EDUCATION POLICY RESPONSIBILITIES OF ASSOCIATE DEANS (EDUCATION)
UPDATED 06/06/2012
Statute 2.3 – The
Faculties
EXTRACTS OF EDUCATION POLICY RESPONSIBILITY
STATUTE
10.2 Subject to Statute 3.1 – The chancellor and the deputy chancellors, to
Statute 3.2 - The vice-chancellor and president and to subsection 10.3, where the
dean has vacated the chair or is absent from any meeting of the faculty or the
faculty board, notwithstanding Statute 1.2 - Meetings -
URL REFERENCE:
http://adm.monash.edu/legal/legislation/cha
pter-two.html
10.2.2 if there is no deputy dean or if the deputy dean has vacated the chair or is
absent, the associate dean;
Statute 2.9 – The
Committee of Deans
Statute 3.3: Deans
2.3 Where the dean of the faculty is unable to attend a meeting of the committee,
the associate dean of the faculty, or failing him a professor of the faculty
nominated by the dean, may, with the consent of the chairman, attend and vote at
the meeting as an alternate for the dean.
3.3
For the purposes of paragraph 3.2.2, where there is no deputy dean of a
faculty or the deputy dean is absent from the university for more than one
day, the associate dean of the faculty shall be the acting dean.
3.4
http://adm.monash.edu/legal/legislation/cha
pter-three.html
Where there are two or more deputy deans or associate deans in a
faculty, a reference to 'deputy dean' or 'associate dean' in this section or in
any statute or regulation is a reference to the first appointed of those
deputy or associate deans, or, where the first appointed is absent or
otherwise unavailable, to any other deputy or associate dean (as the case
requires) in order of appointment.
1
Statute 4: Discipline
EXTRACTS OF EDUCATION POLICY RESPONSIBILITY
4.
Reporting of general misconduct
4.1
8.3.
Subject to this section, a person in the employment of the university
who has reasonable grounds to believe that an act of general
misconduct has been committed by a student must report the matter
to the associate dean (teaching) of the relevant faculty or the
associate dean's nominee who may 4.1.1
fine the student a sum not exceeding $300;
4.1.2
suspend the student from the university for a period not
exceeding eight weeks; or
4.1.3
report the matter to the faculty manager
Where, under paragraph 8.2.1, a student's work has been disallowed
8.3.1
9.5
URL REFERENCE:
http://adm.monash.edu/legal/legislation/cha
pter-four.html
the chief examiner must give written notice of the
disallowance and the reasons for it to the student and to the
associate dean (teaching) of the faculty concerned;
Subject to subsection 9.6, a faculty discipline committee consists of 9.5.1
two members of the teaching staff of the faculty, one being
the associate dean (teaching) or the associate dean's
nominee who shall chair the committee;
REGULATIONS
2
Faculties Regulations
EXTRACTS OF EDUCATION POLICY RESPONSIBILITY
Under subsection 7.7
1.
URL REFERENCE:
http://adm.monash.edu/legal/legislation/cha
pter-two.html
Each associate dean of the faculty if not otherwise a member of the board.
3
URL REFERENCE:
Assessment in
Coursework Programs
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
EDUCATION POLICY BANK (A-Z)
The Dean and Associate Dean (Education) are responsible for implementing this
policy.
Unit Assessment
Procedures
The A. Assessment Regime and B. the Implementation of the Assessment
Regime are the responsibility of the Associate Dean (Education).
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/assessment/unitassessment-procedures.html
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/assessment/asse
ssment-in-coursework-policy.html
5. Security and storage of results
5.4. Suspected breaches of security must be reported to the Chief Examiner and
the Head of School (or the Associate Dean (Education) in the faculties with no
schools).
Grading Scale Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/assessment/gradi
ng-scale-policy.html
Special Consideration
Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/assessment/speci
al-consideration-policy.html
Academic Programs
Offered from Multiple
Campuses Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/awards/multiplecampuses-policy.html
4
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Academic Programs
Offered from Multiple
Campuses Procedures
Study from more than one campus
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/awards/multiplecampuses-procedures.html
1. Where a course requires students to study from more than one campus, this
requirement will be communicated clearly to students at the time of their
admission and in all course marketing materials.
2. To assist with the management of resources across the campuses, limitations
on cross campus unit enrolments may mean that:
2.1 enrolment in a major or minor sequence may be restricted to students whose
home campus is the campus at which the sequence is offered;
2.2 enrolment in quota restricted units may be limited to students whose home
campus is the campus at which the unit is offered; and
2.3 enrolment in units involving projects, field trips, internships, work experience,
professional practice, teaching practice and clinical practice may require students
to enrol in the unit at their home campus.
Courses that are offered from several campuses
3. Where a course is offered from more than one campus:
3.1 it will have the same title and lead to the same award at all campuses;
3.2 an appropriately resourced course management group will be established
under a course director appointed by the dean of the managing faculty, with
representation from all campuses involved in offering the course and the relevant
academic units. This group will oversee the operation of the course across all
campuses;
5
3.3 there will be equivalent course admission prerequisites, including credit
transfer arrangements, at all campuses;
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
3.3 there will be equivalent course admission prerequisites, including credit
transfer arrangements, at all campuses;
URL REFERENCE:
3.4 the course eligibility score for Year 12 entry to an undergraduate course, will
be identical for all campuses. Equivalence criteria apply to entry qualifications
which are not included in the ATAR;
3.5 the ATAR, or equivalent, required for undergraduate admission is subject to
section 5.2 of the Regulations for University entrance and admission to course
work courses and units of study made pursuant to Statute 6.1.1.
3.6 it will have an identical course code, requirements and length across all
campuses;
3.7 variations in the range of major and minor sequences and the specialisations
offered may be desirable to enhance the development of the campus academic
portfolio, differentiate campus offerings within the same market or meet national
regulatory requirements;
3.8 all variations will be clearly articulated in all course marketing materials
applying to the same markets;
3.9 the sequencing of units may vary across campuses, provided that they are
consistent with pre-requisite requirements and do not restrict student progression;
3.10 offering the same units in different semesters from different campuses may
provide students on all campuses with more options for cross-campus study; and
3.11 not all elective units are required to be offered from each campus.
6
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
URL REFERENCE:
Units offered from more than one campus
4. Where a unit is offered from more than one campus:
4.1 the unit code will be identical at all campuses;
4.2 there will be only one unit guide for all campus unit offerings, except as
permitted by the Unit Guide policy and procedures.
4.3 campus specific variations of examples, case studies, texts, references and
other learning resources is on the advice of the relevant unit management group
and with the approval of the Chief Examiner;
4.4 all campuses will use the same learning management system unless
otherwise approved by the relevant Associate Dean (Education); and
4.5 the Chief Examiner will establish and appoint a chair to a unit management
group involving key teaching staff from all campuses involved in offering the unit to
ensure that:
4.5.1 unit assessment is conducted in accordance with the Assessment in
Coursework Programs policy and the Unit Assessment procedures;
4.5.2 there is appropriate communication between the teaching staff at each
campus; and
4.5.3 the teaching resources are comparable between the campuses, and are
shared between the campuses where relevant.
Course Design Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/awards/coursedesign-policy.html
7
Coursework Courses
and Units Accreditation
Procedure
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Proposal for the Introduction of a New Course or Major Amendment to a
Course
1. Expressions of interest for the introduction or amendment of courses are
first considered by managing faculty boards or delegated committee(s),
with the guidance of the Dean and Associate Dean (Education) on
alignment with the educational priorities of the Faculty and University and
academic standards, and resources strategy, as demonstrated through
completion and consideration of the University's course costing template.
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/cour
sework-courses-and-units-accreditationprocedure.html
Proposal for the Introduction of a Course Where 90% or More of Units
Already Exist, or the Combination of Two Existing Courses in a New Double
Degree Course
1. Proposals for the introduction of courses constituted by 90% or more of units
that already exist, or the combination of two existing courses in a new double
degree are first considered by managing faculty boards or a delegated
committee(s), with the guidance of the Dean and Associate Dean (Education) on
alignment with the educational priorities of the Faculty and University and
academic standards, as articulated in University policy, and resources strategy.
Proposal for the Disestablishment of a Course or Conversion of a Course to
a Major or Specialisation Within a Generic Degree
1. Proposals for the disestablishment of a course, the disestablishment of a
course via conversion into a major or specialisation, are first considered by the
degree‐awarding faculty board or delegated committee(s), with the guidance of
the Dean and Associate Dean (Education) on alignment with the educational
priorities of the Faculty and University and academic standards, as articulated in
University policy.
8
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Proposal for the Establishment or Disestablishment of Passport Units or
Cross‐Listed Units
URL REFERENCE:
1. Proposals for the establishment or disestablishment of Passport units or
cross‐listed units, are first considered by owning faculty boards or delegated
committee(s), with the guidance of the Dean and Associate Dean (Education) on
alignment with the educational priorities of the Faculty and University and
academic standards, as articulated in University policy, and resources strategy.
Associate Deans (Education) have responsibility for ensuring that proposals are
fully completed, in line with University and faculty educational priorities and
academic standards as expressed in University policy and supported by
documentation before they are submitted for Education Committee and Academic
Board consideration. They are also responsible for ensuring that changes
approved by Academic Board are implemented, and for communicating
opportunities to improve the University's coursework course and unit accreditation
policy and associated procedures to Education Committee.
Academic and Professional Staff completing proposals have responsibility for
ensuring that proposals are fully completed, in line with University and faculty
educational priorities and academic standards as expressed in University policy
and supported by documentation before they are submitted to the Associate Dean
(Education). They are also responsible for ensuring that changes approved by
Academic Board are implemented.
Honours Year
Programs Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/awards/honoursyear-programs-policy.html
Honours Year
Programs Procedures
The implementation of the procedures is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/awards/honoursyear-programs-procedures.html
9
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/awards/nonaward-study-policy.html
Posthumous
Completion and
Conferral of Awards
Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/awards/posthumo
us-conferral-policy.html
Cancellation of Units
Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/can
cellation-of-units-policy.html
Course Titling and
Abbreviation
Procedures
The implementation of the procedures is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/cour
se-titling-and-abbreviations-procedures.html
Coursework Courses
and Units Accreditation
Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/cour
sework-courses-and-units-accreditationpolicy.html
Non Award Study
Policy
More specific examples:
Course Accreditation
Minor amendments to courses are approved by the degree awarding Faculty
Board. Amendments to double degree courses must be approved by the two
relevant faculty boards. The Associate Dean (Education) is responsible for
reporting minor amendments to courses to University Education Committee on a
biannual basis.
Units:
The Associate Dean (Education) is responsible for reporting amendments to units
and unit renewals to University Education Committee on a biannual basis.
10
Coursework Courses
and Units Accreditation
Procedure
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Proposal for the Introduction of a New Course or Major Amendment to a
Course
1. Expressions of interest for the introduction or amendment of courses are
first considered by managing faculty boards or delegated committee(s),
with the guidance of the Dean and Associate Dean (Education) on
alignment with the educational priorities of the Faculty and University and
academic standards, and resources strategy, as demonstrated through
completion and consideration of the University's course costing template.
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/cour
sework-courses-and-units-accreditationprocedure.html
Proposal for the Introduction of a Course Where 90% or More of Units
Already Exist, or the Combination of Two Existing Courses in a New Double
Degree Course
1. Proposals for the introduction of courses constituted by 90% or more of units
that already exist, or the combination of two existing courses in a new double
degree are first considered by managing faculty boards or a delegated
committee(s), with the guidance of the Dean and Associate Dean (Education) on
alignment with the educational priorities of the Faculty and University and
academic standards, as articulated in University policy, and resources strategy.
Proposal for the Disestablishment of a Course or Conversion of a Course to
a Major or Specialisation Within a Generic Degree
1. Proposals for the disestablishment of a course, the disestablishment of a
course via conversion into a major or specialisation, are first considered by the
degree‐awarding faculty board or delegated committee(s), with the guidance of
the Dean and Associate Dean (Education) on alignment with the educational
priorities of the Faculty and University and academic standards, as articulated in
University policy.
11
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Proposal for the Establishment or Disestablishment of Passport Units or
Cross‐Listed Units
URL REFERENCE:
1. Proposals for the establishment or disestablishment of Passport units or
cross‐listed units, are first considered by owning faculty boards or
delegated committee(s), with the guidance of the Dean and Associate
Dean (Education) on alignment with the educational priorities of the
Faculty and University and academic standards, as articulated in
University policy, and resources strategy.
Associate Deans (Education) have responsibility for ensuring that proposals are
fully completed, in line with University and faculty educational priorities and
academic standards as expressed in University policy and supported by
documentation before they are submitted for Education Committee and Academic
Board consideration. They are also responsible for ensuring that changes
approved by Academic Board are implemented, and for communicating
opportunities to improve the University's coursework course and unit accreditation
policy and associated procedures to Education Committee.
Academic and Professional Staff completing proposals have responsibility for
ensuring that proposals are fully completed, in line with University and faculty
educational priorities and academic standards as expressed in University policy
and supported by documentation before they are submitted to the Associate Dean
(Education). They are also responsible for ensuring that changes approved by
Academic Board are implemented.
12
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Coursework Course
Review Procedures
3. Steps in the review process
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/cour
sework-course-review-procedures.html
3.1 Self-review
Self-review is the first phase of the review process. The purpose of the selfreview stage is to examine and report on the course in terms of curriculum,
teaching, assessment, student learning, graduate outcomes and course
management as well as taking into account how the future delivery of the course
aligns to the strategic direction of the University.
The Dean in consultation with the Associate Dean (Education), course coordinator
and Campus President and PVC (if appropriate) will appoint a self-review team to
lead the self-review process and produce a self-review portfolio.
A six to twelve month timeframe should be considered for this phase. The selfreview process is collegial and consultative. It is designed to engage all staff
associated with the delivery and management of the course in a process of critical
reflection. The self-review portfolio is the evidence-based outcome of the critical
peer review discussions, interpretation and analysis of course data, benchmarking
activities and evaluation of key stakeholder perceptions.
The Terms of Reference (detailed) Table provides a framework in which to
address the terms of reference. Appendices to the self-review portfolio must
include information about course approval or previous course review and external
reaccreditation reports where applicable.
3.2.1 Constitution of the Review Panel
The members of the External Review Panel are nominated by the Dean in
consultation with the Associate Dean (Education) and the Campus President and
PVC (if appropriate).
13
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The External Review Panel nominations are forwarded to the Monash Quality Unit
for approval by the DVC (Education)'s nominee, the PVC (Planning and Quality).
URL REFERENCE:
Selection of panel members is based on their experience, expertise and
impartiality. Panels normally include the following:





two senior academics from relevant areas, but external to Monash
University (an international perspective is encouraged);
a senior staff member of the faculty, but from outside the course under
review;
a panel chair, who must not have any direct involvement with the course;
one member of a relevant professional, industry or employer group; and
one senior student or recent graduate.
The Executive Officer to the External Review Panel is an appropriately trained
Monash member of professional staff, normally nominated by of the faculty
manager.
4. Submission of the Report to Academic Board
Within four weeks of receiving the External Review Panel's Report, the Dean in
consultation with the Associate Dean (Education) and Course Coordinator:


reviews the findings and recommendations; and
submit findings and recommendations to faculty board for approval.
Within three weeks of receiving faculty board approval, the Dean:


prepares for Academic Board a Summary Course Review Advice
Statement which provides Faculty's response to each of the Panel's
recommendations;
submits to Academic Board Summary Course Review Advice Statement
together with a link to the External Review Panel's Report and the
14
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Self-review Portfolio; and

URL REFERENCE:
develops an Improvement Plan.
6. Alternative arrangements for professionally accredited courses
This provision applies to whole courses only, not courses where a major study or
sequence of units is professionally accredited.
Programs subject to professional accreditation are exempted from the standard
provisions for course review documentation and the requirement for an external
panel and will be managed as follows:


Guidelines for
Teaching-Out
Disestablished
Programs
Submit documentation prepared for the accrediting body together with a
separate document addressing any gaps between the university's
requirements and those of the accrediting body.
An external panel is not required by the University in these cases. The
course documentation and the report of the accrediting body will be
considered by the Education Committee.
The university expects that the five year cycle is adhered to for professionally
accredited courses and any variation to the cycle must be considered by the
Education Committee.
Suggested Teach-Out Action Plan: Initial
Consult with the Library, Information Technology (IT) and Student Services
regarding maintenance of support services and any changes to service delivery
associated with teach-out arrangements.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/guid
elines-teaching-out-disestablishedprograms.html
A letter should be sent to all students explaining the teach-out arrangements and
detailing all available options for students.
Unit Coding Policy
Nominate a contact person to deal with student enquiries about the process.
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/development/unitcoding-policy.html
15
Student Evaluation
Policy
MEQ Survey
Procedures
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
Analysing the survey and reporting improvements
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/quality/studentevaluation-policy.html
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/quality/meqmseq-survey-procedures.html
1. Each faculty, campus and division reviews the published reports and raw
data files.
2. Each faculty, campus and division analyses their performance and
prepares and implements an action plan if needed to address areas for
improvement.
3. Each faculty, campus and division reports progress against the action
plan to OPQ.
16
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Student Evaluation of
Teaching and Units
(SETU) Procedures
1. Preparing the Survey
2. Each unit-owning faculty reviews their faculty-specific unit evaluation
questions and notifies OPQ of any amendments at least two weeks prior
to the commencement of semester.
3. The decision about which UOOs are evaluated each semester is made by
the unit-owning faculty. This decision must be made within the policy of
evaluating every unit at least once in each year that it is taught.
4. The decision about which teachers are evaluated each semester is made
by the unit-teaching faculty, in consultation with any other faculty involved
in the teaching. The unit-teaching faculty informs staff that they are to be
evaluated at least two weeks prior to the commencement of the survey
period. Up to five teaching staff may be evaluated per UOO.
5. All teaching staff can also request to be evaluated. The unit-teaching
faculty will need to process these requests.
URL REFERENCE:
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/quality/studentevaluation-of-teaching-and-unitsprocedures.html
3.Reporting the survey results
5. The Associate Dean (Education) of the unit teaching faculty distributes the open
ended comments to the Heads of School (or equivalent), unit co-ordinators (or
equivalent) and UOO teaching staff. Each Faculty Board will approve and maintain
oversight of a process for distributing open ended comments that includes:


how open ended comments of an offensive nature that are in breach of
the University's Equal Opportunity Policy are managed; and
how comments that refer specifically to individual teachers are managed.
4. Analysing the Survey and Reporting Improvements
1. Each unit-owning faculty reviews the published reports and data files of the unit
evaluation data and prepares an action plan to address areas for improvement for
faculty-wide issues.
17
Academic Progress:
Faculty Academic
Progress Committee
Procedure
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
URL REFERENCE:
3. Basis of Referral
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/conduct/facultyapc-committees-procedures.html
Prior to referral to an APC, where applicable the intervention strategy in the
Academic Progress Intervention Strategy Procedures should be implemented.
This usually involves sending a warning letter to students whose academic results
indicate that they are not achieving satisfactory academic progress.
The faculty board may at any time review a student's progress during the
academic year and implement intervention strategies. Intervention strategies may
include meeting with the student, referral to support/assistance, and/or the
imposition of a condition/s on their enrolment. The intervention cannot include
exclusion. Only an 6
APC can exclude a student and then only after referral to the APC following
completion of Semester 2 examinations.
A single review cycle to consider student exclusion is held based upon student
work completed after Semester 2 examinations conclude, where a student has
completed at least two semesters of enrolment.
Students who commenced their course at the start of semester 2 and have
completed only one semester of enrolment are not included in the review cycle for
possible referral to an APC to consider exclusion. Students with one semester of
enrolment only are subject to the Academic Progress Intervention Strategy
Procedures.
As results are not always all immediately finalised faculties may adopt the
following timelines for the exclusion review cycle for two groups of students:

Round 1 - those students who, after the December release of results,
show that they have not met the Faculty's academic progress
requirements; and
The APC triggers are university-wide except where, with the approval of Academic
Board, faculty-specific rules are developed that are more comprehensive. The
application of faculty-specific rules needs to be communicated to students in
advance of the progress review. Alternatively the faculty board may choose to
impose less stringent APC triggers.
Where the faculty board considers a student's academic results does not meet
progress requirements (i.e. an APC trigger is set off), the student is referred to an
APC by issuing a Notice of Referral and Hearing.
18
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
 Round 2 - those students who have deferred exams or withheld results
and who are not currently in the Round 1 category, but who may have not
met the faculty's academic progress requirements after the release of
deferred and withheld results.
URL REFERENCE:
Following the release of semester two results, all faculties will interrogate the
student information system to identify students who meet the APC triggers, being
the criteria for considering exclusion of a student with unsatisfactory academic
progress.
The APC triggers are university-wide except where, with the approval of Academic
Board, faculty-specific rules are developed that are more comprehensive. The
application of faculty-specific rules needs to be communicated to students in
advance of the progress review. Alternatively the faculty board may choose to
impose less stringent APC triggers.
Where the faculty board considers a student's academic results does not meet
progress requirements (i.e. an APC trigger is set off), the student is referred to an
APC by issuing a Notice of Referral and Hearing.
The Notice of Referral and Hearing invites the student to show cause why they
should not be excluded from the course and/or faculty. The Notice must contain
clear advice on:


the reason/s why the faculty believes the progress is unsatisfactory (the
APC trigger)
how to submit to the APC information and documentation in support of
their case to avoid exclusion
the consequences of not responding to the Notice of Referral and
Hearing, including that the student's case may be determined in his or her
absence and that a failure to respond will limit the student's appeal rights;
the need to be contactable and update their contact details on the
university student information system
how to seek advice from university support services




the due date to return documentation
the APC review process and the possible outcomes
the dates on which APC Hearings will occur
student visa implications for international students.



The Notice of Referral and Hearing constitutes both the Notice of Referral
19
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
 the due date to return documentation
 the APC review process and the possible outcomes
 the dates on which APC Hearings will occur
 student visa implications for international students.
URL REFERENCE:
The Notice of Referral and Hearing constitutes both the Notice of Referral
(pursuant to Section 3.2) and the Notice of Hearing (pursuant to Section 5.1) of
the regulations.
The Notice of Referral and Hearing should be sent to the student by post or
delivered in person within 14 days of the release of results in December, and must
not be less than 10 calendar days before the scheduled hearing (unless the
student agrees to a shorter notice period). Delivery occurs on the deemed delivery
date. Additionally, the faculty may elect to send an email to the student's email
account address alerting them to the Notice of Referral and Hearing.
Notices of Referral and Hearing sent to Round 2 students will not require the
student to provide a written response to the faculty until a nominated date, which
will be not less than seven days after the release of deferred and supplementary
examination results. It will notify the student they may be referred to an APC
Hearing subject to their final results.
5. Determination of Action
The faculty APC will review the academic progress of all students who are sent a
Notice of Referral and Hearing, irrespective of whether the student has
responded. A decision must be made by the APC in each case, and Notice of
Decision given to all of these students advising the outcome.
Students who do not respond to the Notice of Referral and Hearing will have their
academic progress assessed and determined in their absence. After reviewing the
available evidence the faculty APC may take no further action, impose conditions
on the student's enrolment or exclude the student. If excluded, the student's
appeal rights are more limited than for students who responded to the
Students may nominate on their Student Response form that they wish to
discontinue their course. Once received by the faculty, this request is deemed
processed and is not able to be rescinded. 9
Students who respond to the Notice of Referral and Hearing but do not wish to
discontinue, will have their case reviewed by the faculty APC. The faculty APC
may take no further action, or impose conditions on the student's enrolment.
Where the student is being considered for exclusion, the case must be referred to
20
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Notice of Referral and Hearing (refer to Appeals to the Dean).
URL REFERENCE:
Students may nominate on their Student Response form that they wish to
discontinue their course. Once received by the faculty, this request is deemed
processed and is not able to be rescinded. 9
Discipline: Student
Policy
Discipline: Student
Procedures
Students who respond to the Notice of Referral and Hearing but do not wish to
discontinue, will have their case reviewed by the faculty APC. The faculty APC
may take no further action, or impose conditions on the student's enrolment.
Where the student is being considered for exclusion, the case must be referred to
an APC hearing to decide this question after full consideration of the student's
submission and circumstances.
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
The implementation of these procedures is the responsibility of the Associate
Dean. Specific examples:
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/conduct/studentdiscipline-policy.html
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/conduct/studentdiscipline-procedures.html
2. General misconduct
A person in the employment of the University who has reasonable grounds to
believe that an act of general misconduct has been committed by an Open
Universities student must report the matter to the associate dean (teaching) of the
relevant faculty or the associate dean's nominee who may 2.1.1 fine the student a sum not exceeding $300; or
2.2.2 report the matter to the faculty manager.
21
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
4. Non Examination Cheating
URL REFERENCE:
4.3 Where, under clause 4.2 (above), a student's work has been disallowed
the chief examiner/staff member in charge of the unit must give written
notice of the disallowance to the student and to the associate dean
(teaching) of the faculty concerned;
5. The Faculty Discipline Committee
5.1 Where an allegation of general/academic misconduct is reported to a faculty
manager or a student lodges a written appeal with the faculty manager against a
fine imposed by an associate dean (teaching) or the dean's nominee or against a
disallowance of work, the faculty manager must-
Plagiarism Policy
5.3 A faculty discipline committee consists of three members of the faculty, one
being the associate dean (teaching) or the associate dean's nominee who shall
chair the committee and may, in any particular case, include a member or
employee of the Open Universities Student Association.
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
Specific example:
Academic and
Administrative
Complaints and
Grievances Policy
Students and staff of the University have a duty to ensure they gain the necessary
academic understanding to minimise incidents of plagiarism and cheating. In this
regard, Associate Deans (Teaching) must take all reasonable steps to ensure all
course-work students, but particularly commencing students, are: aware of the
provisions in the University Statute 4.1 - Discipline about cheating and the policy
and procedures covering plagiarism; and educated as necessary in the
appropriate skills and knowledge to avoid plagiarism.
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean.
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/conduct/plagiaris
m-policy.html
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/com
plaints-grievance-policy.html
22
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Complaints and
Grievances of
Coursework Students
Procedures
Processing of the grievance
11. The grievance officer will determine whether the grievance can be investigated
within the scope of the Academic and Administrative Complaints and Grievances
Policy. Where the grievance sits outside of the scope of the policy, the grievance
officer will send an email to the student within five working days following receipt
of the grievance explaining why the matter can not be investigated under the
policy and associated procedures. If the matter falls within the scope of another
university policy, regulation or statute, the student is to be directed to the relevant
information.
URL REFERENCE:
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/management/com
plaints-grievance-courseworkprocedures.html
12. Where the grievance is of a nature that can be investigated under the scope of
the Academic and Administrative Complaints and Grievances Policy,
the grievance officer will determine whether the grievance is academic or
administrative in nature, record details of the grievance, acknowledge receipt of
the grievance and explain the timelines for resolution and any other relevant
information, including information about relevant university support services. A
grievance receipt is to be emailed to the student within 5 working days of the
grievance being lodged.
13. In the case of an academic grievance, the grievance officer will direct the
matter to the Associate Dean (Education), or nominee, of the appropriate faculty.
In the case of an administrative grievance, the grievance officer will direct the
matter to the faculty manager, or nominee, of the appropriate faculty, or to the
director or equivalent senior manager, or nominee, if the matter concerns a nonfaculty administrative grievance.
14. If the grievance officer is unable to assess the student's grievance due to
insufficient information or clarity, the student will be contacted within 5 working
days following receipt of the grievance. The grievance officer will outline what the
student must do or provide for their grievance to be reviewed, and will also direct
the student to appropriate University support services.
23
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
URL REFERENCE:
Investigation and conciliation
15. The person to whom the grievance has been directed will attempt to resolve it
through investigation and conciliation, and may also direct the student to
appropriate University support services.
16. The person to whom the grievance has been directed is tocommence
conducting an investigation within ten working days of the grievance being lodged
by the student, and consult with relevant staff.
17. The person to whom the grievance has been directed may determine that the
grievance is frivolous, vexatious, or lacking in substance, and decide that no
investigation is necessary. The student is to be advised via email within 20
working days of the grievance being lodged with the faculty/division of this
decision using the grievance outcome template letter, including details of the
reasons for this decision and the student’s right to make a complaint to the
University Student Ombudsman.
18. A complaint by a prospective student against a selection decision may be
dismissed as lacking in substance if the decision is consistent with the published
selection criteria, or if the complainant meets the published selection criteria but
was declined entry in favour of better qualified applicants.
19. The person to whom the grievance has been directed may call a conciliation
meeting with all parties concerned, for the purpose of discussing and, if possible,
concluding an agreed resolution. The findings of the investigation to date may be
presented at this meeting which, if required, must occur within 20 working days of
the grievance being lodged in the faculty/division.
20. If, due to unforeseen circumstances (e.g. staff on leave), an investigation
cannot be concluded within ten working days of its commencement, the person to
whom the grievance has been directed is to send the student an email on the
status of the matter using the grievance status template letter.
21. If a resolution cannot be reached after an agreed number of conciliation
meetings, the person to whom the grievance has been directed will offer, in
writing, the University’s best available solution to the student. The student must
accept or decline the offer via email within 10 working days of the date of the
offer. If accepted by the student the solution will be implemented immediately.
22. If the student does not accept this offer, the student may forward details of the
grievance to the University Student Ombudsman within 20 working days.
24
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
21. If a resolution cannot be reached after an agreed number of conciliation
meetings, the person to whom the grievance has been directed will offer, in
writing, the University’s best available solution to the student. The student must
accept or decline the offer via email within 10 working days of the date of the
offer. If accepted by the student the solution will be implemented immediately.
URL REFERENCE:
22. If the student does not accept this offer, the student may forward details of the
grievance to the University Student Ombudsman within 20 working days.
Collaborative
Coursework
Arrangements Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/management/coll
aborative-coursework-arrangementspolicy.html
Collaborative
Coursework
Arrangements Licensing of
Curriculum Procedures
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/lice
nsing-of-curriculum-procedures.html
25
Collaborative
Coursework
Arrangements
Procedures
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
4. Where it is planned to allocate to the host higher education provider/s the major
responsibility for teaching, the following must be agreed in writing, and is subject
to the following conditions:
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/coll
aborative-coursework-arrangementsprocedures.html
a. The curriculum must be developed or approved by Monash;
b. Monash must oversee assessment, and control examinations and the
setting of academic standards;
c. Monash must also determine fees, by negotiation and ensure that they
are compatible with the Monash fees policy;
d. Students must have contact with Monash teaching throughout their course
in the form of structured self-instructional materials developed by Monash
staff;
e. Monash must nominate its own course coordinator and approve the
partner’s appointment of the on-site program director;
f. Monash staff must be consulted about the appointment and supervision of
the teaching staff;
26
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
g. Students will be enrolled as Monash students upon commencement of the
Monash component of the course;
h. The proposer must indicate how examinations will be undertaken;
i. The proposer must indicate conditions for the extensions or termination of
the program;
j. Monash-enrolled students who successfully complete all the requirements
of their course will graduate with a Monash degree, and
k. Students must be given appropriate access to the broad range of Monash
resources through the Portal system and/or other mechanisms.
l. Entry level requirements and subsequent academic performance of
students will be monitored to ensure appropriate admission standards.
m. The partner Higher Education Provider must award numerical marks and
grades
URL REFERENCE:
5. Exceptions may be made in relation to joint degree programs.
6. Discussions must be undertaken with the Faculty Dean, Associate Dean
(Teaching) and Faculty Manager as to whether the proposed collaborative
coursework arrangement advances faculty teaching imperatives, and whether
academic quality can be achieved and maintained. The Faculty Dean must
confirm in writing to the collaborative coursework arrangement proposer that the
faculty will be able to resource the initiative.
Education Development
Framework Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/edu
cation-development-framework-policy.html
27
Sessional Academic
Induction to Learning
and Teaching
Procedures
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
1. Faculties must ensure that all new sessional staff appointed undertake an
induction program on university learning and teaching. Exceptions might be
granted by the Associate Dean (Education) to those staff with previous teaching
experience, or employed on an ad hoc basis.
URL REFERENCE:
http://policy.monash.edu.au/policybank/academic/education/management/ses
sional-academic-induction-learningteaching-procedures.html
2. The induction provided must be commensurate with the skills and roles of
sessional staff, aligned with the Monash Sessional Training Essentials Program
(STEP), and of at least a half-day duration.
3. A university induction program for sessional staff of not less than a half-day
duration and based on selected topics in the Sessional Training Essentials
Program (STEP) must be delivered each semester on each campus by the Office
of the Pro Vice-Chancellor(Learning and Teaching)(OPVCLT) including Sunway
Campus and South Africa Campus.
4. Faculties will normally deliver annually their own induction programs
customized to the needs of the disciplines, but may direct their sessional staff to
undertake the program delivered by OPVCLT instead.
5. On request, OPVCLT will provide guidance to faculties on developing facultybased sessional induction programs.
8. Associate Deans (Education) must report annually (at 3rd meeting of each year)
in writing to the Learning and Teaching Committee on the numbers of sessional
academic staff completing induction and being exempted from induction (including
the grounds for being exempted).
9. OPVCLT must maintain a dedicated website containing relevant resources and
support information for sessional academic staff. This website will be updated
annually.
10. Faculties/departments/schools must provide dedicated intranet websites
containing faculty-specific support information for sessional academic staff and a
link to the OPVCLT site on sessional academic support and development.
28
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/stud
ent-international-travel-for-study-policy.html
Teaching in a Language
Other than English
Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/teac
hing-in-language-other-than-englishpolicy.html
Unit Guide Policy
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Associate Dean
(Education).
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/unit
-guide-policy.html
Student International
Travel for Study Policy
29
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
Unit Guide Procedures
1. Use of the Unit Guide Template
1.1 The Unit Guide Template will be used to develop a Unit Guide for each
undergraduate and graduate/postgraduate coursework unit offering.
1.2 The Faculty may need to produce alternate forms to meet the diverse needs of
the student cohort.
1.3 Each Unit Guide must include a unit outline (i.e. unit synopsis, objectives,
workload, unit relationships, continuous improvement), schedule of unit activities,
prescribed texts and readings, recommended texts and readings, online
resources, assessment, policy on assessment.
1.4 Fields marked “optional” may be removed.
1.5 When the unit guide is in print form, the order of fields in the Unit Guide must
not be altered.
1.6 Faculties have the authority to include additional fields containing information
deemed important for the discipline or particular units.
1.7 Non-Australian campuses may request that additional information, which is
required by the local government authorities, be included in the Unit Guide for that
campus. Such requests will be made to Learning and Teaching Committee for
endorsement.
1.8 Faculties should keep archived copies of unit guides for all unit offerings
taught by the teaching faculty.
1.9 All Unit Guides must contain a section outlining the impact of feedback
received from students on the continuous improvement of the unit.
URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/unit
-guide-procedures.html
3. Use of the Unit Guide
3.1 All students enrolled in a coursework unit will have access to the Unit Guide
either in print or electronic form, for each undergraduate or graduate/postgraduate
coursework unit of study undertaken, by the end of the orientation week of a
standard semester or, for all other teaching periods, not later than by the end of
the first week.
3.2 Unit Guides will be provided in multiple forms where required to ensure the
Guide is accessible by all students undertaking the unit. Multiple forms will
include alternate written and online versions as recommended for the student by
the Disability Liaison Unit.
30
Use of Animals in
Coursework Programs
Policy
Use of Animals in
Coursework Programs
Procedures
OUTLINE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The implementation of this policy is the responsibility of the Faculty Manager.
Discussion of ethical, social and scientific issues involved in the use of
animals




URL REFERENCE:
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/ani
mals-in-coursework-policy.html
http://www.policy.monash.edu/policybank/academic/education/management/ani
mals-in-coursework-procedures.html
In all units in which animals are used, the General Principles for the Care
and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes, set out in Section 1 of the
NHMRC Code, should be prominently displayed in learning spaces.
In all units in which animals are used, ethical guidelines, such as the
ANZCCART Ethical guidelines for students using animals or animal
tissues for educational purposes, should be prominently displayed in
learning spaces.
In all units in which animals are used, students will be instructed in the
ethical and legal responsibilities involved in the use of animals for
scientific purposes, in addition to relevant methods of animal care and
use.
In all units in which animals are used, students will be invited to raise and
discuss ethical, scientific and social issues relating to the use of animals
for teaching and other scientific purposes.
31