temc 2010 presentation: benchmarking to

+

Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy FrameworksBrigid Freeman, University of Tasmania

Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010Crown Convention Centre, Crown Promenade Hotel 3 - 6 October 2010

+

University Policy Benchmarking Project Examine the state of policy and policy

development in Australasian universities Identify good practice exemplars and

features Identify quality resources supporting the

University Policy Development Cycle Establish models for university policy

management Apply the findings of the research to

contribute to the University of Tasmania Policy on Policy review

Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy FrameworksBrigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+

Research Sample 13 universities spanning all Australian

States and Territories (except Tasmania) 3 universities from New Zealand Both ‘sandstone’ and ‘red-brick’

universities Research-intensive and other universities Single and dual-sector universities Metropolitan and regional universities and One private university


+

Research Focus University Policy Frameworks and Policy on

Policy statements University Policy Repositories University Policy Websites Policy Toolkits Core sample of specific policy statements

(Plagiarism, Environmental Sustainability, Leave Without Pay, Credit)


+“Policy is rather like an elephant – you recognise it when you see it but cannot easily define it”

(Cunningham, 1963, p229 cited in Hill, 1997, p6).

+

What is Policy?Learning from public policy literature …

“Statement of government intent” (Althaus, Bridman and Davis, 2007)

“A promise underlies public policy: If the actions we recommend are undertaken, good … consequences … will actually come about” (Wildavsky, 2007)

“Regulation (the stick), economic means (the carrot) and information (the sermon)” (Verdung, 2007)

Guba (1984) “an assertion of intents or goals; a governing body’s ‘standing decisions’ by which it regulates, controls, promotes, services and otherwise influences matters within its sphere of authority; a guide … a strategy … sanctioned behaviour, formally … or informally … (or) a norm of conduct, characterised by consistency and regularity, in some substantive action area”.


+

Policy Development Process Dror (1971) advises that “… very little can be

done to improve policies by more than incremental bits without reforming the policymaking system, that is, without considering and improving meta-policy”

Early policy process theoretical framework development (Lasswell, 1956; Brewer, 1974)

Bridgman and Davis (1998) developed the Australian Policy Cycle heuristic, stating that “Good process is the foundation for good policy” (1998)


+

Contextualising University Policy Development

Commonwealth Government higher education public policy

Dawkins ‘Unified National System’ (1988) Increased reporting and accountability

requirements Outcomes from Bradley Review Ongoing Commonwealth Government policy

reform Establishment of Tertiary Education Quality

and Standards Agency (TEQSA) Academic standards debates


+University Policy Frameworks

Define university policy Establish the range of policy instruments (e.g. Policy, Procedure, Guidelines) Specify approval authorities for all policy instruments (e.g. Council, VC,

Senate) Identify University Policy Development Cycle stages (or other policy process)

and Define the application of policy instruments (University-wide or section-

specific/local)

Click icon to add picture


+Universities refer to ‘Policy’ broadly

and use a variety of terms …


+

Hierarchy of Instruments, Approval Authorities and Application

Table 2: Hierarchy of Instruments, Approval Authorities and Application

+

Understanding the UTAS Hierarchy Table 3: University of Tasmania Hierarchy of Instruments,

Approval Authorities and Application

+

Using Benchmarking to Enhance the UTAS Policy on Policy (refer: Policy Development and Review Policy)

Confirmed need to establish a comprehensive University Policy Framework (in Policy on Policy) which:

Defines University policy

Establishes the range of policy instruments

Specifies approval authorities for all policy instruments

Identifies policy development cycle stages and

Defines the application of policy instruments (i.e. university-wide and/or section-specific)


+

University Policy Development Cycle (Models Identified)


Model 1 Majority Most of: drafting, consultation, approval, promulgation and review

Model 2 Some Most stages from Model 1, and one or more of: identification of policy requirements, nomination of responsible officers, endorsement, implementation, records management

Model 3 Few Most stages from Models 1 and 2, and one or more of: benchmarking, revision, quality control, monitoring, evaluation

Table 4: University Policy Development Cycle Stages: Models 1, 2 and 3

+

Using Benchmarking to Enhance the UTAS Policy Cycle(refer: Policy Development and Review Policy)

Cautionary note … Cycle not necessarily sequential; intentionally iterative

University Policy Development Cycle

Identification of Policy Requirements Nomination of Policy Owner and Policy Delegate Drafting Benchmarking Consultation Revision Endorsement Quality Control Approval Promulgation Implementation Implementation and Compliance Monitoring Implementation and Compliance Evaluation Review and Records Management


+

Policy Websites‘Good practice’ skeleton University Policy Website: University Policy Framework University Policy on Policy University Policy Repository Policy Toolkit Policy News Records Management Legislation Governance Delegations of Authority Codes of Conduct and Charters University Plans and University Committees Agreements Contact Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy FrameworksBrigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+Using Benchmarking to Enhance the UTAS Policy Website ( http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy)


http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy

+

Policy Repositories University Policy Repositories provide the

authoritative source for University-wide policy documentation

May be complemented by local collections of policy documentation (including local policy)

Presentation under policy themes or organisational lines also useful

UTAS Policy Repository reflects the lack of progress in developing a comprehensive suite of Teaching and Learning, research and administrative policy in accordance with the Policy on Policy


+

Using Benchmarking to Enhance the UTAS Policy Repository (http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy)

University Policy Repository Over time, the UTAS Policy

Repository will provide the authoritative source of UTAS Policy, Procedures and Guidelines

Changes were made to capture all ‘approved’ policies (approved list) and a large number of ‘old’ policy documents (both are in the ‘alpha list’)

Information was included regarding the ‘status’ of various policy projects (i.e. ‘approved’, or ‘old’ / needing to be transferred)

Policy contacts details were addedBenchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy FrameworksBrigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010


+

Using Benchmarking to Enhance the UTAS Policy Toolkit(http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy )

Policy Toolkits – Good Features …

Policy Templates Policy Submission Coversheets Policy Review Submission

Coversheets (i.e. no/minor/major amendment)

Policy Dictionary or Glossary of Policy Terms and Acronyms

Policy Implementation Feedback or Issues Log

Information Sessions, Policy Workshops and capacity building

Policy Evaluation and Review Guide Frequently Asked Questions



+

Benchmarking Four Discrete Policies Plagiarism Policy Environment Policy Leave Without Pay Policy Credit Policy


Benchmarking Method

+

Learning from Specific Policies – Plagiarism Policy

Model Academic Integrity (Plagiarism) Policy Educative, non-legalistic terms Define plagiarism Staff and student responsibilities Procedures for educating students Procedures for investigating and assessing Differential responses Refer student appeal/grievance procedures Central register or database Position regarding detection softwareUTAS – Develop Academic Integrity (Plagiarism) Policy Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy FrameworksBrigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+

Learning from Specific Policies – Environment Policy

Model Environment Policy Manage University’s natural environment Manage University’s developed environment Manage University’s use of natural resources Environmental focus for T&L and research Environmental emergency procedures Interdependence of physical and cultural

environments NZ – Treaty of Waitangi provisions

UTAS – Review Policy and GLP


+

Learning from Specific Policies – Leave Without Pay Policy

Model Leave Without Pay Policy Compliance Purposes Eligibility and assessment criteria Minimum / maximum time limits Approval authority Impact on other entitlements Superannuation arrangements Responsibilities Application procedure Advice

UTAS – Review Policy


+

Learning from Specific Policies – Credit Policy

Themes identified

Qualification portability and articulation (VET ↔ HE)

Inter-sectoral linkages and collaboration Recognition of various modes of formal and

informal learning Efficiencies in education and training system Role of credit and RPL in integrity Capacity for RPL as equity mechanism

UTAS – Develop Credit Transfer / RPL Policy


+‘Skeleton Benchmarking Method’(Benchmarking stage of University Policy Development Cycle)


+

Benchmarked Good Practice Clear definitions Clear range and application of instruments Clear approval authorities Articulate policy development process Genuine consultation Cultural change Commitment to improved University

policy process


+

Lessons from Dror (1971)What is needed is “… an intense moral commitment to try to improve policymaking. … At the very best, changes in policymaking will be slow, inconsistent and sporadic. Even slow and minor changes in the quality of policymaking are a tremendous achievement … but the rate of progress – however significant – will hardly satisfy the hopes and ambitions of policy scientists. … they are going to be very frustrated persons, with all the accompanying dangers of getting cynical and apathetic, on one hand, or of despairing of their role as contributors of policy sciences and policymaking … on the other hand. A stoic view of reality combined with missionary devotion to the improvement of policymaking is required … in order to achieve long-range and insistent impact on policymaking” (p.75).

Thank you.Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy FrameworksBrigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

temc 2010 presentation: benchmarking to

Documents