THE UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO
TE WHARE WĀNANGA O WAIKATO
ACADEMIC BOARD: 22 October 2013
Minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 22 October 2013
Present:
Professor A Jones (Acting Chair), Professor B Barton, Professor N
Boister, Professor K Broughan, Dr K Bryan, Dr A Campbell, Professor B
Clarkson, Ms B Cooper, Associate Professor W Drewery, Mr S Fellows,
Professor A Gillespie, Ms S Gyde, Dr A Hinze, Professor D Hodgetts,
Professor G Holmes, Dr D Johnson, Associate Professor S Jones,
Professor P Kamp, Dr A Kingsbury, Dr T Kukutai, Mr A Letcher, Dr D
Marsh, Mr T Maxwell, Professor R Moltzen, Ms S Morrison, Professor B
Morse, Ms P Ngatai, Ms S Nock, Professor D Penny, Dr M
Schoenberger-Orgad, Professor L Smith, Associate Professor J Tressler,
Professor K Weaver, and Professor M Wilson.
In Attendance:
Dr T Cartner, Ms D Fowler and Ms H Pridmore
Secretariat:
Ms M Jordan-Tong and Ms R Boyer-Willisson
13.57
APOLOGIES
Received
Apologies for absence from Ms C Blickem, Dr T Bowell, Ms M Chen, Professor R
Crawford, Professor B Grant, Mr R Hallett, Professor R Hannah, Mr R Kyle, Ms K Ross,
Associate Professor E Weymes and Dr A Zahra.
13.58
CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS HELD ON 13 AUGUST
AND 25 SEPTEMBER 2013
Confirmed
1. The minutes of the meeting held on 13 August 2013 as set out in document 13/462a.
2. The minutes of the special meeting held on 25 September 2013 as set out in
document 13/476
13.59
REPORT OF THE VICE-CHANCELLOR
Received
The report of the Vice-Chancellor as set out in document 13/463a.
13.60
REVIEW OF THE UNIVERSITY STRATEGY
Considered
Input into the review of the University Strategy, as set out in document 13/353 (updated
15 October 2103).
Noted in discussion
That the revised draft of the University Strategy was well received, and the Academic
Board expressed its thanks to those involved in the Strategy’s development.
13.61
UNIVERSITIES OF THE FUTURE
Considered
The paper by the Vice-Chancellor regarding ‘Future Directions for Teaching and
Learning at the University of Waikato’ as set out in document 13/392.
Noted in discussion
1. That the report sought to reinforce the University Strategy in terms of grounding
generic ideas of Universities of the Future with Waikato’s future as a University; it
needed to complement the Strategy and be implicit within it.
2. That Māori students in particular often chose Waikato due to a sense of identity and
ownership related to the campus location and links with iwi. While it was
important to recognise the changing nature of technology’s influences, it was
important that the campus experience did not disappear.
3. That the University’s motto, Ko te Tangata, needed to be central to consideration of
this University’s future.
4. That the preferred pedagogy was blended eLearning, an inclusive term which
blended distance, online and campus-based learning methods. A sense of place
continued to be of importance; however, that did not necessarily mean on ‘this’
campus. What was important was creating a sense of place where students could
meet and interact, whether that was a physical or virtual place.
5. That in relation to regional delivery, Waikato needed to be mindful of where
students were located, and sometimes going to them.
6. That there had been a substantial growth in ‘block’ occurrences, partly because of
the opportunity this afforded for online students to come together face to face. This
had increased the incidence of students studying on Friday nights and Saturdays,
increasing competition for facilities during these peak times.
7. That future teaching spaces were likely to be less like traditional classrooms and
more like open spaces that facilitated both group and individual learning.
8. That there were substantial costs involved in developing and delivering MOOCs;
quality was important and a poor quality MOOC would be worse than offering
none at all.
9. That an associated financial issue was whether students would be expected to have
their own laptop or other device, and the implications this could have for computer
labs, the provision of hardware, and technical support.
10. That academic staff needed access to expert assistance to build quality online
resources and papers; most staff did not currently have the experience to develop
cutting-edge digital content.
11. That the target market needed to be identified given that different learners had
varying needs. While school leavers usually wanted a significant on-campus
12.
13.
14.
15.
13.62
experience, adult learners juggling the demands of work, caring for children etc
were often a better target market for online learning.
That students’ feedback had focussed on issues relating to learning spaces and
contact time with academic staff. The importance of face-to-face contact was of
increasing importance in primarily online teaching and learning, both with the
paper convener and with other students in the paper. Blended learning needed to
include on-campus interactive learning and collaboration between students.
That it was hard to get students to engage with online paper evaluations without
some sort of incentive, or a clear benefit.
The Universities of the Future document implied that online learning would
increase four-fold. It was not clear what the staffing and resourcing implications of
this would be, or how it would be funded.
That the University needed to better promote the benefits of campus culture and all
the related elements which transformed students from secondary school students
into University graduates.
DRAFT TERTIARY EDUCATION STRATEGY
Considered
Input into the University’s response to the Tertiary Education Commission in relation to
the draft Tertiary Education Strategy, as set out in document 13/477.
Noted in discussion
1. That a tertiary education strategy needed to be long term, not driven by hot topics.
2. That the draft Strategy did not connect well with universities; while it was
recognised that the Strategy was for the whole of the tertiary sector, it was
concerning that there appeared to be little that related to the key purpose of
universities, particularly teaching.
3. That the Strategy appeared to prioritise research, but talked mainly about economic
growth and it was unclear how the funding model would support the expectations.
4. That there was a push for more postgraduate research students without an
equivalent increase in funding for post-doctoral positions. There appeared to be
concern that universities would be producing greater numbers of highly qualified
graduates without clear career pathways.
5. That of the six strategic priorities identified, at least three of these appeared to have
little application to universities; if all tertiary education providers were to be
measured against all six priorities it would have a significant impact on how
universities operated.
6. That there was a strong emphasis on vocational pathways in secondary schools to
feed through into tertiary education, and there appeared to be a push towards a
more utilitarian education system.
7. That the top priority was delivering skills for business, potentially redefining the
role of universities, however industry was still under-investing in research.
13.63
GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF UNIVERSITY GOVERNANCE
Considered
Feedback in response to Government’s Review of University Governance, as set out in
document 13/480.
Noted in discussion
1. That there was no evidence that the proposed changes were evidence based. The
Minister had stated universities were running well, and yet changes were still
required.
2. That Council already included members with significant governance experience and,
should there be gaps, there was provision to co-opt in appropriate expertise.
3. That as universities were not businesses it was imperative to retain the academic
voice on Council.
4. That should the Council be particularly commercially focused, academic freedom
and the University’s role as a critic and conscience of society could be threatened.
5. That it was a concern that the legally sanctioned body to consider and decide on
academic issues, could do so without academic representation.
6. That the changes could signal a potential for the limiting of Māori representation.
7. That it was important that the Te Rōpū Manukura representative remain on Council
as part of the University’s commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and meaningful
partnerships with Māori. With 18 iwi now at the post-settlement stage, Māori had
substantial economic power in the region. One of the contributing factors to
Waikato’s distinctiveness was the Kīngitanga. As mana whenua, Tainui had a huge
interest in tertiary education and were committed to improving educational
outcomes for Māori.
8. That there was a difference between ‘governance’ experience and ‘university
governance’ experience, the latter comprising a small pool of people from which to
draw.
9. That it was noted the review allowed Councils the freedom to retain academic and/or
and other representative positions.
10. That universities were encouraged to engage with the commercial and private sector;
however, the proposal sought to then reduce the number of members who might
have those connections.
11. That little information was included regarding the required skills and experience.
12. That there was no shortage of commercial and financial acuity on Council, likewise
the Finance and Risk Management committees included members with the
appropriate expertise. Governance experience in the commercial sector was not
always commensurate with the skills required for university governance. It would
be difficult for Council to be fully informed about any contextual and/or sector issues
without staff representation and the Council’s ability to question management might
be reduced.
13. That it was important that Council included representatives on it who were not
members of the University and had been appointed because of sector knowledge.
Council needed to have some ability to act independently and offer independent
advice to University.
14. That it was not clear from the proposal whether the University would have a role in
determining the constitution of the non-ministerial appointments to Council or
whether the four ministerial appointments would appoint to the remaining places.
The assumption was that the University would set its own constitution for
appointing members to the non-ministerial positions, but this was not guaranteed by
the wording in the consultation document.
15. That the Academic Board opposed a reduction in the size of Council to a maximum
of 12, as there was no justification or evidence provided for this being the optimum
number for good governance.
13.64
STUDENT MEMBERSHIP OF THE ACADEMIC BOARD
Recommended
That Council approve the amendment to the provisions for student membership of the
Academic Board, as set out in document 13/481.
13.65
REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Considered
The report and recommendations of the Education Committee, as set out in document
13/464, in relation to the following items:
1. Graduating Year Reviews
2. Significant Academic Developments Round Two 2013
3. Category C and Specialisation Proposals
4. Centre for Leadership and Enterprise
5. Academic Collaboration Agreements
Noted in discussion
1. That in relation to the Waikato Management School proposal for the establishment
of a Centre for Leadership and Enterprise, the Deans of Education and Management
had met to discuss potential collaboration and had amended the proposal to include
inter-faculty collaboration.
2. That any contribution to the Centre for Leadership and Enterprise would be at the
standard rate.
3. That the Centre would proceed if the planned/promised donations were realised,
Resolved
1. Approval of the Category C proposals as set out in document 13/419a-s, subject to
minor amendments and further clarification from Faculties as specified in the report
of the Education Committee regarding the proposals set out in documents 13/419c,
13/419i, 13/419n and 13/419p.
2. Approval of the proposal to introduce a specialisation in Professional Learning for
the MEd set out in document 13/420.
3. Approval of the Waikato Management School proposal for the establishment of a
Centre for Leadership and Enterprise subject to the inclusion of interfaculty
collaboration and the correction of minor grammatical errors.
4. Approval of the following academic collaboration agreements:
a. The Waikato-Tainui MBA Addendum between the University of Waikato and
Waikato-Tainui College as set out in document 13/397.
b. The Guaranteed Credit Agreement (GCA) between the University of Waikato
and the New Zealand Music Examination Board as set out in document 13/396.
c. The Memorandum of Understanding between the Southwest University of
Political Science and Law, China (SWUPL) and the University of Waikato as set
out in document 13/445.
d. Approval of the recommendation from the working group on the award of
credit from the Scottish Qualification Authority’s Higher National Diploma and
other international and vocational training qualifications as set out in document
13/406.
13.66
GUIDELINES FOR PHD WITH CREATIVE PRACTICE
Resolved
Approval of the change to the regulations for the PhD, and approval of the Guidelines
for PhD with a Creative Practice Component, as set out in document 12/315, subject to a
change to the name to “Guidelines Requirements for PhD with Creative Practice”.
13.67
UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO DELEGATION OF POWERS STATUTE 2014
Recommended
That Council approve the Delegation of Powers Statute 2014, as set out in document
13/478.
13.68
ACADEMIC BOARD APPOINTMENTS TO COMMITTEES
1. Appointments to Committees of the Academic Board
Reported
1. That document 13/479 set out the University committees with provision within
their constitution for members to be appointed by the Academic Board.
2. That nominations would be accepted prior to, or at the Academic Board meeting.
3. That any Academic Board member making a nomination should ensure they had
obtained the consent of the nominee, preferably in writing.
4. That in the case of more than one nomination being received for a position,
appointment would be by way of a simple majority of votes by those Academic
Board members present at the meeting.
Considered
The schedule of committees requiring members to be appointed or elected by the
Academic Board for 2014, as set out in document 13/479.
Resolved
The appointment of Ms Moe Edmonds and Mr John Locksley to the Student
Discipline Committee.
2. Appointment to the Honours Committee
Reported
1. That provision 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 Professor Anne McKim’s term as an appointee of the Academic Board on
the Honours Committee ended on 31.12.2013; the other members under this
provision were Professor Peter Kamp (to 31.12.2014) and Ms Sandy Morrison (to
31.12.2015).
3. That Professor McKim indicated her willingness to be appointed to the Honours
Committee for a further term.
Resolved
The appointment of Professor Anne McKim to the Honours Committee for a further
three year term ending 31 December 2016.
13.69
COMMITTEE CYCLE 2014
Resolved
Approval of the 2014 Committee Cycle as set out in document 13/346.
13.70
TOPICS FOR FUTURE AGENDA
Considered
Requests or suggestions for topics to be included on future agenda.
Noted in discussion
That information was requested on the operation and effectiveness of the Strategic
Investment Funding; it was agreed that a short paper would be provided to the
Academic Board in 2014.
13.71
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
Reported
That the next meeting of the Academic Board would be held on 4 March 2014 at 2.10pm
in the Council Room.
PROCEEDING WITH THE PUBLIC EXCLUDED
Resolved
That the public be excluded from the meeting to allow consideration of the following items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Minutes (Part 2) of the Academic Board meeting of 13 August 2013
Report of the Vice-Chancellor (Part 2)
Update on Waikato Ag Hub
Development of EFTS Targets for 2014
The interests protected under the Local Government Information and Meetings Act 1987 and/or
the Official Information Act 1982 which would be prejudiced by the public conduct of these
proceedings were:
Item 1 affected material previously dealt with in a meeting from which the public was excluded.
Items 2-4 affected the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or advantage.
Michelle Jordan-Tong
Renée Boyer-Willisson
Student and Academic Services Division
25 October 2013