+
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice
University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, University of Tasmania
Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010
Crown 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 Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

 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
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

 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)
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+
“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”.
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

 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)
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

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

+
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)
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+
Universities refer to ‘Policy’ broadly and use a variety of terms …
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

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)
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

University Policy Development
Cycle (Models Identified)
Table 4: University Policy Development Cycle Stages: Models 1, 2 and 3
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
+ Few officers, endorsement, implementation, records management
Most stages from Models 1 and 2, and one or more of: benchmarking, revision, quality control, monitoring, evaluation
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+
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
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

‘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 Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+
Using Benchmarking to Enhance the UTAS
Policy Website
( http://www.utas.edu.au/governance-legal/policy )
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

 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
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+
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 added
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid 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 to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

Benchmarking Four Discrete Policies




Plagiarism Policy
Environment Policy
Leave Without Pay Policy
Credit Policy
+
Benchmarking Method
Identify key policy provisions
Bundle key policy provisions
Prepare policy skeleton based on benchmarking
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

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 software
UTAS – Develop Academic Integrity
(Plagiarism) Policy
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid 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
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

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

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

+
(Benchmarking stage of University Policy Development Cycle)
1. Identify key policy provisions
2. Bundle key policy provisions
3. Prepare policy skeleton based on benchmarking
6. Delete unwanted policy provisions
5. Identify and add any ‘gaps’
4. Examine current policy and add home university policy provisions
7. Finalise policy skeleton based on benchmarking
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

+







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
Benchmarking to Identify Good Practice University Policy Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010

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
+ 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 Frameworks
Brigid Freeman, Tertiary Education Management Conference 2010