Murdoch University Senate

This is the first meeting of Senate for the Acting Vice Chancellor (Professor Mal Nairn), who commenced on 4 February, and for Ms Candice Heedes, a new student member elected for the calendar year 2002.

This is the last Senate meeting for Ms Helen Shurven (who has indicated her intention to resign from Senate on 28 February) and Ms Mara West (whose term expires on 30 March, and who is not seeking re-election). Elections are underway to fill both vacancies. Nominations close on 8 March.

Attached is a fold-out A3 sheet containing photographs of all Senators. This is designed to assist Senators, especially the newer ones, to know all their fellow Senators.

Enclosed are profiles and photographs of all Senators, and a similar document for members of the senior executive.

Mr Macpherson and Mr Pett have recorded their apologies for this meeting, as both of them will be overseas. Any further apologies received after the circulation of the agenda will be reported to the meeting.

The Chancellor will ask whether any Senators have an interest to declare concerning any items on this agenda. Senate has adopted the following statement on conflict of interest:

Senators have a duty to place the interests of the University before their own personal advantage (financial or otherwise) and the advantage of any other person or organisation (including the group that elected or appointed the Senator). Possible conflicts of interest include:

• employment by, shareholding in or directorship of a company dealing with the University

• membership of a body that is in competition or conflict with Murdoch University

• for Murdoch staff members, out-sourcing or restructuring of their work sections

• any matter under discussion that would result in personal financial advantage

• government officials who are responsible for an aspect of policy or operations which affects a matter under consideration by the University

A matter which arises from membership of the group qualifying the Senator for election to Senate, and which is not otherwise special or personal to the Senator, is not a conflict of interest. (Examples could include students voting on assessment policy, or staff voting on a salary increase for all staff.)

At the start of each meeting of Senate and its committees, Senators must declare the nature, character and extent of any conflict of interest. In case of doubt, it is best to acknowledge possible conflict of interest. When conflict of interest is identified the Chair (subject to the views of the meeting) may ask the Senator to leave while the item of business is discussed; to participate in the discussion but withdraw from the meeting before the vote; to stay but not participate in the debate; or to stay with full rights to debate and vote. Where there is a significant conflict of interest, future papers on this matter might not be made available to the Senator concerned.

All declarations of interest shall be minuted, along with any ensuing action.

In addition, if any member of staff presenting a proposal to Senate or one of its committees has a conflict of interest, the person must declare that interest at the meeting.

Last year Senate resolved that at its first meeting each year, Senate receive from the Vice Chancellor an address on the State of the University and an updated analysis of issues affecting the University’s external environment. The former was already the practice of the then Vice Chancellor, and assists Senate fulfil its role of focusing on strategic issues. Senate also resolved that at the same meeting, Senate identify any key strategic issues which it wishes to discuss during the coming year, and allocate responsibility for preparing discussion papers on them.

The Acting Vice Chancellor will report orally with a powerpoint presentation. An updated environmental analysis will be distributed at that time.

The Deputy Vice Chancellor will give a presentation on the status of development of the new Strategic Plan. The same presentation was given at Academic Council on 30 January. Council’s response is recorded at 6276 in its minutes [item 17 in these Senate agenda papers]. Senate is advised this is work in progress; frank feedback is sought, as that would be most useful in the development of the new strategic plan.

The following extract from the November Senate minutes outlines the views expressed then:

Senate noted a summary of the Strategic Plan workshop held on 12 October. The Acting Vice Chancellor gave an oral report on the outcomes of the executive retreat on strategic planning held on 25-26 November. The suggested theme for the University is sustainability: ecological, economic, technological, cultural and social. This would build on the University’s strengths. It will be part of a presentation on 6 December to the 73 participants in the recent strategic planning workshop, after which it may be reworked and broader consultations held on campus. It is proposed to conduct market research on this theme, before any decision is made. The Chancellor, who had attended the retreat, supported the proposed theme as providing a logical focus for the University, which needs to establish a clearer identity for itself.

A number of points were made during the ensuing discussion: what is the size of the market for such a theme; will it attract international students; what size should the University aim to grow to (one Senator equated growth with survival, while another argued this should not be accepted without debate); the importance of the University’s reputation in the market, in order to recruit students; what sorts of jobs will there be in 5-10 years from now; the need to establish a niche or reputation in WA that distinguishes the University from its competitors; why the market seems to see Murdoch as third; ways of capturing more of the mature-age market; why the University is regarded as not so attractive by school leavers; what market share to aim for; the University should countenance the unthinkable; and the need first to debate a vision for the University, and only after then, strategies.

In reply, the Acting Vice Chancellor suggested that the University should consider what percentage of its intake it should aim to be first preference (currently this is 77%); differentiation should make the University more competitive; and the University’s educational profile is sufficiently broad for a rich undergraduate experience. He invited Senators who are interested to attend the December 6 presentation, and indicated that a presentation on strategic planning might be held for Senators in January or February, before Senate next meets.

Stemming from the review of Senate last year, Senate resolved that each year it should set its priorities for the coming year, i.e. goals for Senate, in addition to any for the University. This involves considering what issues it needs to address in order that Senators can fulfil their fiduciary duties and best add value to the University.

Senate also resolved that it should identify any key strategic issues which it wishes to discuss during the coming year, and allocate responsibility for preparing discussion papers on them.

The September meeting of Senate agreed to annually review the University’s performance in each of nine key areas: campus infrastructure, community relations, finances, international operations, research, risk management, staff, students, and teaching and learning. These reviews will take the following form:

• Be on financial and operational performance against the key strategic objectives of the University, centred on agreed Key Performance Indicators to include past performance and future goals.

• Include an executive summary sheet, comparative data for the university sector, and graphical representation of key data.

• Be accompanied by a discussion paper on key issues for the University in this area. At the preceding Senate meeting, Senate will be invited to consider any issues it wishes included in that paper.

• The report will be listed as a major item for discussion, in the first part of the agenda.

The next meeting of Senate will review the University’s research performance. In accordance with the Senate resolution, the meeting is invited to consider any issues it wishes to be included in the discussion paper.

[Note:

The February meeting of Senate was going to review the University’s financial performance. However, that has been held over till the April meeting, as the annual financial statements for 2001 are not ready yet.]

9.1 Academic Audit Report

As preparation for the compulsory audits of universities to be conducted every five years by the new Australian Universities Quality Agency, last year the New Zealand Universities Academic Audit Unit was commissioned by the Vice Chancellor to conduct an academic audit of this University. The ensuing report was copied to Senators in May.

The Chancellor has asked that Senate receive a progress report on implementation of the recommendations of that report, so Senate can be assured that the university will be well positioned for the forthcoming AUQA audit of the University. That audit will be held in 2003, 2004, 2005 or 2006. Attached is a progress report from the Academic Quality Audit Committee.

9.2 Review of Academic Council

One of the recommendations of the NZ audit team was that "Murdoch clarify its expectations of Academic Council, and then reflect on whether these would be better served by a different composition". Attached is a paper proposing Senate and Academic Council agree to establish a joint working party to review Academic Council.

[Note:

At the last Senate meeting, the President of Academic Council undertook to report to the February meeting of Senate on the outcome of the academic restructuring process last year. The Divisions have not yet completed the 2001 exercise. In light of the difficulty in generating accurate cost information for the first time, and the sensitivity of the outcomes, the Divisions have been given an extension until the March meeting of Academic Council. The President expects to be able to report to Senate on the outcome at that time.]

11.      OFFSHORE OPERATIONS [Senate will move into committee]

The October meeting of Senate requested the Acting Vice Chancellor to report to this Senate meeting on the progress of the implementation of procedures outlined in the Vice Chancellor’s report to the offshore working party dated 11 September 2001. It also resolved that the report be submitted to Senate via the offshore working party.

This report is attached as a confidential paper. The working party has seen the report; its suggestions have been incorporated in the final version.

Senate is asked to move into committee for this item. The meeting is asked to allow the President of Academic Council and the Executive Dean of the Division of Business, IT and Law to remain for this item.

On the recommendation of Academic Council and Legislation Committee, the November meeting of Senate approved amendments to Statutes and Regulations to accommodate changes in University terminology from "programme" to "major". The Murdoch University Act requires that the changes be ratified at a Senate meeting no later than ten weeks after the meeting that approved the changes. As there was an interval of thirteen weeks between the November and February meetings, the matter has to be approved again by Senate. [An amendment to this clause, increasing the interval to 16 weeks, is contained in the Statutes (Repeals and Minor Amendments) Bill 2001. However, that Bill has yet to complete its passage through State Parliament.]

Senate therefore is invited to approve the following changes to Statutes:

Statute No. 5 – Academic Council
1.	The Academic Council shall be a committee constituted by this Statute for the purposes of section 18(1) of the Act and is the principal academic body of the University. Subject to the authority of the Senate, the functions of the Academic Council are:
	(b)	to determine the programmes of study courses and majors to be offered by the University, subject to the authority of the Vice Chancellor as academic principal and chief executive officer of the University;

Statute No. 11 – Admissions

1.

The Academic Council shall be responsible for determining: (a) policy on the academic aspects of admission of students to the University, and (b) which programmes of study courses and majors shall have a quota limiting the total number of students who may be admitted. The Council may delegate this authority to a committee of the University. Every such delegation shall be revocable by the Council, and no delegation shall prevent the Council carrying out the responsibilities imposed on it by this Statute.

Statute No. 20 – Examinations

5.	Notwithstanding the other terms of this Statute, a student may be appointed to a Board or Committee to consider an appeal by another student
	(a)	against a final assessment where the grounds of appeal include grounds other than only a request for a second assessment of the student’s performance;
	(b)	against exclusion from a programme of study course or major or from the University due to unsatisfactory academic progress.

In accordance with s.25 of the Murdoch University Act, approval of the Statute changes requires the support of an absolute majority of members of the Senate.