DOCSLIB.ORG

Towards Open and Ethical University Governance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Towards Open and Ethical University Governance Towards Open and Ethical University Governance NTEU discussion paper August 2017 1. Overview This discussion paper has been prepared to support the implementation of the 2016 National Council1 motion, Accountability of University Councils, which asked for “a report on the varying practices of universities and the impact upon the quality of university governance and their obligations under the university Acts, as well as to the broader community.” The discussion paper outlines the experiences of NTEU staff members on university council/governing bodies, the current extent of external and private sector representation on these bodies, and the character of legislative reform undertaken in Australia since 1988. The discussion paper demonstrates that systematic ‘reform’, over recent decades, has sought to reduce elected staff and student representation on university governing bodies. These measures are fundamental not only to the concentration of governance decision-making in the university executive but to the removal of openness, transparency and accountability in university decision-making and operations. As part of an array of measures necessary to reverse this trend, the NTEU has developed a draft NTEU Code of Open and Ethical University Governance. Its purpose is to articulate a clear set of principles that protect the distinctive character of Australian universities as public institutions. 2. Staff experiences of University Councils/Governing Bodies In September 2016, the NTEU settled a Federal Court case at the University of New England, where Professor Margaret Sims was accused in February 2015 of having a standing conflict of interest by holding both union and council positions.2 Professor Sims was already the staff- elected representative on council when elected the NTEU Branch President. Significantly, she was re-elected as staff representative on council while the dispute was in progress. While the joint statement released on 30 September 2016 settled that there was no apparent conflict of interest in holding both positions, the case highlighted the extent of secrecy and lack of transparency currently on university councils. Concerns were reinforced by responses collected through an evaluation survey circulated on 21 September 2016 for an NTEU workshop for university council members who were also NTEU members.3 The survey attracted 22 responses (61% of attendees). Responses from the survey highlighted the following key concerns about governance arrangements at the relevant institution: that lack of transparency and accountability in governance protocols was common; 1 NTEU National Council, https://www.nteu.org.au/myunion/about_us/national_council 2 Andrew MacDonald (2017) “Union claims win in conflict of interest case at University of New England”, http://www.nteu.org.au/article/Union-claims-win-in-conflict-of-interest-case-at-University-of-New-England-19070 3 Jeannie Rea (2016) “Union members on university councils,” Advocate, Vol.23, No.3, 22. 1 that ‘conflict of interest’ assumptions limit legitimate questions made by elected staff seeking to address issues of poor governance; that most council leaders exert pressure on individual members to conform to council decisions; that staff often feel isolated and there is benefit in building networks amongst union aligned council members; that there is a role for legal and procedural skills in holding management to account during council meetings; and that university council meetings present a unique opportunity to present the best interests of the university from a staff perspective, although in numerous instances this opportunity is only just being recognised by NTEU members. Lack of transparency in Council procedures Specific responses to the evaluation survey reinforced the prevalence of secrecy and lack of transparency in university council meetings and processes: 75% said either the council agenda, papers or minutes were not entirely available to staff members. In a few instances, the agenda itself was not available. In other instances, minutes were redacted or presented as summaries, and sometimes took long periods before they became public. 37% said Council meetings were not open to observers. When observers were allowed, this was generally at the discretion of the Chancellor and they would be excluded for confidential matters. In some instances, only invited presentations or staff at specific levels were able to observe meeting proceedings. 61% stated they could not report on council business to staff. There was significant variation across responses in relation to what could not be reported on. In most instances, commercial-in-confidence or highly sensitive matters could not be reported. In some instances, restricted subject matter extended well beyond commercial-in- confidence matters. 38% said they were encouraged to communicate with other council members outside of council meetings. The majority of comments reflected that NTEU members were neither encouraged nor discouraged, however, a handful outlined they were discouraged from engaging with other council members, either by the assignment of a mentor or through the direct intervention of the Chancellor. 94% received an induction, although 76% said they did not receive training on meeting procedure. Some reported being intimidated by the Vice Chancellor or discouraged from meeting with other Councillors at induction. Some described their induction experience as limited to reading council papers and not about meeting procedure or analysing financial documents. 58% said they were encouraged to nominate for committees of council. Comments reinforced that there was a wide variety of responses in terms of committee participation, with staff participation common in some instances, and discouraged in others. Following this survey, the NTEU consulted further with workshop participants and NTEU staff. These discussions highlighted that: At some universities the council agenda was divided into a ‘confidential’ and ‘non- confidential’ list of items. Important matters were concealed from broader scrutiny by simply being added to the confidential items; 2 Union members were commonly discriminated against by not being allowed to join council committees or sub-committees where important assessments and decisions were made; Minutes were not recorded for Committee and sub-committee meetings at some institutions and therefore were not properly accountable to the governing body, let alone the public; Council members often do not have a publicly-listed email address and therefore are not accountable to any stakeholder, irrespective of whether they are staff, students, the local community or the wider public. This includes Minister-appointed (external) governing body members who often have no formal means of contact or correspondence with the wider public. Feedback to the evaluation survey and other correspondence does not reflect governance practices at all Australian universities. But the existence of these practices in numerous places across the sector demonstrate the regulatory burden in relation to university governance is fragile and that non-transparent practices and committee cultures have demonstrably been able to flourish. 3. Changing role of University Councils/Governing Bodies Governing body structures and practices are routinely influenced by binding legal instruments including their enabling legislation, Commonwealth funding legislation, State/Territory general legislation, corporations’ law, and other local factors that influence operations. For instance, universities are subject to legislation that empowers state and Federal audit bodies to make financial assessments of public institutions, as well as state legislation that regulates against improper conduct and corruption at universities. This includes the Crime and Corruption Commission in Qld (which found the UQ vice-chancellor culpable of corruption in 2013), 4 and the WA Crime and Corruption Commission (which found the Murdoch University chancellor responsible for improper conduct in 2016).5 Nonetheless, university governance has been subject to structural and economic changes larger than the traditional dichotomy between “internal estates and state level regulation”.6 A key role for university councils/governing bodies is to make decisions on increasingly complex internal and external dimensions of institutional governance. The 2013 Review of Higher Education Regulation report, which depicts modern university governing bodies as covering interlocking ‘regulatory forces’, extending from legislation to market incentives, and from local to global pressures. These include the student demand-driven system (DDS) for CSPs (Commonwealth-Supported Places), competitive grants, performance-based research funding, state-based, national and international quality assurance, along with market pressures such as the competition for international students and emerging online learning markets.7 The role of individual university councillors sit amidst forces which have effectively inserted “non-academic interests into the heart of education, adding layers of external 4 Crime and Corruption Commission (Qld) (2013) An examination of suspected official misconduct at the University of Queensland, http://www.ccc.qld.gov.au/research-and-publications/publications/misconduct/uq/an-examination-of- suspected-official-misconduct-at-the-university-of-queensland 5 WA Crime and Corruption Commission (2016) Report on a Matter of Governance at Murdoch University, https://www.ccc.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/Report%20on%20a%20matter%20of%20governance%20at%20Murdoch
Load more

Recommended publications
  • USYD Submission to New International Education Strategy
    Professor Stephen Garton AM Vice-Chancellor and Principal 12 May 2021 The Hon Alan Tudge MP Minister for Education Chair, Council for International Education Submission made via: https://www.dese.gov.au/australian-strategy-international-education-2021-2030 The University of Sydney welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the development of a new ten-year national strategy for international education. Our feedback is intended to complement the submissions provided by Universities Australia, the Group of Eight and the International Education Association of Australia, to which we have contributed. In 1923, the University accepted its first international student - a young man who was studying to become a teacher when he returned home to China. The University has been educating international students for close to 100 years and Australia has been a global leader in the delivery of high-quality international education for well over 30 years. The disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic for students, staff, education providers and businesses has been well-documented. While the full impact of the pandemic on the higher education and research sectors remains unknown, it appears increasingly likely that Australian international education will continue to face challenges for the foreseeable future. It is therefore extremely timely for the Australian Government, through the Council of International Education, to be leading a national discussion about what Australia’s international education sector will look like in ten years and about the short- and long-term priorities and steps that are needed to ensure Australia continues to have a strong, albeit recalibrated, international education sector, capable of delivering significant and diverse benefits for the nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposal for the Australian Annual Higher Education Student ICT Study (AAHESIS) 1
    DIVISION OF LEARNING AND TEACHING SERVICES (DLTS) Panorama Avenue Tel: +61 2 6338 4804 Bathurst NSW 2795 Fax: +61 2 6338 4342 Australia www.csu.edu.au/division/lts ABN: 83 878 708 551 Proposal for the Australian Annual Higher Education Student ICT Study (AAHESIS) 1. Overview: Value/Need for the project This proposal for an Australian Annual Higher Education Student ICT Study directly addresses ALTC’s Priority 2 – that is, proposals that deliver strategic approaches to learning and teaching that address the increasing diversity of the student body. This proposal specifically focuses on student diversity in relation to ICT capability. Its national, collaborative all-of-sector approach supports the ALTC objectives of identifying learning and teaching issues that impact on the Australian higher education system and facilitative national approaches to address these and other emerging issues. The proposal supports ALTC Principles of Inclusiveness, Long term change – through a focus on systemic change and capacity building, and Collaboration. The aim of the project is to provide a survey instrument and process that will provide information about ICT capability, use and experience of commencing higher education students in Australia. As more and more higher education institutions begin offering online courses and seek to cater for diverse student groups, the complexity of accommodating differences in student preparedness, including ICT skills, for higher education study will increase. The availability of the information gathered by this survey will enable universities to better target their programs and services to support students’ success. The significant in-kind support from the project partners in this project provides ALTC with value for money.
    [Show full text]
  • Report: Higher Education and Research Reform Amendment Bill 2014 [Provisions]
    APPENDIX 1 Submissions Received 1. Prof Jacqueline K 2. Mr Chris Jervis 3. Professor John G 4. Mr Brian Long 5. Dr Rosemary S. O'Donnell 6. Dr Anthony Fricker 7. Mr Victor Ziegler 8. Dr Matthew Fitzpatrick 9. Name Withheld 10. Ms Catherine Chambers 11. Ms Catherine Ogier 12. Dr Martin Young 13. Ms Lisa Ford 14. Isolated Children's Parents' Association of Australia 15. Australian Technology Network of Universities 16. Rev W.J. Uren 17. Australian Association of Social Workers 112 18. Ms Janice Wegner 19. Equity Practitioners in Higher Education Australasia (EPHEA) 20. Mr John Quiggin 21. Mr John McLaren 22. The University of Notre Dame Australia 23. University of South Australia Student Association 24. Mr Damian Buck 25. Australian Catholic University (ACU) 26. Name Withheld 27. Name Withheld 28. Ms Rosamund Winter 29. Holmesglen Institute 30. Queensland Government - Department of Education, Training and Employment 31. Mr Robert Simpson 32. Name Withheld 33. Ms Juna Langford 34. Avondale College of Higher Education 35. Mr Grahame Bowland 36. Mr Ben Bravery 113 37. Dr Geoff Sharrock 38. Name Withheld 39. Name Withheld 40. Mr Matthew Currell 41. Name Withheld 42. Australian Liberal Students' Federation 43. Mr Stephen Lake 44. Mr Trent Bell 45. The University of Western Australia 46. Group of Eight Australia 47. The University of Queensland 48. Council of Private Higher Education (COPHE) 49. PPE Society, La Trobe 50. Dr Nathan Absalom 51. Mrs Robyn Wotherspoon 52. Open Universities Australia 53. CQUniversity Rockhampton 54. Navitas Ltd 55. Mr Peter Gangemi 114 56. Regional Universities Network 57.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY PROFILES 2021 This Work Is Licensed Under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence
    UNIVERSITIES AUSTRALIA UNIVERSITY PROFILES 2021 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. Further inquiries should be made to the Chief Executive. 1 Geils Court, Canberra ACT 2601 P +61 (0)2 6285 8100 E [email protected] universitiesaustralia.edu.au ABN 53 008 502 930 FOREWORD Universities are places of great inspiration and initiative. They are where we forge our understanding of ourselves and the world around us – and our place in a forward-looking nation. Our universities educated more Australian students than ever before in 2019 – over one million Australian and 450,00 international students. Almost 340,000 students graduated that same year. Our universities offer courses in natural and physical sciences, information technology, engineering, architecture and building, agriculture and environmental studies, health, education, management and commerce, society and culture, creative arts and food hospitality and personal services. Universities are constantly adding new disciplines of study that reflect changes in industry, society and workplaces. Through them, they seek to prepare students for jobs that do not yet exist. Australia relies on our world-class university research to find solutions to the biggest challenges and to grasp the most promising opportunities. University expertise, ingenuity and innovation help to develop new industries and new jobs that will shape Australia’s future. Through collaborations with business, university researchers help them solve their toughest problems and bring their ideas to fruition. Through this research, education and community engagement, universities improve the lives of individuals, families, communities, and the nation. Thirty-nine outstanding universities are members of Universities Australia and this, the 2021 edition of University Profiles, is your guide to all of them.
    [Show full text]
  • University Student Finances in 2012 July 2013
    University student finances in 2012 A study of the financial circumstances of domestic and international students in Australia’s universities July 2013 Emmaline Bexley, Suzanne Daroesman, Sophie Arkoudis and Richard James Centre for the Study for Higher Education The University of Melbourne This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. Further inquiries should be made to the Chief Executive: GPO Box 1142 CANBERRA ACT 2601 Ph: +61 2 6285 8100 Fax: +61 2 6285 8101 Email: [email protected] Web: www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au ABN: 53 008 502 930 Contents Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 1. The key findings ................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Survey method and sample composition ........................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Survey method ................................................................................................................................................................. 11 2.2 Summary of responses ................................................................................................................................................. 12 2.3
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 NMC Technology Outlook: Australian Tertiary Education. a Horizon Project Regional Report
    2016 NMC Technology Outlook for Australian Tertiary Education A Horizon Project Regional Report Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Key Trends Accelerating Technology Adoption .................................................................................................. 5 Significant Challenges Impeding Technology Adoption ........................................................................ 7 Important Developments in Educational Technology: Time-to-Adoption Horizon: One Year or Less ! Bring Your Own Device .................................................................................................................................... 9 ! Flipped Classroom .......................................................................................................................................... 10 ! Learning Analytics ........................................................................................................................................... 11 ! Online Learning ................................................................................................................................................ 12 Time-to-Adoption Horizon: Two to
    [Show full text]
  • No. 14 University of New South Wales
    Submission No 14 INQUIRY INTO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NSW TERTIARY EDUCATION SECTOR Organisation: University of New South Wales Date Received: 24 July 2020 UNSW Submission: Future development of the NSW tertiary education sector About UNSW Sydney UNSW is one of Australia’s leading research and teaching universities, ranked in the 2020 QS World University Rankings as one of the top 50 universities in the world1. Through our 2025 Strategy, UNSW is committed to research that addresses some of the most significant challenges facing Australia and the world, as well as educating students to become highly employable skilled professionals. In 2019, the 70th anniversary of our foundation, UNSW had 64,053 students enrolled and 7285 total staff. We are proud to have been ranked first in Australia for research excellence and impact, with more top ratings in broad fields of research and more impact cases rated high than any other Australian university2. Highlighting the breadth and quality of research by UNSW academics, in 2020 UNSW again had the highest number of subjects (12) ranked first within Australia and the highest number of subjects (52 out of 54) ranked in the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) subject ranking3. Meanwhile, UNSW ranks 27th in the world in the 2020 QS Graduate Employability Rankings4. Beyond academic excellence, our 2025 Strategy has ‘Social Impact’ and ‘Innovation and Engagement’ as key priorities for UNSW, ensuring that our work supports improved quality of life for people in Australia and around the world, while also supporting the exchange of knowledge with the broader community, opening up new opportunities for job creation.
    [Show full text]
  • Work-Integrated Learning: the New Prprofessionalofessional Apprenticeship?
    Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice Volume 18 Issue 1 Satisfying Many Masters: Teaching into Article 5 Professional Degrees in the 21st Century Work-Integrated Learning: The new prprofessionalofessional apprenticeship? Kate Ashman La Trobe University, Australia, [email protected] Francine Rochford La Trobe University, Australia, [email protected] Brett Slade La Trobe University, Australia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp Recommended Citation Ashman, Kate; Rochford, Francine; and Slade, Brett, Work-Integrated Learning: The new professional apprenticeship?, Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 18(1), . Available at:https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol18/iss1/5 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Work-Integrated Learning: The new professional apprenticeship? Abstract This article considers the intersection between two major themes in university policy: the improvement of participation by rural and regional communities and the dimension of graduate employability. It argues that work-integrated learning has the potential to address both themes, but that the development of an apprenticeship model for prestige degrees such as law may deliver additional benefits to rural and regional student engagement. It considers a radical approach to employability by the reintroduction of the apprenticeship approach in disciplines of law and accounting specifically to assist scaffolding of learning for rural and regional students. It considers the modern context of university education and the implications of an expanded university system for delivering employability skills. The expansion of university education has not delivered consistent improvements in participation among rural and regional populations, and it is hypothesised that the visible integration of work-integrated learning has the capacity to address this deficit.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Universities' Review
    vol. 53, no. 1, 2011 Published by NTEU ISSN 0818–8068 AURAustralian Universities’ Review Editorial Policy Book Reviews The Australian Universities’ Review (AUR, formerly Vestes) is Books for review should be sent to the Editor. Our policy is to published by the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) to review books dealing either with tertiary education or with mat- encourage debate and discussion about issues in higher edu- ters pertinent to issues in tertiary education. Book reviews should cation and its contribution to Australian public life, with an be between 200 and 1200 words; review essays may be longer. emphasis on those matters of concern to NTEU members. AUR Editor Editorial decisions are made by the Editor, assisted by the AUR Satire Dr Ian R Dobson Editorial Board. The views expressed in articles in this publica- Do you have something satirical to say about the Australian tion, unless otherwise stated, are those of the authors and do not higher education sector? Send it in! AUR Editorial Board necessarily represent the views of the Editor, the Editorial Board Dr Jeannie Rea, NTEU National President or the publisher. Replies and letters Dr Timo Aarrevaara, University of Helsinki Although some contributions are solicited by the Editor or the AUR welcomes letters of response to articles published in the Professor Walter Bloom, Murdoch University Editorial Board, AUR is anxious to receive contributions inde- journal. Longer responses to articles are also encouraged. pendently from staff and students in the higher education sector Dr Anita Devos, Monash University and other readers. Responses should be a maximum of 1,000 words, and should be received within a month after the publication of the journal so Dr Jamie Doughney, Victoria University AUR publishes both articles and other contributions, includ- that they can be properly considered by the Editor and the Edito- Dr Leo Goedegebuure, University of Melbourne ing short commentary and satire.
    [Show full text]
  • Australia's Higher Education Delivery
    Australia’s higher education delivery offshore and online – trends, barriers and opportunities Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education Gwilym Croucher, Kristine Elliott, William Locke and Edward Yencken Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 What is transnational education? ........................................................................... 4 1.2 Australian transnational education ......................................................................... 6 2. Examining transnational education .................................................................................... 7 2.1 Specifying transnational education in the Australian context ................................ 7 2.2 Research approach and outline ............................................................................... 9 3. Offshore transnational education .................................................................................... 10 3.1 The current state of offshore TNE ......................................................................... 10 3.2 What do providers see as key challenges for TNE? ............................................... 14 3.3 What do providers see as key enablers of TNE? ................................................... 17 4. Online transnational education ........................................................................................ 19 4.1 Online education as TNE .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Destination Australia Using Your Cambridge Qualifications to Study in Australia Contents a Pathway to University Success
    Destination Australia Using your Cambridge qualifications to study in Australia Contents A pathway to university success .............1 Why choose Australia? ...........................2 Student success stories ......................... 4 What you need to know ..........................6 What qualifications do I need to get a place on a course at an Australian university? ........................7 How do I apply to study at an Australian university? ............................8 Recognition of Cambridge qualifications ..........................................9 Australian universities that accept Cambridge International A Levels 0....... 1 About us Cambridge Assessment International Education prepares school students for life, helping them develop an informed curiosity and a lasting passion for learning. We are part of the University of Cambridge. Our Cambridge Pathway gives students a clear path for educational success from age 5 to 19. Schools can shape the curriculum around how they want students to learn – with a wide range of subjects and flexible ways to offer them. It helps students discover new abilities and a wider world, and gives them the transferable skills they need for life, so they can achieve at school, university and work. A pathway to university success Cambridge International AS & A Levels are recognised as a passport to success in education, university and employment. They are valued by Australian universities as academically rigorous qualifications that equip students with the skills they need to succeed, both at university and beyond. Nearly all Australian universities with undergraduate programmes recognise our qualifications, including those from the Group of Eight coalition of top universities. Each of these member universities is well regarded in a number of different areas and Cambridge students are currently enrolled at or have graduated from these universities.
    [Show full text]
  • Navitas Is Committed to Assisting Migrants and Refugees from Around the World to Settle and Obtain Employment in Australia
    Navitas Limited Annual Report 2008 For personal use only Navitas Limited Annual Report 2008 3 Your World of English Contents ACE – Sydney, Perth, Cairns, Brisbane ACL – Sydney Navitas – Your World of Education 3 HELC – Melbourne LMT – Adelaide Who are we? 4 Highlights 6 Your World at University Our achievements 7 ACBT – Colombo (Sri Lanka) ACN – Sydney Group Leadership Team 8 AIBT – Lusaka (Zambia) Chairman’s letter 10 AUSI – Nairobi (Kenya) Chief Executive Officer’s review of operations 12 CIC – Perth Partnerships for the future 16 CRIC – Cambridge (UK) Curtin – Sydney, Singapore Divisional review of operations 18 EIBT – Adelaide Board of Directors 34 Eynesbury – Adelaide Corporate governance statement 36 FIC – Vancouver (Canada) HIBT – Hertfordshire (UK) Financial statements 41 ICM – Winnipeg (Canada) Corporate information 118 ICWS – Swansea (UK) Additional information 119 LIBT – London (UK) Investors’ information 120 MIBT – Melbourne MQC – Sydney Glossary 121 PIBT – Perth Business contact details 122 QIBT – Brisbane SAIBT – Adelaide SIBT – Sydney Your World at Work ACAP – Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane AIPS – Melbourne Cytech – Sydney The annual general meeting of Navitas will be held at the Jarrah Room, MEG – Melbourne Navitas Limited, Level 2, Kirin Centre, 15 Ogilvie Road, Mt Pleasant, Navitas Workforce – Sydney Western Australia 6153 on Thursday 20 November 2008 at 11 am. Pollin8 – Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane Your World of Recruitment For personal use only EduGlobal – (China, Australia) EOL – (UK) SOL – (India) StudyLink – (Australia) Sydney Winnipeg 4 Navitas Limited Annual Report 2008 Navitas – Your World of Education Vancouver Swansea Cambridge London Winnipeg Beijing Delhi Hong Kong Colombo Nairobi Singapore Jakarta Darwin Lusaka Cairns Brisbane Perth Adelaide Sydney Melbourne The Navitas Group is a world leader in the development and provision of educational services and learning solutions.
    [Show full text]