THE UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO
TE WHARE WĀNANGA O WAIKATO
THE ACADEMIC BOARD
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY 20 NOVEMBER 2012
Present:
Professor R Crawford (Chair), Professor B Barton, Ms C Blickem, Dr T
Bowell, Prof K Broughan, Dr K Bryan, Mrs B Cooper, Associate
Professor W Drewery, Ms S Gillard, Professor B Grant, Mr R Hallett,
Dr A Hinze, Professor D Hodgetts, Professor G Holmes, Dr D Johnson,
Professor A Jones, Associate Professor S Jones, Professor P Kamp, Mr
R Kyle, Dr. D Lumsden, Dr D Marsh, Ms P Melbourne, Professor R
Moltzen, Professor B Morse, Ms P Ngatai, Associate Professor J
Tressler and Professor M Wilson
In attendance:
Mr A Letcher, Ms H Pridmore and Ms S Sleigh
Secretariat:
Ms M Jordan-Tong and Ms R Boyer-Willisson
12.73
APOLOGIES
Received
Apologies for absence from Mr P Baker, Ms T Mills, Ms S Morrison, Professor F
Scrimgeour, Professor K Weaver, Dr A Zahra.
12.74
CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING (PART 1) HELD ON
9 OCTOBER 2012
Confirmed
The minutes of the meeting (Part 1) held on 9 October 2012 as set out in document
12/527a), subject to the following change:
Minute 12.70, note three, delete “The chairperson can decline to place the item on
the agenda.” and “If the motion is seconded, the Board would be asked to vote on
the motion on and if the Board votes in favour of the motion then the item would
be added to a future agenda.”
12.75
MINISTRY OF BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND ENTERPRISE FUNDING
Noted in discussion
1. That at the last meeting of the Academic Board, it was noted that a meeting
would take place between the University and the Ministry of Business,
Innovation and Enterprise (MBIE) in relation to research funding.
2. That MBIE representatives were introduced to University researchers in the
1
3.
4.
12.76
Faculty of Science and Engineering, and the Faculty of Computing and
Mathematical Sciences and shown some of the work taking place.
That it was clear that the funding processes had changed radically, with
much more core funding being granted to Crown Research Institutes (CRIs);
increasingly it appeared that universities would need to become subcontractors to CRIs and would therefore need to continue to build strategic
relationships in anticipation of future funding rounds.
That it was not yet clear what impact the National Science Challenges would
have on funding environments.
EXECUTIVE APPROVAL
1.
Graduating Year Reviews
Reported
1. That the Graduating Year Reviews had been considered and
recommended for approval by the Education Quality Assurance
Committee and the Education Committee but due to the revised
approval process implemented as a result of the new committee
framework, they were not able to be submitted to the Academic Board
before the Universities New Zealand CUAP deadline of 1 November
2012.
2. That the Chair of Academic Board had approved the Graduating Year
Reviews for submission to CUAP.
Received
The Graduating Year Reviews which had been submitted to CUAP:
a. Bachelor of Business Analysis-Financial / Bachelor of Business AnalysisFinancial with Honours as set out in document 12/04a.
b. Entrepreneurship and Innovation for BECom as set out in document
12/04b.
c. Maori Music Streams for BMus - Maori Musical Instruments in
Traditional and Contemporary Contexts, and Maori Song and Dance in
Traditional and Contemporary Contexts as set out in document 12/04c.
d. Population Studies for the BSocSc as set out in document 12/04d.
e. Anthropology for BA(Hons), MA as set out in document 12/04e.
f. Geography for BA(Hons), MA as set out in document 12/04f.
Noted in discussion
That it was currently difficult for review coordinators to access robust
quantitative data regarding graduate destinations. A survey of graduates was
being developed by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning) and the
Head of Student and Academic Services.
2
2.
Memorandum of Understanding - Shanghai International Studies
University
Reported
1. That an Addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding between
Shanghai International Studies University, School of Law (SISU-Law)
and Te Piringa, Faculty of Law at the University of Waikato (UoW-Law)
had been developed by the Faculty of Law and the Academic
Administration Office.
2. That the Education Committee recommended that the Addendum
proceed to the Academic Board for approval, subject to clarification of a
number of points which were noted and had been addressed; however, it
was approved executively to enable the agreement to be signed while the
SISU delegation was visiting the Waikato campus.
3. That executive approval of the Addendum to the Memorandum of
Understanding with Shanghai International Studies University, School of
Law was granted by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, on behalf of the Vice
Chancellor, as Acting Chair of the Academic Board on 2 November 2012.
Received
A report from the Dean, Faculty of Law, in relation to the Addendum to the
Memorandum of Understanding with Shanghai International Studies
University, School of Law, as set out in document 12/526.
12.77
REPORT OF THE VICE-CHANCELLOR
Received
The report of the Vice-Chancellor as set out in attached document 12/516.
Noted in discussion
1. That the Tertiary Education Committee (TEC) was still in consultation
regarding calculation of average quality scores for PBRF. There will likely be
more than one average quality score; the Vice-Chancellor would report any
updates to staff.
2. That CUAP had approved a change to the definition of masters degrees to
allow completion in 180-points following a three-year undergraduate degree.
Agents had indicated there was demand from international students for oneyear masters programmes; the revised definition made these possible.
3. That the increased EFTS funding allocated for science and engineering
subjects was only available for students enrolling in those areas and could not
be reallocated.
3
12.78
PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE ACADEMIC
BOARD TO INCLUDE THE PRESIDENT OF THE WAIKATO STUDENTS’
UNION
Reported
1. That at the last meeting of the Academic Board, a proposal had been
submitted to amend the constitution to include the President of the Waikato
Students’ Union (WSU) as an ex officio member of the Academic Board.
2. That there was general support for the proposal; however, it was agreed that
final consideration of the recommendation to Council would be deferred
until the November meeting to allow criteria for the inclusion of this position
to be documented and to accompany the recommendation.
Received
1. A proposal, as set out in document 12/474, from the President of the WSU,
that the position of President of the WSU be reinstated as an ex officio
member in the constitution of the Academic Board.
2. The proposed criteria for inclusion of the President of the WSU as an ex
officio member of the Academic Board as set out in document 12/540.
Noted in discussion
1. That for 2013, the President of the WSU was also the Student Member of
Council, which allowed time for further consideration of the criteria during
2013.
2. That the criteria would be developed further for consideration by Academic
Board in 2013.
12.79
REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Received
The report and recommendations from the Education Committee meeting of 23
October as set out in document 12/529:
Noted in discussion
Scholarships framework
1. That the Scholarships Framework had been recommended for approved by
all Faculty Boards apart from Computing and Mathematical Sciences.
2. That the main issue related to funding scholarships within the research
institutes as it was understood that research institutes were intended to be
self-funded. However, the scholarships allocated to the research institutes
would be part of faculties’ existing allocations, not in addition.
3. That the Scholarships Framework was a comprehensive document which
clearly outlined the University’s approach to scholarships, and its strategy
for scholarship funding. However, the following concerns were noted:
4. The allocation of scholarship funding seemed to focus on supporting doctoral
4
5.
6.
and masters research. Of particular concern was that only $100,000 (less than
2%) of funding was allocated to taught postgraduate programmes which
count for about two thirds of postgraduate EFTS. Qualifications which had a
professional orientation would potentially be disadvantaged by this
framework.
The allocation to undergraduate scholarships seemed low; some faculties
would have preferred to see a bigger proportion directed to attracting and
retaining excellent undergraduate students.
The framework did not address how the postgraduate scholarships would be
used to attract new students; currently a large proportion was allocated to
students who were already enrolled.
Recommended
That the Scholarships Framework be approved for 2013 only, with further review
in line with faculty board feedback, and with data on cost benefit analysis, to be
undertaken during the year.
Resolved
That the Academic Board approved:
1. The renewal of the guaranteed credit agreement between the Bay of Plenty
Polytechnic Diploma in Applied Computing and the University of Waikato
as set out in document 12/444
2. The renewal of the guaranteed credit agreements between the Bay of Plenty
Polytechnic Diploma in Sport and Recreation and the UNiversit of Waikato
as set out in document 12/486.
3. The Significant Academic Developments Timeline as set out in document
12/448
4. The Category C and Specialisation Timeline as set out in document 12/449
5. The following Category C and Specialisation Proposals:
a.
Amendment to the compulsory papers for the Electronics major for the
BSc and BSc(Tech) (document 12/462a)
b.
Amendment to the compulsory papers for the Chemistry major for the
BSc (document 12/462b)
c.
Amendment to the fourth year compulsory papers for the BE(Hons)
(Software Engineering) (12/462c)
d.
Deletion of the subject ‘Enterprise and Innovation’ for the PGDip
(document 12/462e)
e.
Introduction of a specialisation in Global Studies in Education for the
MEd and PGDipEd (document 12/463a)
f.
Introduction of a specialisation in Governance for the PGCert(Mgt)
(document 12/463b).
5
12.80
REPORT OF THE RESEARCH COMMITTEE
Received
The report and recommendations from the Research Committee meeting of 25
October as set out in document 12/528.
Noted in discussion
1.
That some concern had been raised that a staff member being performancemanaged in one aspect of their job could potentially be eligible for a
research award. However, this risk was mitigated by the requirement for
the Dean to sign agreement to the nomination.
2.
That the Academic Board supported in principle the Terms of Reference for
the Research Excellence Awards, as set out in document 12/76, subject to
further work being undertaken to develop the criteria for the awards.
12.81
UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO PLANS
1.
Student Plan
Noted in discussion
1. That in a deliberate effort to not encroach on the goals of the Teaching
and Learning Plan, the Student Plan, as currently drafted, makes little
reference to the educational dimension of the student experience.
2. That, as it evolved over time, it would improve the Student Plan if it
more explicitly referenced aspects of the educational dimension of the
Student Experience.
Recommended
That the Vice-Chancellor submit the draft Student Plan 2012 – 2015, as set
out in document 12/501, to Council for approval.
2.
Workforce Plan
The Assistant Vice-Chancellor (Operations) was in attendance for this item.
Noted in discussion
1. That as the Workforce Plan evolved over time it would be helpful to
clarify the processes for professional goal setting and performance
appraisal, especially in terms of the collegial aspects of those processes.
2. That as the Workforce Plan evolved it would also be useful to clarify the
University’s key messages concerning its core values and principles
associated with teaching, learning, scholarship and research alongside
the management and financial drivers.
6
Recommended
That the Vice-Chancellor submit the draft Workforce Plan 2013 – 2015 as set
out in attached document 12/524, to Council for approval.
12.82
REVIEW OF THE CRITERIA FOR HONORARY AWARDS
Recommended
That Council approve the changes to the Criteria for Honorary Awards
recommended by the Honours Committee, as set out in attached document
12/520.
12.83
REVIEW OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR COUNCIL AND ITS
COMMITTEES
Noted in discussion
Secretaries note: The Academic Board was inquorate during consideration of this item.
The item was therefore considered by the members of the Academic Board who were
present.
Recommended
That the Rules of Procedure for the Council and its Committees, as set out in document
12/521, be referred to the next meeting of Council for approval along with the
following advice from members of the Academic Board:
1. That it would be helpful to have advice regarding how these Rules of
Procedure should be applied in practice in relation to particular committees,
especially the Faculty Boards.
2. That it would be useful to identify the principles underpinning the Rules of
Procedure, that is, the behaviours and outcomes that they are intended to
support.
3. That the Assistant Vice-Chancellor (Executive) undertook to work with a
small group of Academic Board members and committee chairpersons on a
set of high-level principles for this purpose.
4. That these principles, and any further changes to the Rules of Procedure that
might be appropriate in support of the principles, will be brought back to the
Academic Board and Council in due course.
12.84
PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE REGULATIONS FOR THE HIGHER
DOCTORATES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO AND THE HIGHER
DEGREE APPEALS AND COMPLAINTS REGULATIONS
Received
A proposal from the Postgraduate Research Committee to amend the Regulations
for the Higher Doctorates of the University of Waikato and the Higher Degree
Appeals and Complaints Regulations.
7
Reported
1. That during the course of the review of the University’s committee
framework in 2011, it had been noted that changes to the University’s
regulations for higher doctorates (namely the Doctor of Science, Doctor of
Literature and Doctor of Laws) would be necessary to align them with other
relevant University regulations and also with the terms of reference of the
committees that had authorities and responsibilities associated with higher
doctorates.
2. That a working party established by the Postgraduate Research Committee
reviewed and recommended changes to the current regulations for higher
doctorates having taken into account the revised committee framework and
the alignment of the regulations with the University’s current thinking
regarding the purpose of higher doctorate qualifications.
3. That minor consequential changes were also recommended by the working
party to the Higher Degree Appeals and Complaints Regulations to reflect
the fact that the appeal provisions for the higher doctorates would now be
covered in the higher doctorate regulations and to remove references to the
Deputy Chair of the Postgraduate Research Committee as that position no
longer existed.
4. That the revised regulations had been considered and recommended for
approval by the Postgraduate Research Committee on the 10th of October
2012 and by the Research Committee on the 25th of October 2012.
Resolved
That the revised Regulations for the Higher Doctorates of the University of
Waikato and the Higher Degree Appeals and Complaints Regulations be
approved, as set out in document 12/504.
12.85
ACADEMIC BOARD APPOINTMENTS TO COMMITTEES FOR 2013
Reported
1. That clause 5 of the constitution of the Honours Committee provided for
“Three members of the academic staff of the University, at least one of whom
was a member of the sub-professorial academic staff, appointed by the
Academic Board for terms of up to three years, so that the term of each
person expires in a different year.”
2. That Michele Akoorie’s term as a sub-professorial appointee by the Academic
Board on the Honours Committee ended at the end of 2012.
3. That Sandy Morrison had agreed to have her name put forward for a three
year term from 1.1.2013 – 31.12.2015.
Resolved
That Ms Sandy Morrison be appointed to the Honours Committee for a three year
term from 1.1.2013 to 31.12.2015.
8
12.86
COMMITTEE CYCLE 2013
Noted in discussion
1. That it had been agreed that the proposed 22 January meeting of Academic
Board was not necessary.
2. That the date of the proposed 26 February meeting of the Academic Board
would need to change but an alternative had not yet been determined. The
Secretary would advise members when a date had been confirmed.
Resolved
Approval of the 2013 Committee Cycle as set out in document 12/487, subject to
removal of the 22 January meeting of the Academic Board, and confirmation of
the date of the February meeting of the Academic Board.
12.87
CHANGES TO THE DELEGATION OF POWERS STATUTE
Recommended
That Council approve the amendment to the Delegation of Powers Statute as set
out in document 12/542, subject to the inclusion of the Student Discipline Appeals
Committee under clause eight.
12.88
HIGHER DEGREE COMPLETIONS
Received
The report of students who had completed the requirements for the award of
higher degrees since the last meeting of the Academic Board as set out in
document 12/512.
12.89
TOPICS FOR FUTURE AGENDA
Recommended
That the Professional Goal setting process be included as an item for review in
2013, particularly in relation to the separation of the collegial, conversational
Professional Goal Setting process from a more formal performance appraisal
process.
12.90
PROPOSED RESTRUCTURE
ENGINEERING
OF
FACULTY
OF
SCIENCE
AND
Noted in discussion
1.
That a special Faculty of Science and Engineering Board meeting would be
held before the end of 2012 to discuss the proposed restructure.
2.
That there was some concern expressed that the process had not been
sufficiently consultative; however, the Dean advised that the proposal
9
3.
12.91
would come to Academic Board before final approval, at which point the
Board would be able to confirm that an appropriate process had been
followed.
That the proposal was currently being reviewed by Human Resources.
Faculty consultation was ongoing and feedback could be provided at any
time via the consultation website or directly to the Dean until the middle of
January.
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
Reported
That the next meeting of the Academic Board would be held in February 2013.
The date and time would be confirmed by the Secretary via email.
12.92
PROCEEDINGS WITH THE PUBLIC EXCLUDED
Resolved
That the public be excluded from the meeting to allow consideration of the
following items:
1. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting (part 2) held on 9 October 2012
2. Report of the Honours committee
The interests protected under the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987, and/or the Official Information Act 1982, which could have
been prejudiced by the conduct of these proceedings in public were:
 Item 1 concerned matters that were previously dealt with at a meeting of the
Honours Committee from which the public was excluded.
 Item 2 affected the privacy of natural persons.
Michelle Jordan-Tong
Renée Boyer-Willisson
Student and Academic Services Division
25 November 2012
10