Murdoch University Senate

The meeting received the report of a joint Senate/Academic Council working party which had reviewed Academic Council; the minute of Academic Council’s consideration of the report; and a paper on the role of Academic Boards that was presented to the National Conference on University Governance on 10 November. Introducing the report, its Chair (Dr Mike Partis) identified the issues as redefining Council’s statement of purpose, the size of Council (there is a clear view within the University that it is too large), adding Rockingham Campus representation on Council, including the past President of Council, and communication between Senate and Council. He acknowledged disquiet by students about the proposed reduction in their representation. The President of Council advised the meeting of Council’s response. Council had supported recommendation 1; made three amendments to recommendation 2 (removing the immediate past President of Council, retaining elected academic staff at 12 rather than having 3 of these positions filled by co-option, and reworking the basis of election of a Rockingham staff member); and did not support recommendation 3.

The working party’s first recommendation, on the role of Council, had been broadly supported.

Resolved: S/95/2002

to adopt the following statement of purpose for Academic Council (superseding that approved AC/35/1996): To discharge its statutory responsibilities under the Murdoch University Act and any other relevant legislation. To provide a forum for staff and student debate, acting as the collegial voice. Academic Council should be the main locus of opinion of the University community on all academic matters affecting the University. To give effect to those aspects within the University’s strategic plan, as approved by Senate, that fall within its jurisdiction. To decide academic policy matters, including setting academic planning priorities and ensuring the quality of academic activities. To advise the Senate and the Vice Chancellor on budgetary priorities in the formulation of the annual University budget. To advise the Senate and the Vice Chancellor (as appropriate) on the academic staffing policies of the University. To consider any matter referred to the Academic Council by the Senate or the Vice Chancellor.

Senate accepted Council’s recommendations that the immediate past President of Council be an official attendee rather than a member of Council, and that the basis of election of a Rockingham staff member on Council be considered further. A Senator suggested a six year sunset clause on the latter provision. Senate, by a large margin, rejected the working party’s proposal that three of the elected academic staff positions be changed to co-opted positions that could redress under-representation of particular disciplines and add staff with particular expertise. It was argued that an electoral process is more democratic, changing this would reduce the power of academic staff on Council, and that Council already has the power to co-opt individuals. [During the discussion it was clarified that the Murdoch University Act and the Academic Council Statute both give Council authority to co-opt.] The report proposed a reduction of student members of Council from six to four. A motion to have five student members, thereby retaining the student proportion of the total membership, was narrowly defeated. The meeting then supported the stance taken by Council on its membership.

Resolved: S/96/2002	(a)	that the composition of the Academic Council should be as follows:
		President of Academic Council Vice Chancellor Deputy Vice Chancellor Pro Vice Chancellor (Academic) Pro Vice Chancellor (Research) Pro Vice Chancellor (Regional Development) the Executive Deans Guild President Guild Education Vice-President 12 elected members of the academic staff 2 elected members of the general staff 1 elected undergraduate student 1 elected postgraduate student 1 elected representative of members of the academic staff with teaching responsibilities on the Rockingham Campus
	(b)	to request the University Secretary to determine a suitable mechanism for identifying the candidates eligible for election as a representative of the Rockingham Campus academic staff and method for election and to bring this to the January 2003 meeting of Academic Council for consideration;
	(c)	that transitional arrangements should be put in place to enable the new Academic Council composition to be phased in;
	(d)	to request the University Secretary to draft the consequential changes required to Statute No 5 Academic Council (including correction of the identified typographical error) and to submit the recommended changes to the January 2003 meeting of Academic Council.

[Note: The membership of Council will then decrease from 36 to 29 members. The changes from the current membership are a reduction of three elected academic staff members, two student members and one general staff member, the creation of a position for an academic elected by staff with teaching responsibilities on the Rockingham Campus, and the removal of the University Librarian and the PVC (Resource Management).]

The working party’s third recommendation was to establish a joint Senate/Academic Council steering committee to consider the business of both bodies and address any differences in opinion between the two. Council felt it was unnecessary to formalise the existing arrangements, which operate smoothly. Senate therefore let the recommendation lapse. The Chancellor advised that if later Council feels a need for a more formal mechanism, it is up to Council to flag it.

Senate recorded its appreciation to Dr Partis and the other members of the working party for their service.

The University Secretary reported on his attendance at the International Conference on Corporate Governance in Kuala Lumpur at the end of October, where he gave a paper on effective oversight by governing bodies. He also reported on a one and a half day AVCC University Governance Workshop on 8-9 November which identified the most important issues or topic areas in university governance and then workshopped best practice in these areas. The issues ranked as most important, in order, were: performance monitoring, oversight of commercialisation, strategy formulation, evaluation of Council effectiveness, and the role and duties of individual Councillors. The group plans to meet again early next year to finish off this work, which will feed into the planned national protocols on university governance. This meeting – the national meeting of secretaries of university Councils - to be hosted by Murdoch, will be in March or April.

The Chancellor reported on the AVCC National Conference on University Governance, which was held in Adelaide on 10-11 November. Quality management of governing bodies is firmly on the national agenda; if we do not make sure our standards of effectiveness in governance are very high, it is likely to be done for us. At the same time, there is some scepticism about how best this can be achieved. Given the bicameral governance structure, the effectiveness of Academic Council also needs monitoring. The head of DEST is focused on achieving smaller governing bodies and resolving what he sees as conflicts of interest. The Victorian government is pressing universities there to pay members of their governing bodies. The Chancellor also reported on the subsequent meeting of university Chancellors. That group saw little advantage in reducing the size of governing bodies, saw a need for attention to quality management in governance, will cooperate with University Secretaries in developing protocols for good governance, and may constitute themselves as a formal group when they next meet on 11 April in Brisbane.

The Pro Vice Chancellor (Regional Development), Professor Kateryna Longley, gave a presentation on developments at the Rockingham Campus since Senate was there last November, and at the Peel Campus the University shares with Challenger TAFE and Mandurah Senior College. She advised that the region (Kwinana, Rockingham and Peel) has a great need for a University presence; the University has a greater opportunity to be a transformational force there than at the Murdoch Campus, as the region has one of the lowest participation rates for higher education in Australia. She outlined the highlights of 2002, including equity programs, structured workplace learning, establishment of a regional Research Centre, community initiatives, bringing large numbers of people onto the campus for public events, student ambassadors, the introduction of primary teacher education (first preference applicants far exceed the number of places), and the recent Premier’s Award for Excellence. The region’s population is growing rapidly, and the University’s enrolments are growing also, hopefully reaching 1,000 next year. The University is surveying the Peel community about what the community would like the University to be offering there.

The Chancellor thanked Prof Longley and the other Rockingham Campus staff for a very successful year, in which the University has had a major impact there.

6.1 Murdoch University Foundation

The meeting noted the Vice Chancellor’s written report. There was one recommendation requiring Senate’s consideration.

Resolved: S/97/2002

to appoint Prof Ralph Simmonds as a trustee of the Murdoch University Foundation.

6.2 Administrative Reorganisation

The Vice Chancellor advised Senate that he had undertaken extensive consultations with Heads of Schools concerning proposals to reshape the academic Divisions in order to achieve administrative savings and a better focus on the directions the University will be taking. There would not be any staff loss or redundancies, as there is the opportunity for staff to take positions at the University that otherwise would be filled by external advertisement. It is proposed to consolidate the Divisions of BITL and SSHE, move Psychology and VBS into a new health sciences group, give Heads of Schools effective delegated powers, and focus Executive Deans more on inter-university matters, external work and generating income. The Divisional structure (if that nomenclature is retained) would be mainly for internal purposes, with external marketing being of courses and Schools, not Divisions. The Schools directly affected have all supported the changes. Discussions will proceed about implementation, with proposals on the number of Divisions and their nomenclature to come to Academic Council in the new year, for it to recommend to Senate.

Two issues were raised in discussion: the consultative process (whether the process had been sufficiently consultative, and the desirability of consulting the Guild about the effects on services to students); and whether combining the two biggest Divisions would lead to an imbalance. On the latter, the Vice Chancellor indicated that the three Divisions would have similar sized budgets (less than 25% difference), health sciences was likely to be the fastest growing group (and has pipeline growth), and administrative units should not be seen as the academic profile. A Senator expressed the view that the size of budgets might not be the best measure of managing structures, and that the size of the BITL/SSHE combination could pose difficulties. The Vice Chancellor responded that the quality of Heads of School, and their ability to be represented in the structure, are critical.

6.3 University Strategic Plan

The current Strategic Plan will expire at the end of this year. At its August meeting, Senate approved the Strategic Plan 2003-7 in principle. Following extensive consultations, a draft Strategic Plan was now before the meeting. This included a new goal on regional engagement, and operational plans (each with goals, strategies and targets) in the areas of education, research, management and regional engagement. Underneath this umbrella, Divisional Plans will be developed in 2003. The Deputy Vice Chancellor advised that the consultative process had been more thorough than when the previous Plan was drafted; people are more engaged; and a conscious effort had been made to have a slimmer document with quantitative targets.

Several suggestions were raised in the ensuing discussion: the Mission should include reference to interdisciplinarity approaches to teaching and learning; the Plan should include something on governance, and about the campus Masterplan; the curriculum page might include graduate attributes; and female representation in senior staff and on committees should be included. The Deputy Vice Chancellor undertook to amend page 22 to include mention of the master plan. A Senator commended the Plan for being much easier to work with than the previous Plan.

Upon the recommendation of the Vice Chancellor, Senate

RESOLVED S/98/2002	(a)	to approve the Draft Strategic Plan 2003-2007 [v.2.3] in principle;
	(b)	that final approval of the plan be postponed until the February meeting of Senate, when the outcome of the Commonwealth Review of Higher Education (Crossroads) will be known, and when further advice will be tendered about the status of the Masterplan.

The meeting noted the first report from the Campus Environment Committee. Introducing the report, the Chair of the Committee (Dr Michael McCall) advised that the University was fortunate to have such enthusiastic and committed people on the working parties established by the Committee. The Committee is currently documenting the present level of energy and water usage, waste generation and environmental degradation. At the same time it is establishing specific benchmarks against which change can be measured. Intervention has resulted in the introduction of passive solar principles in a building currently being planned for campus, and future planning will routinely incorporate environmental design. The Committee acknowledges that it must ensure that environmental responsibility is recognised across the campus; this will be one of its major tasks. A Senator suggested there are ways of removing from water the iron that stains buildings and walkways. The meeting recorded its appreciation of the work of the Committee, and encouraged it to make further progress.

At its meeting on 21 October, Senate approved amendments to Statute No. 17 – Guild of Students and Statute No. 22 – Fees. Notice of the proposed Statute changes had been displayed within the University in accordance with the provisions of section 25 of the Murdoch University Act. The University Secretary had received no objection to the amendments. Senate therefore

Resolved: S/99/2002

to ratify the attached changes to Statute No. 17 – Guild of Students and Statute No. 22 – Fees.

The Chancellor declared that in accordance with S.25 of the Murdoch University Act, the resolution had been carried by an absolute majority of members of the Senate.

Senate confirmed the minutes of the meetings held 7 and 21 October 2002. It also noted action taken to implement the resolutions of the meetings.

The July meeting of Senate approved a policy whereby the Chancellor, Pro Chancellor and Vice Chancellor bring forward recommendations to the November Senate meeting on who to appoint as the committee Chairs. On their recommendation, Senate

Resolved: S/100/2002	to appoint the following Committee Chairs for 2003-5:
	Audit and Risk Management Committee	Sir William Heseltine
	Environmental Committee	Dr Michael McCall
	Equity and Equal Opportunity Committee	Dr Sally Cawley
	Legislation Committee	Judge Kate O’Brien
	Resources Committee	Mr Robert Pett

The individual Chairs will recommend to the Chancellor who should be the members of their committees.

Senate noted the minutes of the meeting of Academic Council held on 16 November 2002. The following matter required Senate’s consideration.

11.1 Bachelor Degree Regulation 16(1)

A proposed amendment to Bachelor Degree Regulation 16 (1) to more accurately reflect current practices was supported by Academic Council at its meeting on 6 November. This had been proposed by Academic Policy Committee, when it reviewed the academic planning guidelines. Legislation Committee had endorsed the form of the above regulation change, by circulation

Resolved: S/101/2002

to amend Bachelor Degree Regulation 16(1) as follows:

The Divisional Board shall determine the units to be offered by the Division, including their title, points value and enrolment option(s). The content, prerequisites, and teaching and assessment methods of each unit shall be as approved by the School Committee. All decisions on unit offerings relating to unit title, points value, enrolment option(s), content and pre-requisites for the following year shall be finalised by a deadline set by the President of Academic Council after consultation with the Executive Deans. Any changes after that date (other than those specified in the following sub-regulation) require the approval of the President of Academic Council. Academic Council may over-rule any decision made by a Division on unit offerings where, in its view, this is against the interests of the University overall.

Senate noted the minutes of the meeting of the Resources Committee held on 18 November 2002. The recommendation concerning the budget was considered later in the meeting.

Senate noted the minutes of the meeting of Environmental Committee held on 9 October 2002. There were no recommendations to Senate.

Senate noted the minutes of the meeting of Honorary Awards and Ceremonial Committee held on 7 November 2002. There were no recommendations to Senate.

The November meeting of Legislation Committee was cancelled due to lack of sufficient business. Senate noted the minute of two matters that had been considered by circulation. The following matter required Senate’s consideration.

15.1 Fees Regulations

The amendments to the Fees Statute require the Fee Regulations to specify which students are exempt from the amenities and services fee. Amendments to the Regulations were based on principles agreed at a meeting between management and the Guild of Students. On the recommendation of Legislation Committee, Senate

Resolved: S/102/2002	to approve the following amendments to the Fees Regulations:
	(a)	insert the following new regulation:
		2.	The following categories of students are exempt from the amenities and services fee:
			(a)	students whose principal enrolment is at another university who cross-enrol at Murdoch University;
			(b)	students who are enrolled in Murdoch University units as part of the University's UniTrack program;
			(c)	students enrolled in enabling courses (as defined by the federal Department of Education, Science and Training); and
			(d)	students enrolled offshore in courses offered by the University in conjunction with a local partner under a formal Agreement.
	(b)	renumber existing regulations 2-4.

16.       AUDIT AND RISK MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Attached are the minutes of the meeting of Audit and Risk Management Committee held on 6 November 2002. These include the following recommendation to Senate:

16.1 Implementation of Risk Management Plans

The last meeting of Senate requested a report on what is required to fast-track implementation of the Risk Management Plan. On the advice of the Committee, Senate

RESOLVED S/103/2002	(a)	to adopt the attached Risk Implementation strategy in relation to detailed operational risk;
	(b)	that a consultant under the management of the Director, Office of Internal Audit and Risk Management be engaged to prepare a Strategic Risk Management Plan and a list of the top 10 operational risks, as a matter of urgency.

The meeting noted that, in accordance with resolution 90/85, the Official Seal of the University had been applied to the following documents since the last meeting of Senate:

· Variation of Agreement with Curtin University of Technology for provision of counselling services

· Deed of license with Andrew Franks concerning intellectual property in his research project

· Deed of license with Nari Michelle Anderson concerning intellectual property in her research project