intellectual

climate at Charles Sturt University in the past 12 months?

The data in Table 3 shows that the overall satisfaction with the intellectual climate is quite low. With 10-20%

of respondents indicating they ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’ with the five statements. This indicates that

there is need for more focus on creating opportunities for students to engage with their peers and other

researchers at school, faculty, and university level.


Q14. If you have any additional comments about the intellectual climate at Charles Sturt, please write them here.

‘I do not know a single other PhD student at Charles Sturt.’

505



This stood out as one of the most concerning of all the comments offered by respondents in this survey. All of the 15 respondents to this question expressed similar sentiments, especially for those enrolled off-campus. They used words like isolated, siloed, minimal support, disappointed, irrelevant.

These responses indicate there is a need for continued efforts to provide support that is tailored to replicate or at the very least approximate the on-campus experience for those students studying off-campus. Some progress is being made in this area with the introduction of HDR Connect, PGSA, DocFest and the planned Peer-to-peer mentoring programme and schools and faculties also need to continue with Faculty HDR forums and other initiatives to provide consistent and inclusive collegial experiences for all of their HDR candidates.

Progress and Assessment

Q15. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your progress and assessment in the past 12 months?

The responses found in Table 4 indicate that overall students are satisfied however the lower average for the fourth statement about final assessment is supported by similar results from the 2020 PREQ in relation to the examination process and suggests this is an area for further work.


Q16. If you have any additional comments about progress and assessment, please write them here.

Ten of the eleven respondents to this question used terms like lack of clarity, unclear, and not entirely clear in their responses. The table above shows this to be particularly the case in relation to final assessment (examination). Access to clear, consistent, and easy to find information appears to be needed from early in the candidature. Some dissatisfaction with the content of Inductions was also expressed but this was countered by other equally positive comments about Induction and PD workshops. The desirability of having access to Inductions and other PD outside of business hours was also raised.

A number of comments were received about a lack of clarity around the examination process, and other expectations and where to find accurate information. One respondent reported the lack of clarity about the difference between a thesis and exegesis and there were several comments about difficulties in navigating and accessing information on the website.

506



‘A workshop on using the Charles Sturt website would be useful, especially if it were delivered at a speed suitable for novice users.’

Feedback and Resources

Q17. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about feedback and responsibilities as you have experienced them in the past 12 months

The responses in Table 5 are in relation to feedback and resources are generally positive overall although responses to the first and last statements indicate that more work is needed around communications and listening to the student voice.

Table 5. Responses from Q17

Q18. If you have any additional comments about feedback mechanisms and student/staff responsibilities, please write them here.

Overwhelmingly the responses to this question reflected a need for more clarity around expectations and the supervisory relationship.

‘There could be more clarity around what the supervisor's responsibilities to HDRs actually is.’

Accessing support and information and knowing who to go to get that support was also a common theme in these responses whether it be for ethics, mental health, or student concerns.

507



Research Skills

Q19. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your research

skills development over the past 12 months?

The responses to the statements about the development of research skills shown in Table 6 suggest that

overall students feel well support and confident about this aspect of their HDR programme.


Q20. If you have any additional comments about research skills development, please write them here.

The responses in this and the next section highlighted several issues. Firstly, there appears to be a lack of understanding of what the terms professional development (PD) and research skills development refer to and a lack of awareness of what the role of PD is within the HDR candidature and beyond. Comments from those studying Professional Doctorates or with previous project management experience reflected a view that they did not require any further research skills training or research PD as they were already professionals in their field.

‘I don't understand the focus of this survey on non-degree areas like PD’

‘I have decades of experience in project management, so this project does not require new skills.’

‘I also don't have need of professional development as I am never going to be working in the research field at university.’

508



A lack of awareness about the training and resources available at Charles Sturt was also common with one respondent saying that they found it easier to access at other universities than at Charles Sturt.

There was also the view expressed again that the Charles Sturt website was difficult to navigate, and that finding professional development resources online was difficult.

‘…the website needs a HDR just to negotiate.’

For students studying part-time (and usually with work or other commitments during the day) accessing PD sessions conducted during normal business hours was problematic.

There were also several mentions of the need for support and training for qualitative research methods and ethics. This seems to be more a matter of communication as PD sessions for both of these are regularly offered.

Several respondents indicated a lack of support from their supervisory team in exploring further professional development and career options. Concern about lack of employment opportunities in academia was also expressed.

Professional Development

Q21. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your professional development over the past 12 months?

The data shown in Table 8 suggests that students are not engaging with their professional development as much as we would like. For newer initiatives such as the Individual Development Plan (IDP), Vitae and PostAc this is not surprising. However, when these results are filtered for stage of candidature (Table 7) the findings suggest that the work we are doing through the Induction and other communications channels to promote these activities is seeing a better uptake of the IDP and engagement with Vitae with newer students than with the mid and late candidature students.

Table 7. Engagement with Professional Development filtered by candidature stage

PD Programme Early Candidature Mid Candidature Later Candidature

IDP 46.8% 42.8% 25%

Vitae 32% 24% 10%

509




Q22. During the past 12 months (or since commencing your research degree programmeme if that is more recent) approximately how many days have you spent on research skills training or other continuing professional development activities?

Table 9 shows data from Q22 indicating the time they have spent on their PD. As discussed below, there is some evidence that what respondents consider to be skills training and PD may not be consistent with what the university includes in under these umbrella titles and so it is possible that students are doing more PD than they have included in these responses. When filtered for part-time and full-time there is, surprisingly, a substantial number of part-time students reported doing almost the same number of days of PD as their full-time counterparts (Table 10). There is also a significant difference in the days of PD undertaken by students who are enrolled to study on-campus as opposed to those off-campus.

510




Table 10. Time spent on Professional development filtered by candidature mode

Time spent on PD Part-time Full-time Off Campus On-campus

Less than 1 day 18% 4.5% 11.43% 2.8%

1-4 days 33% 34% 30% 40%

More than 5 days 50% 61.5% 52.8 57.5%

Q23. If you have any additional comments about professional development, please write them here.

The ability to access PD and training due to work commitments and a lack of awareness of what PD was available were key themes in these responses. Several respondents indicated they were not familiar with specific resources mentioned such as Vitae and PostAc. This suggests we need to continue with our communication efforts about these resources and the messaging about why PD is important. As many of our HDR candidates are studying part-time while working during the day the demand for PD to be delivered out of hours or recordings to be made more accessible appears to be strong.

More information about the types of PD activities undertaken by students will be useful and should be added

to future surveys.

Opportunities

Q24. Please indicate which of the following opportunities you have experienced or would like to

experience.

The data in Table 11 shows that students are very keen to participate in a wide range of opportunities to

support their candidature and also their professional development. Of note is the high level of interest in

publishing, participating in conferences and communicating to non-academic audiences. There is also

strong interest in mentoring. The lower level of interest in internships or workplace engagement is also

notable as this suggests we will need to do more work to promote the benefits of this to students and to

those who influence them.

511




Q25. If you have further comments about opportunities, please write them here.

The responses here indicated that HDR candidates are wanting more support and guidance including in

relation to careers and mentoring and opportunities to communicate their research.

Other comments in this section suggest that the support HDR students receive from their supervisors has a significant impact on whether or not they see value in or access these opportunities.

Overall Experience

Q26. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your HDR programme overall?

The overall satisfaction rankings shown in Table 12 show that over 85% of respondents agree or strongly

agree with the statement ‘overall I am satisfied with the experience of my HDR programme’. They also

suggest that almost 10% of respondents were not satisfied with the experience of their HDR programme and

512



over 12% would not recommend Charles Sturt to others to do an HDR. Some insights into the reasons for

this may be found in responses to Q28.


Q27. What have been the positive aspects in your HDR programme experience so far?

Overwhelmingly supervision and support from supervisors was the most common theme of the 68 responses to this question as this word cloud shows. Also frequently mentioned where: academic writing, PD and skills training, library,

Q28: What areas could be improved based on your HDR programme experience so far?

Four main themes came through in the 62 responses to this question.

Firstly, that there is a lack of clarity around expectations for the HDR. This includes the thesis itself, administrative requirements, timelines, available resources and support, information about safety and wellbeing, compulsory units for coursework, ethics and travel and expense funds. Whilst all of this information is accessible from the student portal and the website it appears that students are struggling to navigate these platforms. As a solution a review of the website from the perspective of a new user with limited online literacy should be conducted and consideration should be given to moving ahead with the development of a Student Handbook where all of this information can be found.

Secondly, whilst overall there was a very positive response to the supervision experience there were a number of students who expressed that their supervisors where inexperienced, required more training, or

513



had limited expertise in their research area. These maybe isolated cases but they highlight the need for ongoing work in this area.

Thirdly, was the theme of isolation and the desire for greater connection with their peers. This included social and cultural engagement but also opportunities to interact outside of their immediate academic disciplines. The difficulty in communicating with such a dispersed cohort via virtual media was also highlighted and particularly with COVID restrictions in place. Initiatives such as the HDR Newsletter, HDR Connect, PGSA, DocFest and REACH Peer-to-peer mentoring helping to address these concerns, but ongoing work is needed.

The fourth theme was around the availability of support resources. This included more individual support for ethics applications, research methods, IT and software.

One positive aspect of this feedback is that for most of these issues we have already begun or have plans to implement initiatives to address these concerns. These are detailed further in the Discussion and Recommendations section.

Personal Outlook

Q29. For each of the following statements to what extent do you agree or disagree that overall, in the

past 12 months:

The following two questions sought to gain an understanding about the students overall personal outlook and

the things that may be impacting on them. The data here suggests that a lack of connection was a key area

of concern and this is also reflected in the comments in Q30.


Q30. If you have any additional comments about your personal outlook, please write them here.

The data from Q29. suggests that many students are experiencing struggles with work-life balance and

feeling disconnected. The responses in this section may have been influenced by the circumstances of

514



COVID-19 however, the desire to be more connected and have more support as the word cloud below

shows, is a theme that has come up in this survey and across a range of surveys with HDR candidates in the

past 12 months.

Q31. In the past 12 months have you considered, for any reason, leaving your HDR programme?


When filtered for part-time and full-time enrolment there is no significant difference from the overall results to this question with 26% of part-time respondents and 21% of full-time respondents saying ‘Yes’.

The students surveyed had not withdrawn at the time of the survey and so it maybe that they were able to work through some of their main concerns. It will be useful to evaluate how these numbers compare with actual withdrawals for the year.

Q32. If you wish, please write your reasons or significant factors for considering leaving your HDR programme.

Over 25% of all respondents said they had considered leaving their HDR programme in the past year.

The most common reasons given in the 32 responses to Q23 were:

• Work pressures and work life balance

• Uncertain job prospects

• Health- own or family member

• Isolation

• Lack of support or guidance from supervisors

• Frustration with the process and cost

• Disruption to research due to COVID

The responses suggest that generally it is issues outside of the university’s control such as health or family

concerns that are deciding factors. There were a couple of respondents who expressed more specific

concerns about supervision and their research more generally, but these seem to be isolated rather than a

general issue.

515



Paid Employment

These questions about paid employment were included so as we could gain insights into how our students are juggling their research programmes and other commitments.

Q33. Are you currently in paid employment?

These statistics in Table 15 show that a large proportion of HDR candidates are working as well as studying. An analysis filtering with enrolment variables shows of those who responded ‘Yes’, 31.82% were enrolled Full-time and of that group over 42% reported normally working more than 21 hours per week. Table 15. Currently in paid employment

73.77% of those who responded ‘Yes’ are enrolled Part-time and of those over 86% reported normally working more than 21 hours per week.

Juggling these work hours with an HDR programme will no doubt prove challenging for many students and perhaps explains why work-life balance was a key factor cited by students for considering withdrawing. It will also have implications for the delivery of PD training and other programmes during business hours with over 76% of students combining more than 21 hours employment per week with their research programme (Table 16).

Q34. How many hours do you normally work in an average week?

Table 16. Average weekly hours worked

5. Discussion and Recommendations

The data from the 2020 GRES is overall very positive and suggests that in the main students are happy with the support they are receiving and the progress they are making.

Table 17 shows the weighted average results in the six main areas and Overall Satisfaction.

516



Table 17. Weighted averages

Supervision Resources and Support

Intellectual Climate

Progress and Assessment

Feedback and Responsibilities

Research Skills

Overall Satisfaction

4.22 4.00 3.6 4.08 4.15 4.26 4.08

Of note is the very high weighted average for Supervision and Research Skills which indicates that overwhelming our students are very happy with their supervisory support and how they are developing as researchers. The weighted average related to Intellectual Climate stands out as being lower than all other areas. This may be as a result of COVID-19 but it also reflects similar findings in both the Smythe Review and previous PREQ results.

Generally, negative comments appear to be one or two isolated cases and not a reflection of the wider experience although there are several areas where there appears to be issues that need to be addressed. These can be summarised under four main themes: expectations, website, engagement, and professional development. Pleasingly, a number of new initiatives have already been put in place or are in the planning stages that should go along way to doing that.

Expectations There appears to be a need for more clarity about expectations in a number of areas. Firstly, in relation to supervision, students are unsure of what they can and should expect from their supervisors. Whilst the new EACP provides a guide for conversations about these issues, students may be unsure about what they are able to ask from their supervisors in relation to meetings and feedback. More clarity could be added to the HDR Induction as a guide for students. Secondly, more clarity on the expectations and differences between a thesis, exegesis and thesis by publication is needed and timelines and process around examination, feedback and review. The proposed new HDR Student Handbook should also include clear information about these matters.

Recommendation 1: Developing a HDR student handbook that links as a partner document to the website and Induction training and provides clear details about the candidature lifecycle, milestones, and exceptions.

Website Many students commented on having difficulties navigating the website to find the information and resources they require. This may be partly due to a lack of clear and easy to navigate links, language barriers and inconsistent information and terminology. We should also be careful about assuming that all of our HDR candidates are accustomed to navigating the online space and provide guidance and alternatives where possible.

Recommendation 2: A full review of all of the HDR resources and the website Internet Architecture so that information is clear and easy to access from a number of possible pathways. Work has already begun on this, but it is important that it is undertaken from the perspective of someone who is unfamiliar with the website or the information that is available.

Lack of connectedness Many students commented in feeling isolated and disconnected from their peers. This sentiment was picked up on during 2020 and as a result a number of initiatives to provide opportunities for students to engage have already been started. These include: HDR Connect, a fortnightly online support group where HDR can meet, discuss their research, or just share experiences; Post-graduate Student Association; HDR Newsletter (monthly); and a Graduate Research Facebook Group. The reintroduction of DocFest in 2021 has also provided a point of contact for many that will be built on and there has been a reinvigoration of many of the online writing groups. Whilst many of these initiatives only reach a small number of students, they are working together to build a sense of community.

517



A new initiative rolling-out in August 2021 is REACH P2P- a peer to peer mentoring programme for HDR students- will further add to this engagement. The ongoing work of the Graduate Studies Engagement Officer, working with the Professional Development and Communications team and the Graduate Studies team as well as other key stakeholders across the university help to build on the momentum in these areas.

The relatively poor result in relation to Intellectual Climate also reflects the lack of opportunity that is afforded to students to connect with their peers and other researchers within their schools and faculties.

Recommendation 3: That all the current initiatives to support and grow student engagement that have been put in place or are in development phase continue to be supported and developed moving forward.

Recommendation 4: That work be done with the Office of Research and Graduate Studies, faculties, and schools to look at developing a strategic and sustained programme of events that facilitate the development of the intellectual climate for HDR students and provide opportunities for students to engage and share their research.

Professional Development There appears to be a need for clearer articulation of we mean by the term Professional Development. Its current use at Charles Sturt includes all inductions, training and workshops offered through the PD calendar, experiential activities such as presenting at or attending a seminar or conference, networking, media, academic writing, industry engagement and much more. There is a sense from comments in the survey that this is not fully understood. The PD team need to work to more clearly communicate this as well as the value of ongoing learning and skill development.

Access to PD outside of normal business hours for the many students who are combining their work with study should be offered as much as is possible. More flexible, individualised and ‘just in time’ delivery options should be explored to make PD sessions as accessible as possible.

Recommendation 5: Review how we currently communicate about PD and skills training and industry engagement and ensure that we are clearly articulating what we mean when we use these terms.

Recommendation 6: Continue efforts to educate supervisors and students about the purpose and value of PD through all available communication channels.

Recommendation 7: That the PD look at ways to make sessions more accessible to students including options for out of hours delivery, recorded sessions, shorter modules that can be curated and taken as needed by students to allow ‘just in time’ delivery.

Overall, the GRES 2020 has proved to be a valuable resource that provides some clear insights into our HDR student experience and highlights a number of areas where we can provide greater support or modify current services or support to be more accessible. The results support the need for many of the new initiatives that have already begun or are planned for implementation in the coming few months.

The data from GRES 2020 will also provide a solid benchmark form which to measure the impacts of changes and new initiatives over time and also as a comparison with other external surveys such as PREQ.

Suggested changes to the survey tool for the 2021 survey are:

1. Refining questions to ensure plain language is used and that it is clear what is meant by terms such as professional development.

2. Collect additional data about the types of PD students are undertaking and form where they are sourcing it

3. Collecting additional data about barriers to accessing PD 4. Collecting data about the impacts of COVID-19 5. Changing the participant information to stipulate that data may be used in external publications 6. Implement a more rigorous communications strategy, including working with key stakeholders within

schools and faculties, and incentivise participation to reach the target sample size of 50% of the population.

518



6. 2021 GRES Timeline

June- July Complete analysis and report on 2020 GRES

August Review and revision of survey question

Revision of support material and participant information statement

September Approval for changes from HDRC

Submit amendments to HREC for approval

October Implement Communications with key stakeholders

November Offer 2021 GRES to all current HDR students from 22nd November

December Close 2021 GRES on 24th December

519

Item 23: Other Business

520

Item 24: Meeting Summation

521

Item 25: Next Meeting

2022 Please note that the closing date for all agenda items is now 2 weeks and 2 days.

No. Date Time Location Agenda Close

25 Friday 25 February 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference Wednesday 9 February

26 Friday 29 April 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference Wednesday 13 April

27 Friday 24 June 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference Wednesday 8 June

28 Friday 2 September 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference Wednesday 17 August

29 Friday 4 November 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference Wednesday 19 October

No. Date Time Location Agenda Close

19 Friday 26 February 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference 12 February

20 Friday 16 April 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference 2 April

21 Friday 25 June 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference 11 June

22 5 July Flying Minute

23 Friday 3 September 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference 20 August

24 Friday 5 November 9.30am – 12.30pm Videoconference 22 October

522

Item 26: Director, Research Services Report

The report from the Director, Research Services will be circulated as a late paper.


523

university research committee meeting no. 24

Documents