Monash University Policy Bank

Purpose

• To assist the University to assure itself of the quality of its academic organisational areas
• To utilise learning from this developmental process in order to effect ongoing quality improvement.

Scope

• Academic areas, including faculties, schools, departments, institutes, centres or academic fields.
• All aspects of an academic area’s operations, including planning and quality assurance, resources, academic programs, learning and teaching, research and research training, and professional and community activities.

Policy Statement

The guiding principles for review are based on the University’s quality cycle of Plan, Act, Evaluate (monitor and review) and Improve. The following principles relate specifically to reviews of academic areas:

1. The strategic directions of the University are of central importance for all reviews.
2. Benchmarking leading to improvement is strongly encouraged, as is input from stakeholders.
3. Academic reviews consider the effectiveness of processes and procedures, particularly as they are demonstrated through outcomes. Effective processes are best demonstrated by successful outcomes and reviews encourage a focus on outcomes.
4. The importance and relevance of external professional and accreditation reviews is acknowledged.
5. Quality assurance and improvement are core responsibilities and budgeting for review is therefore part of the normal planning and budgeting process of academic areas.
6. Each academic area will be reviewed at least every 5 years.

Academic reviews will comprise the following stages as detailed in the Procedures:

• Self-review of the academic area and preparation of self-review report;
• Call for submissions;
• Review by external panel and preparation of review report;
• Preparation of action plan;
• Reporting to and consultation with the Vice-Chancellor’s group and the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Quality);
• Reporting on implementation of recommendations 12 months after lodgement of the review report and action plan.

The Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ) will maintain a database of academic reviews, implementation plans and 12-month follow-up reports on implementation of recommendations.

Supporting procedures

Responsibility for implementation

Vice Chancellor’s Group
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Quality)
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Research Training)
Deans
Associate Deans (Education)
Associate Deans responsible for research and research training
Faculty managers
Heads of schools/departments/centres/academic areas

Status

Key Stakeholders

Vice Chancellor’s Group
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Quality)
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Research Training)
Manager, Centre for Higher Education Quality
Deans
Associate Deans (Education)
Associate Deans responsible for research and research training
Faculty managers
Heads of schools/departments/centres/academic areas
Academic and administrative staff of academic areas
Students

Approval body

Endorsement body

Definitions

Academic Review: the process for evaluating an academic area, including faculties, schools/departments, centres, institutes or academic fields in relation to the Monash quality cycle, with respect to strategic planning, quality assurance, management, teaching and learning, research, resources, and external engagement.

Course review: the process evaluating an academic program in relation to the Monash quality cycle, with respect to the strategic, academic and business aspects of the course, including planning and quality assurance, resourcing, course demand, structure and management, teaching and learning, and external engagement.

Related legislation

Related policies

Course Review Policy 

Related documents

Academic Review: sample calendar of events (obtained through CHEQ)
Academic Review: sample format for implementation plan (obtained through CHEQ)

Date Effective

Review Date

Owner

Author

Contact Person