• Section 1 - Purpose and Context
• Section 2 - Definitions
• Section 3 - Policy Statement
• School Reviews
• College Reviews
• Authority to Initiate an Academic Review
• Frequency of Reviews
• Part A - General Principles and Core Terms of Reference of Academic Review
• General Principles
• Core terms of reference
• Schools
• Colleges
• Part B - Academic Review Committees
• Section 4 - Procedures
• Part C - Academic Review Procedures
• Part D - Post Review Procedures

Section 1 - Purpose and Context

(1) The University of Western Sydney is strongly committed to maintaining high quality and reputable programs through the implementation of quality assurance and enhancement strategies. This process involves a systematic cyclical review of academic activities as set out in this policy and procedures document.

(2) The purpose of an academic review is to assist the University to monitor the quality of its curricula, teaching, research, community engagement, and associated operations.

(3) Academic reviews also provide the Vice-Chancellor University Executive, the Colleges and Schools, Academic Senate, and the Board of Trustees with expert advice and information that assists with strategic decision making, resource allocation, identifying academic excellence and areas for improvement and enhancement.

Section 2 - Definitions

(4) Nil.

Section 3 - Policy Statement

(5) This policy is concerned with the reviews of a College or School.

School Reviews

(6) The review of a School enables the University to be assured that:

1. the academic activities of the School are aligned with the strategic plans and directions of the relevant College and the University;
2. the School is maintaining the required quality and standards;
3. the School is contributing as appropriate to the relevant College's research profile, community engagement goals, and income generation priorities;
4. the School is viable, managed efficiently, and capable of responding to change.

(7) The review of a School would usually encompass all or part of those factors associated with: learning and teaching; the student experience; research training; management of college/university processes; research; regional and community engagement; income generation; staff; expenditure and facilities. Details on the specific areas, which may be covered in the review of a School, are contained in Section 2 Table 1.

(8) School reviews will be organised by the relevant College under the guidance of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching).

College Reviews

(9) The review of a College enables the University to be assured that:

1. the strategic effort and priorities of the College are aligned with UWS strategic directions;
2. the College's contribution to the attainment of key UWS strategic goals;
3. the College is viable and responsive to changes in demand.

(10) The review of a College may involve predominantly using the information obtained from School reviews, mentioned in (5) above. A College review may also encompass all or part of those factors associated with strategic planning and management including: teaching and learning; research and research training; community engagement and business and resources. Details of specific areas that may be covered by an academic review are contained in Part A, below.

(11) College reviews will be managed by the Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) and funded by the University.

Authority to Initiate an Academic Review

(12) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services), after consultation with the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) and the Dean of the College, can recommend to the Vice-Chancellor that a review should be undertaken.

(13) The Vice-Chancellor has the authority to initiate and approve an academic review.

Frequency of Reviews

(14) The Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching), in consultation with the Deputy Vice- Chancellor (Academic and Services) and the Deans, will develop and update a schedule of academic reviews for the Colleges and Schools.

(15) The Vice-Chancellor will approve the schedule of reviews and will advise Academic Senate and the Board of Trustees of the review schedule.

(16) Each School will normally undergo a review every five (5) years. However, a School may be reviewed at any time if there is a perceived need.

(17) Whenever possible, the University's review process, and any required professional accreditation reviews should be coincident.

(18) Each College will normally undergo a review every six (6) years. A review of a College may occur out of the normal review cycle, if there is a perceived need.

Part A - General Principles and Core Terms of Reference of Academic Review

General Principles

(19) The general principles for the conduct of all academic reviews are as follows:

1. all reviews will be conducted within the context of the University's strategic plan, its educational profile and the relevant College's strategic plan;
2. all reviews will involve the use of internal and external (including international) key performance indicators and relevant benchmarks against best practice;
3. all reviews will involve a consultation process with key stakeholders including students, staff and professional/community groups as appropriate;
4. the external reviewers will act as an audit team, testing the veracity of the self-assessment portfolio.

Core terms of reference

(20) Specific terms of reference for an academic review will be developed in accordance with the nature and purpose of that review. However, for each review category (Schools and Colleges), there will be the following core terms of reference.

Schools

(21) In undertaking a review of a School, the Review Committee will assess the extent to which the College/School is achieving its mission and objectives and how well it tracks and improves the quality of what does. The key issues are:

1. consistency of quality, including the implementation of policies and procedures.
2. equivalence of quality irrespective of where a program is delivered.
3. 'how do you know' what you are doing is effective and 'what are you doing to close the loop' on what needs to be improved?
4. how the College/School uses evidence to make decisions about where to put strategic and improvement efforts?

Colleges

(22) In undertaking a review of a College, the Review Committee will consider:

1. the alignment of the College's strategic planning and operational processes with UWS key strategic directions and priorities;
2. the College's contribution to the attainment of UWS strategic goals;
3. the College's viability and, if necessary, identify any relevant issues;
4. any matter relevant to the operation of the college, as it believes is appropriate.

Part B - Academic Review Committees

(23) The membership of a committee to review a School shall comprise:

1. the Chair, appointed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services) in consultation with the Vice- Chancellor. The Chair should be an external person;
2. the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) or his/her nominee;
3. at least two persons, appointed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services), who are external to the University, have high academic or professional standing, and are familiar with the area under review;
4. where specialised expertise is required, additional members may be appointed at the discretion of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services) in consultation with the Vice-Chancellor

(24) The membership of a committee to review a College shall comprise:

1. an external Chair, appointed by the Vice-Chancellor;
2. the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services) or his/her nominee;
3. at least two persons, appointed by the Vice-Chancellor, who are external to the University, have high academic or professional standing, and are familiar with academic management;
4. additional members at the discretion of the Vice-Chancellor.

Section 4 - Procedures

Part C - Academic Review Procedures

(25) The Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) will advise the Executive Dean/Head of School that a review is to be undertaken usually twelve (12) months in advance of the review. as per the schedule of reviews.

(26) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services), on the advice of the PVC Learning and Teaching, will propose the composition of the Review Committee and the terms of reference and will convey this information for comment to the Dean of the College, the School under review. While School(s) do not have right of veto they might suggest alternative external members and/or additional terms of reference for consideration by the Deputy Vice- Chancellor (Academic and Services.

(27) The Vice-Chancellor will give approval for the review to proceed.

(28) The relevant Dean, Head of School will be advised by the Pro Vice- Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) of the review program and key dates including the time line for the submission of the self-assessment portfolio and other data/information, required by the Review Committee.

(29) Once notified of the review process, the relevant Dean or Head(s) of School and, as appropriate, the Head of Program will commence the management of the self-assessment process and the preparation of the self-assessment portfolio.

(30) To assist the review, the self-assessment will be constructed along the lines of an Australia Universities Quality Agency portfolio. It will cover:

1. Teaching and Learning
2. Research and Research Training
3. Community and Regional Engagement
4. Resourcing and Infrastructure

(31) The School will attempt to identify at least two initiatives that it wishes to pursue within the next 3-5 years.

(32) The portfolio will draw upon data provided by:

1. Office of Planning and Quality, working with the Associate Dean (Academic);
2. Research Office, working with the Associate Dean (Research);
3. Community engagement/regional development, working with the Associate Dean (Development);
4. Office of Human Resources, working with the College Manager.

(33) Typically, this data will be that employed during the annual quality processes engaged in by the University.

(34) The relevant Dean/Head(s) of School will submit the self assessment portfolio to the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) one month before the review committee meets to consider the review documentation.

(35) The external reviewers will act as an audit team, testing the veracity of the self-assessment portfolio. The review team will be expected to come up with a series of commendations, recommendations, and affirmations. In particular they will be expected to comment upon the College/School's proposed initiatives. They will be free to suggest additional/alternative initiatives where they see fit and where the evidence supports these.

(36) Depending on the scope and nature of the review, the committee will spend a period of at least two-four days on the relevant campus(es). During this period, the Committee may meet with staff, students, relevant members of the broader UWS community and key people or groups external to the University.

(37) The review team will be expected to come up with a series of commendations, recommendations, and affirmations. In particular they will be expected to comment upon the College/School's proposed initiatives. They will be free to suggest additional/alternative initiatives where they see fit and where the evidence supports these.

(38) The report will be submitted to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services) who then will invite the relevant Dean, Head of School, and College/School staff members to formally respond in writing within a specified time period to the review findings.

(39) The Vice-Chancellor and Executive will consider the review report and recommendations as well as the formal response received from those mentioned in (38) above.

(40) The initiation of any action arising as a result of the review is at the discretion of the Vice- Chancellor who, through the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services), will notify the relevant Dean or Head of School accordingly.

(41) Where recommended actions have the potential to affect the employment conditions of staff, Human Resources will be advised and the relevant industrial processes will be followed.

(42) The Vice-Chancellor will present a summary of the review outcomes to Academic Senate and, as appropriate, to the Board of Trustees. It should be noted that the final report is a report to the Vice-Chancellor and the release of information other than the summary is at his/her discretion.

Part D - Post Review Procedures

(43) The Dean of the College, with the support of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching), is responsible for ensuring the actions required as a result of the review are implemented. In particular:

1. the Dean, in consultation with Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) and key staff, will develop implementation and evaluation strategies that are integrated into the College's strategic planning processes and/or (as appropriate) a change proposal for consultation as required under the current Enterprise Agreement.
2. the Dean will incorporate those actions that have significant financial implications into the annual budget and planning process;
3. the Dean (or nominee), together with the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching), will report on progress in implementing recommendations from each College and School review. This report will detail for each review:
   1. recommendations completed and when;
   2. recommendations to be completed and a timeline for completion;
   3. recommendations that have been set aside and the justifications for this outcome.
4. the report will be circulated to the University Executive, Vice-Chancellor's Advisory Committee, the Strategy and Resources Committee of the Board of Trustees, and Academic Senate. The Vice-Chancellor will be responsible for ensuring that those recommendations that have resource implications are dealt with in an appropriate and timely manner. The Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) will be responsible for overseeing those recommendations that have academic implications. In addition, relevant sections will be sent to the external members of each of the review committees to provide feedback to the committee members as to actions taken.
5. Where feasible, all recommendations from a College/School review will be actioned within twelve (12) months. When all recommendations have been actioned, this should be noted in the Annual Report. No further reference need then be made until the next review.

(44) The Office of Planning and Quality will consolidate the recommendations from these and other reviews to ensure that the University has access to the outcomes of reviews and progress with respect to their recommendations.