ACADEMIC BOARD REPORT #3 - 21 APRIL 199 [Nice to be back doing this informal, unofficial report. Apologies for the gap in the sequence. As some will know, I had some distractions in the latter part of 1998, and since December I have been overseas on leave & OSP. I hope to keep the series going as long as I am on the Board; my term expires on 30 June, and I am up for re-election (hint, hint.)] A relatively low-key meeting this time. The VC was absent, and several key players were away at a funeral. After a few minutes were wasted trying to page in the virtual campus at KL by telephone, we kicked off with a/g VC Darvall reporting on the latest (and close to final?) moves on the unhappy story of the Monash Mt Eliza Business School. He told us that there was a MMBS Board meeting next week at which two options were to be considered: complete integration with BusEco, or "amicable separation" in which the award courses such as the MBA revert to Monash. (Actually he didn't say that - his version was garbled and it took a few minutes of questions and corrections from the floor to sort what was actually happening. I hope he remembers which way to vote next week.) Next was Malaysia Campus PVC Jim Warren's (in person) report on the doings in KL. His short written mentioned the student growth (not quite as high as hoped) and problems with computer facilities, network access and the library (weren't we told last year that MUSM students were getting better computer labs than students in Australia?) In his oral report he mentioned that the campus was getting unexpected competition from twinning programs, which the Malaysian government had suddenly allowed to expand to 17 colleges offering full (so-called three-plus-zero) off-shore programmes at about half the fees of MUSM. He commented that this may not be much of a danger as it appeared that many students entering such programs would not have got places at MUSM. In discussion it emerged that one such program was Sunway's VUT business course on the same campus as MUSM. Jim also commented that the overall market for qualified (i.e. A-level or Australian matric.) students may be smaller than originally expected, and that the largest single challenge in future years would be getting suitable staff at the low prevailing salaries in Malaysia. The newish Dean of Medicine, Nick Saunders, presented his Future Directions Report, which is the replacement of the old decanal annual report. Perhaps the most interesting elements were those relating to the review of the undergraduate medical course which, as has been in the press, is likely to be trimmed from 6 years to 5. Speaking to this, he remarked that it had to be seen in the context that medicos needed at least 4 years of further study/supervision before getting a Medicare Provider Number. He also foreshadowed changes such as introductions of electives, some possibility of part-time study, and a small graduate entry scheme. He also mentioned continued attention to selection methods, as all medical schools in Australia apart from Monash and UNSW are using some form of aptitude testing as well as results/interviews. DVC Darvall reported on the CRC outcomes, which were quite satisfactory for Monash. The 4 new CRCs, including "our" EDST were balanced by 4 which were not renewed, resulting in a status quo outcome which leaves us still in the top group of universities in CRCs. There has been a shift in the location of CRCs, which Engineering and Science losing them to Medicine and IT. He also reported (at Bill Melbourne's request) on the per-faculty graduate scholarship outcomes for "H1 Equivalent" applicants. I don't know the reason for the question, but the figures in the answer were largely meaningless. (I don't think Peter was having a good day.) Then on to the reports from the LTOP Working Parties. The full reports from these are on http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/apsu/abwp/index.htm -Chris Avram reported briefly (on behalf of John Rosenberg) on the Promotion of Educational Technology WP. No discussion. -Les Nethercott (BusEco) reported (on behalf of Merran Evans) on the Cross-Faculty Programs WP. The key recommendation here was to abandon Boards of Management for cross-faculty degrees and have one faculty nominated as the "owner" (with some sort of dispute resolution mechanism.) John Redmond (Dean Art & Design) seemed upset about this and chewed the bone at some length, but without much success. No-one seemed to think Boards of Management had been successful. -Mike Brisk reported from the Cross-Institutional Programs WP which has recommended a model for such programs which includes multi-badged testamurs. Another Future Directions report, this time from the Library, with Hans Groenwegen standing in for Edward Lim. A long and as-ever interesting report (is it on the Web, Hans?) His spoken summary was perhaps a bit more retrospective than futures. Interesting to see that library borrowings seem to be dropping a little. A bit of ritual grumbling from the students reps. One was about the decision to start afternoon exams at 2:30 pm, which was alleged to be very inconvenient to 9-5 students (the decision was to enable simultaneous exams in Victoria, KL and Hong Kong.) The other, with a tad more justification, was about the decision to drop guaranteed places for HECS students while leaving them in place for fee-paying students. Probably the right decision for the wrong reasons, and potentially bad PR. I meant to mention that the meeting began with a welcome to returning members like Chris Avram and Anita Jawary who were ditched from the Board earlier this year when the elected campus reps were abolished. Anita and Chris are now back, having been nominated by the respective Campus Managers. This led me to muse, yet again, on the way the Board and its functioning has changed over the decade. I joined the Board at its first meeting in 1990 when it took over from the old Professorial Board, and it was still very much the old PB: only a couple of token non-professorial staff, fierce debates, provocative comments and repartee, etc. etc. A sort-of academic House of Peers. The changes to its structure in the early 90s, which significantly broadened the representation, resulted in it becoming a bit more parliamentary. Mal Logan really used it as a sounding board, we had questions-without-notice sessions with the Comptroller (now General Manager) and Registrar (now NULL), etc. etc. With the passing on of Mal, things have changed even more. VC Robinson clearly distances himself from the Board; you get the impression at times that he is just gracing us with his presence. DVC Lindsay's changes to the membership, which reduce the elected and academic elements in favour of ex-officio membership by various managers/directors and their nominees, leave one with the impression that it is less of a parliament and more of a bloated Board of Directors. Managerialism is winning. Jim Breen 22 April 1999