MINUTES for Meeting Number 1, 2014
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ATTACHMENT A
COMMON UNITS COMMITTEE
MINUTES FOR MEETING NUMBER 1, 2014 10am, 1st August, Building Orange 4.2.08
Present: Chair: Martin Carroll, Nicola Rolls, Birut Zemits, Richard Head, Bandana Koirala, Elizabeth Thynne, Greg Shaw, Sharon Bridgeman, Giselle Byrnes, Terry Dunbar, Sue Carthew.
1. Welcome and Apologies
The Chair welcomed the committee members and accepted apologies from Barbara White, Mike Miloshis, Zoe Carmichal
2. Minutes of Previous Meetings
Resolution: That the minutes be accepted.
2.1 Actions arising from previous meetings
Item No. 1 Navitas - table evidence and revised memorandum
To ensure a complete mapping exercise was carried out regarding whether or not Navitas students should continue to receive advanced standing for CUC100, the committee reques- ted a comparative assessment of student outcomes overtime. OMP provided data over 3 years comparing Navitas students who achieved CT against those who did not. The data confirmed that those students who achieve a CT are not disadvantaged and achieve com- parative success. Committee conclude this provides sufficient evidence to confirm the ap- propriateness of the current practice of giving CUC100/106 as advanced standing for stu- dents who achieve 65% or more overall and a minimum of 65% for both the research essay and exam in Navitas.
Resolution: Continue practice of giving Navitas students ad- vanced standing against CUC100 where they achieve 65% or more overall and a minimum of 65% for both the research essay and exam.
Action: Theme leader, CU to request OMP provide comparative reports to the CU com- mittee on all paths via which students can achieve advanced standing.
Item No.2 Establish review of PTS & TEP advance standing as part of a broader review of these programs.
MC has discussed with the VC. This is not an action item for the CU committee.
Resolution: Item to be removed from ongoing CU committee ac- tions. Item No. 3 Discuss unit offerings in Melbourne
Resolution: No further action required.
Item No. 4 Essington School, CUC100E, discuss unit offering for 2014 with PVCA & Essington Head Master.
PVCA and Theme Leader CU met with David Cannon to confirm that the existing 4 semester CUC100E model was not viable and would cease at the end of 2014. Year 12 students are now participating in the standard CUC100 unit offering.
Resolution: No further action required on 2014 offering.
Action: Theme leader, CU to report back to committee on lo- gistics/budget of Essington students being able to choose to study either CUC100 or CUC106 in 2015.
Item No. 5 Essington school, CUC100E, follow up with Callista team as to whether Essington can be introduced as a location
Resolution: No further action required.
Item No. 6 CU budget discuss revised funding model with management accountant
PVCA advised that the CU committee is not a budget management committee but rather its remit is to ensure that there is a university wide approach to the academic issues associated with the program.
Resolution: Committee agreed that the CU budget management should only be considered via existing budgetary channels.
Item Nos 7& 8 CUC106 – establish working party to investigate high external withdrawal and develop and table withdrawal investigation.
Item to be discussed at 3.4.
Item No. 9 Investigate whether it is possible to capture qualitative feedback on the YouTube videos and quizzes based on the model for the reusable learning objects project.
Liaison and Academic Support Coordinator advised that there are currently 5 library You- Tube videos available and these links could be embedded into Learnline to track usage. PVCA suggested that they be relocated to share stream to ensure CDU has complete ac- cess to the metrics.
Action: Liaison and Academic Support Coordinator to dis- cuss possible relocation of 5 YouTube videos to Sharestream with Bill Searle, Manager - Learning Item No. 10 Committee members to email unit title ideas for the new iteration of CUC100 to the External coordinator.
The impetus for this iteration is the sustainability strategy development introduced at VCAG in 2012. The strategy has not yet been deployed around the university. The strategy pro- posed and academic theme as one of the goals for the promotion of sustainability develop- ment. An opportunity to achieve this was identified through embedding sustainability into the common core curriculum to ensure all students would be exposed to this theme. The PVCA brought this to the committee. It was never the intention that the LO’s for CUC100 move away from academic literacy, but rather the subject matter would be sustainability.
Pro Vice Chancellor - EHSE advised there was discussion about whether or not we should have a sustainability unit and the school of the environment did not have sufficient EFTSL to sustain viability, it was about giving them something that would provide them with a higher level of EFTSL. There was talk about whether or not to have a sustainability common unit not associated with academic literacies. As an interim step it was thought that we could in- troduce sustainability in CUC100.
CUC100 was never meant to be the final resting point for sustainability.
The unit was developed, it went through a number of committees including the unit advisory group, the common unit committee, the school LTC and the Faculty LTC at the university LTC it was rejected.
The Theme Leader, CU confirmed that the CU team has sought the input of Andrew’s team (REIL). Andrew Campbell and Penny Wurm have been helpful in providing the team with some very concrete input.
The ULTC rejected the new proposal on the following basis: A change to the current graduate attributes has not been presented to academic board.. The sustainability strategy has not been promulgated. The unit was considered to be overly ideological at the apparent expense of the lit- eracies There would be difficulties with the accrediting bodies with the new title.
With regard to the final point, the PVCA points out that there is a need to discuss the changes with the professional bodies, but does not require their consent. Pro Vice Chancellor – LEBA suggested that evidence of the professional bodies require- ments should be provided where necessary.
The following changes were suggested: Title Order of learning outcomes Ideological column in learning activity table
Associate Dean L&T LEBA – the final assignment as a hurdle task may need to be con- sidered. NR advised that this was raised at the FLTC and was passed.
Associate Dean L&T LEBA – current definition of hurdle assessments is broad.
Associate Dean L&T LEBA confirmed that the content was not totally rejected, but rather that the emphasis needed to shift to academic literacies rather than sustainability. The first learning outcome in the document was on sustainability and it was suggested that they should be reordered. There was a belief that sustainability was given prominence over sus- tainability which was not the intention.
PVCA advised that CDU is submitting 2015 Course details to the commonwealth govern- ment today and therefore this unit cannot be reaccredited until 2016
The committee passed on thanks to team for their hard work on the redevelopment. There are some very specific ideas which the team can work on. In addition, VCAG needs to return to sustainability strategy and after that there would be a solid platform to renegotiate the proposed changes to the academic community.
LT – Team was disappointed initially, and are committed to running an academic literacies unit with interesting content. This is a good opportunity to go back and refocus on what is working well in the unit as it stands. Team are happy to have a year to develop the unit to present the best outcomes for the students.
GB – graduate attributes work needs to continue and as well as discussions about expand- ing the common units program. Any move in sustainability would be part of those discus- sions. Query made about whether we are trying to pack too much into one unit.
Pro Vice Chancellor - EHSE - teaching academic literacies through a topic like sustainibilities is a good way of teaching as it provides the literacies with a context. She expressed con- cern that the unit was rejected given the broad level of consultation.
The committee remain committed to the development of the unit and there is now an 11 month window to nuance the unit.
3. Standing items 3.1 Theme Leaders report (Attachment C)
Theme Leader CU advised that the common units offerings at Melbourne and Sydney cam- puses, BIITE, GOO and Essington have increased the team’s workload considerably. Theme Leader CU congratulated the unit coordinators on their efforts in this regard.
With regard to the budget the target load has increased by 57 EFTSL, 93% of the budget is already committed and it is anticipated that the program will need a fin loan. 1.5 TEP staff have been teaching on the CUs and this has been moved over to the CU cost code. P Szy- biak, Deputy Director Marketing confirmed that the CU’s funding allocation represents 10% of the overall revenue base for the program.
The majority of the spend is on casual staffing which represents 62% of delivery.
PD was offered at the beginning of the year, to ensure all staff are on the same page in terms of teaching approaches and this year included TEP and ALLSP teams.
Into-uni program (HEPP funded) is looking at attracting students to HE. Theme Leader, CU has been working with Terry McClafferty to consider embedding academic literacy skills in a subject for Kormilda. Students will receive 10 cps if they transfer across. It was suggested that Essington could develop the same model but David Canon did not wish to pursue it.
PVCA advised that the approval of advanced standing for Kormilda students will need to take place before the enrolment period for next year otherwise students cannot benefit from it. Action: Theme Leader, CU Speak to Into-Uni Coordinator about setting this up.
CU research – the team gave a presentation from the pilot in semester 1 in May, turnout was lower than anticipated. The project is looking at a number of things, including: how students are reacting to Learnline and what they are finding useful. The study is at- tempting to understanding the role of Learnline in student success.
Initial results point toward a correlation between the use of collaborate and student success, but team has further work to do in this regard. The recorded collaborate sessions were the most popular. Students liked emails, reminders and regular communication from teaching staff and learning objects in a variety of forms, hard copies and videos, were favoured.
Pro Vice Chancellor - EHSE confirmed that in other research (part of the retention project?) students also stated that they found the recorded sessions valuable.
Pro Vice Chancellor - EHSE and Pro Vice Chancellor – LEBA suggested that when the team have a next update it could badge the presentation as part of the retention project.
PVCA suggested that the presentation could also tie in with launch of analytics in August.
Action item; research team to coordinate with retention group for next presentation with
3.2 CUC107 report (Attachment D).
RH advised that the withdrawal rate is 30%, which is in line with other units at CDU. In the period SS2012 to S1 2014 SELT results have gone from 4’s to 6’s.
The student luncheon event went well and will be repeated. Collaborate sessions are well attended.
Weekly emails sent out to the tutors, there are about 26 groups and increasing. Turnaround for student queries is 48 hours.
Moderation sessions have improved consistency across the team.
3.3 CUC100 report (Attachment E)
The CUC100 external coordinator advised that the unit is well regarded, with large cohorts in a number of locations. All teams are using the same teaching plan and participating in mod- eration to ensure consistency.
Externally running smoothly and the majority of students respond well to it. Same teaching team of tutors, everyone has worked on campus in Darwin at one time. The pastoral care is strong externally.
The same rate of withdrawal has been maintained. Note the withdrawal figure include stu- dents who gained CT.
SELTs were very positive and working on strategies to improve the Melbourne campuses re- sponse rate. Of the qualitative comments, 59 students responded that the unit need no changes. Collaborate sessions are offered between 4.30-5.30 and many view the recorded sessions. The team plans to offer evening sessions.
PVCA queried the high numbers of students receiving CT so late, given that this has a neg- ative effect on unit retention rates. Theme Leader CU confirmed that students enrol in the unit as it is compulsory and once they have gone through the UI they are encouraged to ap- ply for CT if they think they have completed the necessary skills elsewhere.
Action: Theme Leader CU to explore ways of getting informa- tion to students about CT earlier (including enrolment packages, common units website, Online Orientation site).
3.4 CUC106 report (Attachment F)
Theme Leader, CU advised that there is still an issue with withdrawals and SELTs (generally 5 and above but are not as high as the other two units). Theme Leader CU advised that the unit covers a lot, design and innovation, group work and literacies, students also have to build a prototype. A working party (including reference group members from around the university) will be examining the issues associated with high withdrawal.
Theme Leader CU and Coordinator CUC106 recently surveyed the CUC106 students and 50% stated that teamwork was the principle reason for withdrawal, followed by personal reasons and study load and the design demands of the unit (which may be due to the fact that the unit attracts not only engineering and science students but also pharmacy students who may not be interested in the design aspect).
In addition, teamwork for external students was considered problematic because of: difficulty in contacting team members group assignments lack of face to face discussion finding a group even when assistance is given
PVCA given high external attrition and lower SELTS an intervention is required, the unit has been problematic for a while.
Pro Vice Chancellor – LEBA pointed out that there is an issue of equivalence between the internals and externals especially with regard to group work. What we are assessing is their ability to work as a team however we have no control over all of the variables that might disrupt that.
Resolution: Committee agreed that a substantive change to the assessment for CUC106 is required.
Action: Theme leader, CU to report back to committee on out- comes of forthcoming CUC106 working party meeting to discuss issues of withdrawal and unit content.
3.5 Library Information Skills report Liaison and Academic Support Coordinator’s written report circulated at the end of meeting, feedback to be given via email.
4. Possibilities for CUC100 pre commencement of degree
Deferred to a later CU committee meeting.
PVCA confirmed that Edwina Grose should be invited to discuss any logistical issues related to this item at the next meeting.
Actions Arising
No Item Person Time- Progress . frame 1. Theme leader, CU to request OMP Theme leader, November pending provide comparative reports to the CU CU committee on all paths via which students can achieve advanced standing.
2. Theme leader, CU to report back to Theme leader, Next Completed committee on logistics/budget of Ess- CU meeting ington students being able to choose to study either CUC100 or CUC106 in 2015. 3. Liaison and Academic Support Co- Liaison and Next ? ordinator to discuss possible reloca- Academic Sup- meeting tion of 5 YouTube videos to port Coordinat- Sharestream with Bill Searle, Man- or ager - Learning 4. Inter uni prog - Kormilda students ad- Theme leader, Next Pending vanced standing CU meeting further samples 5. Theme Leader CU to explore ways of Theme leader, Next Completed getting information to students about CU meeting CT earlier (including enrolment pack- ages, common units website, Online Orientation site) 6. Theme leader, CU to report back to Theme leader, Next Completed committee on outcomes of forthcom- CU meeting ing CUC106 working party meeting to discuss issues of withdrawal and unit content.