2015 REVIEW OF COURSES - Governance · 2016-03-11 · Review of Courses – Submission to the Review Panel Page 1 of 164 . File Ref F71207 . 2015 REVIEW OF COURSES . Three Year Undergraduate

Review of Courses – Submission to the Review Panel Page 1 of 164

File Ref F71207

2015 REVIEW OF COURSES

Three Year Undergraduate Bachelor Degrees

Bachelor of Arts Bachelor of Commerce Bachelor of Design Bachelor of Science

SUBMISSION TO THE REVIEW PANEL

4 November 2015


Dear Review Panel members, The University of Western Australia (UWA) is committed to the systematic review and evaluation of its activities as an integral part of its strategic planning and quality assurance process. As such, I welcome the opportunity for peer review of our three-year undergraduate Bachelor degrees with a particular focus on evaluating the new courses introduced at UWA in 2012. Thank you for agreeing to participate in this review as a member of the Review Panel. Please find herein a self-assessment report of UWA’s three-year undergraduate Bachelor’s degrees, including the Bachelor of Arts, Commerce, Design and Science. I am most grateful to the Audit Team members who have worked tirelessly over the past few months to bring this self-assessment report together. The members of the Audit Team are: Professor Grady Venville, Dean of Coursework Studies – Convener Professor Alan Dench, Dean, Graduate Research and Postdoctoral Training Professor Brendan Waddell, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Science Professor Mark Israel, Deputy Chair, Academic Board Dr Kabilan Krishnasamy, Academic Secretary, Academic Policy Services Emeritus Professor Izan H.Y Izan Professor Elizabeth Geelhoed, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences Dr Kate Hislop, Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts Dr Nicholas Letch, UWA Business School Mr Grant Revell, School of Indigenous Studies Mr Tom Beyer, Guild Education Council President Ms Kathrin Stroud, Executive Officer - Review of Courses The self-assessment report was prepared with data provided by UWA’s Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance and has been endorsed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education), Professor Alec Cameron. I commend the report to the Review Panel and trust you will find it helpful in setting the scene for the formal period of the Review of Courses when you visit UWA from 18th – 20th November 2015. Yours sincerely,

Professor Grady Venville Dean of Coursework Studies


TABLE OF CONTENT TABLE OF CONTENT ....................................................................................................... 3

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 12

2 Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 15

3 Background Information ........................................................................................... 21

3.1 Rationale and Development of New Courses ........................................................ 21

4 Overview of New Courses - Undergraduate Coursework Courses ........................ 23

4.1 UWA Educational Principles and Key Features of Undergraduate Coursework Courses ................................................................................................................ 23

4.2 Structure of Undergraduate Coursework Courses ................................................. 25

4.3 Overview of Major Offerings .................................................................................. 27

5 Performance Overview of Undergraduate Coursework Courses ........................... 35

5.1 University Level Indicators .................................................................................... 35

5.1.1 Student Load ................................................................................................. 35

5.1.2 Western Australian Certificate of Education (WACE) First Preferences ......... 37

5.1.3 UWA’s Position in International Institutional Rankings of Universities, 2010- 2015 .............................................................................................................. 40

5.2 Teaching and Learning Indicators ......................................................................... 41

5.2.1 External: Course Experience Questionnaire and Graduate Destination Survey . ...................................................................................................................... 41

5.2.2 Internal: SURF and SPOT.............................................................................. 42

5.3 Additional Indicators .............................................................................................. 43

5.3.1 Service Learning ............................................................................................ 43

5.3.2 Study Abroad ................................................................................................. 44

6 Quality Assurance Mechanisms: Governance and Curriculum Management ....... 46

6.1 Simplification and Standardisation of the New Courses Structural Framework and Curriculum Management Processes ..................................................................... 46

6.2 Academic Governance: Curriculum Approval Process .......................................... 47

6.3 Regulatory Framework supporting New Courses .................................................. 50

6.3.1 Rules ............................................................................................................. 50

6.3.2 Policies .......................................................................................................... 50

6.4 Unit Reduction and Unit Levels ............................................................................. 51

7 Key Stakeholder Surveys – Students and Major Coordinators .............................. 52

7.1 The Student Voice – Student Survey Analysis ...................................................... 52

7.2 Major Coordinator Survey ..................................................................................... 54

7.3 Faculty Deans ....................................................................................................... 54

8 Bachelor of Arts – Structure and Performance ........................................................ 55


8.1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 55

8.1.1 Areas of Success/Commendation (Evidence-based) ..................................... 55

8.1.2 Areas of Improvements or Changes and Reasons for Change ...................... 55

8.1.3 Recommendations for Further Change/ Improvements .................................. 55

8.2 Structure of the Majors .......................................................................................... 57

8.2.1 Overview of the Structure of Majors ............................................................... 57

8.2.2 The Distinctiveness of Majors ........................................................................ 66

8.2.3 Developmental Progression within Majors ..................................................... 68

8.3 Communication Skills ............................................................................................ 71

8.4 Research Skills ..................................................................................................... 74

8.5 Complementary Units ........................................................................................... 76

8.6 Units – Categories and Individual Performance .................................................... 77

8.7 Indigenous Education ........................................................................................... 80

8.8 Study Abroad ........................................................................................................ 81

8.9 Quality Assurance Mechanisms and Curriculum Management ............................. 82

8.10 Other Generic Issues ............................................................................................ 83

8.10.1 Flexibility and Broadening .............................................................................. 83

9 Bachelor of Commerce – Structure and Performance ............................................ 86

9.1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 86

9.1.1 Areas of Success ........................................................................................... 87

9.1.2 Recommendations for Further Change/ Improvements .................................. 88

9.2 Course Intake and Student Quality ....................................................................... 89

9.2.1 Admission Statistics ....................................................................................... 89

9.2.2 Quality of Student Intake ................................................................................ 94

9.2.3 Course Completion Data ................................................................................ 96

9.2.4 Course Attrition Rates .................................................................................... 96

9.2.5 The Extent of Service Learning ...................................................................... 97

9.3 Structure of the Majors .......................................................................................... 98

9.3.1 Overview of the Structure of Majors ............................................................... 98

9.3.2 Enrolment in Majors ....................................................................................... 99

9.3.3 Complementary Units for Majors offered in the BCom .................................. 101

9.3.4 Distinctiveness of Majors ............................................................................. 102

9.3.5 Progression within Majors ............................................................................ 102

9.3.6 Changes to the Structure of Majors .............................................................. 103

9.3.7 Embedding of Communication and Research Skills ..................................... 103


9.4 Units – Categories and Individual Performance .................................................. 103

9.4.1 Teaching Performance ................................................................................. 103

9.5 Student Experience ............................................................................................. 105

9.5.1 Study Abroad ............................................................................................... 105

9.6 Communication and Research Skills ................................................................... 106

9.6.1 Communication Skills ................................................................................... 106

9.6.2 Research Skills ............................................................................................ 107

9.7 Indigenous Education ......................................................................................... 109

9.8 Quality Assurance Mechanisms/ Curriculum Management ................................. 109

9.8.1 Current Review and Improvement Processes .............................................. 109

9.8.2 School Governance and Curriculum Management ....................................... 110

9.8.3 Curriculum Mapping Requirements and Implementation .............................. 110

9.8.4 Professional Accreditation Requirements ..................................................... 110

10 Bachelor of Design .................................................................................................. 111

10.1 Bachelor of Design – Executive Summary .......................................................... 111

10.1.1 Overview of the Degree ............................................................................... 111

10.1.2 Areas of Success/Commendation – Evidence-Based .................................. 112

10.1.3 Areas of Improvements/Change and Rationale ............................................ 113

10.1.4 Recommendations for Further Change/Improvements (Evidence-Based) .... 113

10.2 Quality of the Course .......................................................................................... 115

10.2.1 Course Completion Data .............................................................................. 115

10.2.2 Course Attrition Rates .................................................................................. 115

10.3 Structure of the Majors ........................................................................................ 117

10.3.1 Overview of the Structure of Majors ............................................................. 117

10.3.2 Distinctiveness of the Majors and Content Overlap ...................................... 117

10.3.3 Complementary Units .................................................................................. 118

10.4 Units – Categories and Individual Performance .................................................. 119

10.4.1 Unit Enrolments and SURF .......................................................................... 119

10.4.2 Performance of Category A and B Broadening Units ................................... 119

10.4.3 Completion of Category A Broadening Requirement .................................... 120

10.4.4 Electives and LOTE ..................................................................................... 120

10.5 Embedding Communication and Research Skills ................................................ 120

10.6 Indigenous Education ......................................................................................... 121

10.7 Quality of Students / Student Experience ............................................................ 122

10.7.1 Course WAM on Completion ........................................................................ 122


10.7.2 Quality of Student Intake (ATAR) ................................................................. 123

10.8 Study Abroad ...................................................................................................... 124

10.9 Service Learning ................................................................................................. 125

10.10 Quality Assurance Mechanisms: Governance and Curriculum Management ... 125

10.11 Professional Accreditation Requirements ........................................................ 125

10.12 Other Degree-Specific Issues .......................................................................... 126

11 Bachelor of Science ................................................................................................. 127

11.1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 127

11.2 Overview of the Bachelor of Science .................................................................. 128

11.3 Structure of the Bachelor of Science ................................................................... 130

11.4 Developmental Progression of Discipline Content ............................................... 132

11.5 Characteristics of the BSc Student Cohort .......................................................... 134

11.5.1 ATAR Scores ............................................................................................... 134

11.5.2 High School Background ............................................................................. 134

11.5.3 International Students .................................................................................. 134

11.6 Student Performance in BSc Majors ................................................................... 136

11.7 Student Retention / Mobility among BSc Majors ................................................. 139

11.8 Broadening Units ................................................................................................ 141

11.8.1 Broadening Unit Choices made by BSc Students ........................................ 141

11.8.2 Views of Staff and Students on Broadening Units ........................................ 143

11.8.3 Possible Changes to Broadening Unit Requirements ................................... 146

11.9 Research and Communication Skills ................................................................... 146

11.9.1 Research Skills ............................................................................................ 146

11.9.2 Communication Skills ................................................................................... 147

11.10 Indigenous and Cultural Competence .............................................................. 148

11.11 Service Learning Units .................................................................................... 149

11.12 Student Feedback / Student Experience ......................................................... 149

11.12.1 SURF Scores for BSc Majors ................................................................... 149

11.12.2 Additional Formal and Informal Student Feedback ................................... 150

11.13 Governance and Curriculum Management ...................................................... 151

12 Indigenous Education .............................................................................................. 153

12.1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 153

12.1.1 Indigenous Student Issues ........................................................................... 153

12.1.2 Indigenous Curriculum Issues ...................................................................... 153

12.2 Background......................................................................................................... 154


12.3 Indigenous Initiatives in the New Courses Framework ........................................ 155

12.4 Indigenous Students ........................................................................................... 155

12.4.1 Programs, Initiatives and Transition ............................................................. 156

12.5 Indigenous Curriculum ........................................................................................ 158

12.5.1 Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE) ............................................................ 159

12.5.2 Majors in Indigenous Studies and Broadening Units .................................... 160

12.5.3 Masters of Heritage Studies Program .......................................................... 161

12.5.4 Student Access to and Engagement in Indigenous Units ............................. 161

12.5.5 Targets for Student Engagement with Indigenous Content Units ................. 162

13 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 164


APPENDICES

Review of Courses – Approved Proposal .............................................................................. A

Overview of UWA Accreditation Requirements ..................................................................... B

Course Experience Questionnaire % Agreement with Items by

State and Institution, 2012-2014 ........................................................................................... C

Unit evaluations at UWA – An Analysis of SURF Survey Results, 2010-2014 ....................... D

Student Survey for Review of Courses – Detailed Analysis ................................................... E

Bachelor of Commerce – Second Major Completions in 2014 ............................................... F

Bachelor of Commerce – Reasons for Discontinuation, 2012-2015 .......................................G

Bachelor of Commerce – Changes and Rationale for Changes to Majors ............................. H

Bachelor of Commerce - Embedding Research Skills ............................................................ I

Bachelor of Science – Second Major Choices for Students taking each BSc Major .............. J

Bachelor of Science – Distribution and Choice for Core and Complementary

Units in each of the 31 BSc Majors ....................................................................................... K

Bachelor of Science – Domestic vs International Enrolments and Load for

BSc Students by First Major, 2013-2015 ............................................................................... L


FIGURE INDEX Figure 1: Overview of Major Structures ............................................................................... 25

Figure 2: Diagrams of Undergraduate Course Structures .................................................... 26

Figure 3: Number of Majors taught by each Faculty in each Degree, 2015 ......................... 27

Figure 4: UWA Student Load by Undergraduate Degree, 2015 ........................................... 27

Figure 5: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of

Arts (BP001) ....................................................................................................................... 28


Commerce (BP002) ............................................................................................................ 30


Design (BP003) ................................................................................................................... 31


Science (BP004) ................................................................................................................. 32


Science (excluding Engineering Science)(BP004) .............................................................. 33

Figure 10: Undergraduate Student Load for WA and Go8, 2010-2014 ................................ 36

Figure 11: Percentage Share of Student Load for WA Universities, 2010-2014................... 36

Figure 12: First Preference WACE by ATAR ....................................................................... 38

Figure 13: Average Student ATAR on Entry to UWA’s Cycle 1 Degrees, 2010-2015 .......... 39

Figure 14: UWA’s Position in International Rankings of Universities, 2010-2015 ................. 40

Figure 15: UWA’s Performance on the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ),

2010-2014 ........................................................................................................................... 42

Figure 16: UWA SURF Score Averages, 2010-2014 ........................................................... 43

Figure 17: Total Enrolments in Service Learning Units, 2012-2015 ..................................... 44

Figure 18: UWA Domestic Undergraduate Student Studying Abroad, 2010-2015 ............... 45

Figure 19: Undergraduate Majors, 2012-2015 ..................................................................... 48

Figure 20: University’s Education-Related Committee Structure ......................................... 49

Figure 21: Undergraduate New Courses Units, 2012-2016 ................................................. 51

Figure 22: Overview of Major Coordinator Questionnaire Responses by Degree ................ 54

Figure 23: Overview of the Majors in the Bachelor of Arts ................................................... 57

Figure 24: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the

Bachelor of Arts .................................................................................................................. 58

Figure 25: Relative Popularity of Majors in the BA .............................................................. 60

Figure 26: Proportional Enrolment of BA Majors by Degree ................................................ 60

Figure 27: UWA Domestic Undergraduate Students Studying Abroad, 2010-2015 ............. 81


Figure 28: Commencing Enrolments and Load for BP002 Students by

First Major, 2012-2015 ........................................................................................................ 91

Figure 29: Bachelor of Commerce - Enrolments and Load 2012-2015 ................................ 92

Figure 30: Bachelor of Commerce - Domestic/International Enrolments

and Load by First Major, 2012-2015 .................................................................................... 93

Figure 31: ATAR Score Distribution for School Leavers Enrolled in BCom,

2014 and 2015 .................................................................................................................... 94

Figure 32: Average ATAR Scores for Degree-Specific Majors in BCom, 2012-2015 ........... 95

Figure 33: Non ATAR Entrants for Degree-Specific Majors in BCom, 2012-2015 ................ 95

Figure 34: BCom Course Completion by Degree Major, 2014 ............................................. 96

Figure 35: Attrition Rates for BCom, 2012-2015 .................................................................. 97

Figure 36: Reasons for Discontinuation in BCom, 2012-2015 ............................................. 97

Figure 37: Overview of the Structure of BCom Majors ......................................................... 98

Figure 38: Combinations of BCom Majors, 2015 ............................................................... 100

Figure 39: Mean SURF Scores for Core and Elective Units in BCom Majors .................... 104

Figure 40: Outgoing BCom Semester/Year Exchange Program by Country, 2013-2015 ... 105

Figure 41: Outgoing BCom Short-Term Program by Country, 2013-2015 ......................... 106

Figure 42: Embedding of Research Skills in BCom Majors ............................................... 108

Figure 43: Enrolments in INDG Units by BCom Students, 2012-2015 ............................... 109

Figure 44: Continuing Enrolments and Load for BP003 Students by

First Major, 2013-2015 ...................................................................................................... 111

Figure 45: Course Attrition Rates for Bachelor of Design, 2012-2015 ............................... 115

Figure 46: Number of Enrolments by TISC Applicants in Bachelor of Design,

2013-2015 ......................................................................................................................... 116

Figure 47: Commencing Enrolments and Load for Bachelor of Design Students by

First Major, 2012-2015 ...................................................................................................... 116

Figure 48: Overview of the Structure of Majors in the Bachelor of Design ......................... 118

Figure 49: Broadening Units taken by Bachelor of Design Students by

School, 2012-2015 ............................................................................................................ 120

Figure 50: Indigenous Unit Enrolment – BP003 Students, 2012-2015 ............................... 121

Figure 51: Weighted Average Mark in Bachelor Courses, 2013-2015 ............................... 122

Figure 52: UWA Domestic Undergraduate Students Studying Abroad, 2010-2015 ........... 124

Figure 53: Service Learning Unit Enrolments - BP003 Students, 2012-2015 ..................... 125

Figure 54: Annual Enrolments for the BSc, 2012-2015 ...................................................... 128

Figure 55: 2014-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the

Bachelor of Science (without Engineering Science) .......................................................... 129


Figure 56: Distribution of shared Level 1 units among majors in the Natural and Agricultural

Science disciplines ............................................................................................................ 131

Figure 57: Distribution of shared Level 1 units among Biomedical Science and

related majors ................................................................................................................... 132

Figure 58: Distribution of Student Load (%EFTSL) by ATAR Entry Score (shown as

quartiles) for each Major ................................................................................................... 135

Figure 59: Unadjusted Grade Distribution in BSc Majors, 2012-2014 ................................ 137

Figure 60: Adjusted Grade Distribution in BSc Majors, 2012-2014 .................................... 138

Figure 61: Destination Major for those Students moving from the Biomedical

Science Double Major between Levels 2 and 3 (2012-2014) ............................................. 139

Figure 62: Retention, Gain and Loss across BSc Majors between Levels 2 and 3,

2012-2014 ......................................................................................................................... 140

Figure 63: Broadening Unit Load for Sport Science Students in 2014 ............................... 141

Figure 64: Distribution of Broadening Units across 27 Science Majors in 2014 ................. 142

Figure 65: Student responses to survey Question 1 (students from all degrees) ............... 144

Figure 66: Student responses to survey Question 1 (BSc students only) .......................... 144

Figure 67: Student responses to survey Question 1 (non-BSc degrees) ........................... 144

Figure 68: Student responses to survey Question 2 (students from all degrees) ............... 145

Figure 69: Student responses to survey Question 2 (BSc students only) .......................... 145

Figure 70: Student responses to survey Question 2 (non-BSc degrees) ........................... 145

Figure 71: Delivery of Communication Skills within each of the 31 BSc Majors ................. 147

Figure 72: Largest Unit Enrolments in 2015 by BSc Students in Broadening Units

with an Indigenous Focus ................................................................................................. 148

Figure 73: Enrolments in Service Learning Units, 2012-2015 ............................................ 149

Figure 74: Mean SURF Scores for Level 3 Units in each BSc Major ................................. 149

Figure 75: UWA Indigenous Student Enrolments, 2009 – 2015 ......................................... 155

Figure 76: UWA Indigenous Students Equity Indicators, 2011-2015 ................................. 156

Figure 77: Total Unit Enrolments in Indigenous Knowledge, History and

Heritage Major, 2012-2105 ............................................................................................... 160

Figure 78: 2015 Units with Indigenous Content ................................................................. 162

Figure 79: Student Uptake of Indigenous Content Units at UWA, 2012-15 ........................ 162

Figure 80: Graduate Uptake of Indigenous Content Units at UWA, 2014 .......................... 162


1 Introduction

In 2012, the University of Western Australia (UWA) implemented a streamlined yet flexible new course structure for all undergraduate and postgraduate courses. The visionary objectives of the new courses included meeting the future educational needs of students and the wider community at the highest possible standard, positioning the University well for the future by reinforcing its international reputation and commitment to excellence, as well as achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and related administrative arrangements for the benefit of both staff and students. The University is now offering five undergraduate Bachelor degrees, typically of three years’ duration, collectively comprising over 70 majors:

The Bachelor of Arts; The Bachelor of Commerce; The Bachelor of Design; The Bachelor of Science; and The Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours).1

A number of these undergraduate majors are complemented by postgraduate degrees of two years’ duration, leading to accredited professions such as medicine, law, architecture and engineering. The philosophy behind this 3+2 new course structure is that students achieve a well-rounded education in their undergraduate degree, followed by specialisation in a professional postgraduate qualification or postgraduate coursework course that builds on these foundations and focuses on more discipline-specific technical depth, as well as professional capabilities. The inaugural implementation of the four three year undergraduate Bachelor degrees was completed at the end of 2014, with the majority of the first cohort of students graduating from their Cycle 1 degree. It is therefore timely to conduct a comprehensive review of the four three year undergraduate Bachelor degrees, constituting the first phase of a comprehensive Review of Courses which the University will be conducting over a three year period (2015-2017). The University is committed to the systematic review and evaluation of its activities and a review framework for courses is an integral part of its strategic planning and quality assurance. To that effect, the Review of Courses will inform the development of a cyclical review framework to facilitate ongoing performance evaluation of all of the University’s curriculum offerings.

1 This integrated honours course (4 years) gives high performing students (minimum ATAR 98) the freedom to choose a

major from any field of study within Arts, Commerce, Design or Science while including intensive research as an integral part of the course. Further information can be found on the UWA website: http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses-and-careers/undergraduate/phil-honours. Note that the required content of the major is not compromised in any way.

http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses-and-careers/undergraduate/phil-honours



The following table, an excerpt from the Review proposal, provides an overview of the Review of Courses’ Framework: Review of Courses Framework 2015 2016 2017 Cycle 1 Courses (AQF Level 7):

Bachelor of Arts Bachelor of

Science Bachelor of

Design Bachelor of

Commerce

Cycle 1 Courses (AQF Levels 5 - 8):

Bachelor of Philosophy (AQF 8)

End-on Honours (AQF 8) Graduate entry diplomas

(AQF 5) Advanced diplomas (AQF

6) Undergraduate transition

plans and courses being taught out.2

Cycle 2 Courses (AQF Level 8 - 9)

Postgraduate coursework courses (approx. 200), including professional practice doctorates (eg MD, JD)

Transition to postgraduate courses (including assured entry pathways)

The complete approved proposal for the Review of Courses is included as Appendix A. The aim of the Review at hand is to determine the degree to which the original objectives of UWA’s new courses have been achieved or subsequently varied in light of changes in the education sector since that time. The visionary objectives of the new courses are:

“To meet the future education needs of students, and therefore the needs of the wider community at the highest possible standard;

To position the University well for the future by reinforcing its international reputation for a commitment to excellence;

To achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and related administrative arrangements, for the benefit of staff and students”3

Ultimately, the purpose of the 2015 Review of Courses is to evaluate the success of the four three year undergraduate Bachelor degrees and the structural framework that governs them. Six months ago, an UWA internal Audit Team was appointed, comprising senior academics from across the University who were key stakeholders in the development of the original new courses framework with significant expertise in one of the four undergraduate degrees under review, and tasked with preparing documentation for consideration by a Review Panel. Within the Audit Team, focus groups were established and tasked with preparing a self-assessment report for one of the degrees. Each report robustly triangulates several sources of data, including key University data sets and surveys of staff and students specifically conducted to inform this Review. Collectively, the Audit Team has prepared this submission.

2 Including the Diploma in Modern Languages – transition plan to offer Diploma extended to 2016 pending

review – Education Committee R8/15 3 Each objective is elaborated in the Education for Tomorrow’s World document pp 3-4


The submission follows a top-down approach, with chapters 3-7 providing important contextual information for the four undergraduate Bachelor degrees’ self-assessment reports which constitute chapters 8 to 11. Chapter 12 provides an analysis of Indigenous Education at UWA. Chapter 3 provides historical background about the development of the new courses framework, chapters 4 and 5 include overviews of the new courses structure and overall performance of the undergraduate coursework courses respectively, the latter based on selected University level indicators and teaching and learning indicators. Chapter 6 provides an overview of the governance and curriculum management arrangements in the new courses structure. Chapter 7 provides a summary of the input received from staff and students which constituted valuable sources of information for the degrees’ self-assessment reports.


2 Executive Summary

The University of Western Australia (UWA) implemented a streamlined yet flexible new course structure in 2012. The philosophy behind the 3+2 new course structure is that students achieve a well-rounded education in their undergraduate degree (three years) followed by specialisation in a professional postgraduate qualification or postgraduate coursework course (two years) that builds on these foundations and focuses on more discipline-specific technical depth, as well as professional capabilities.

The focus of this review is the four undergraduate (Cycle 1) bachelor degrees including the Bachelor of Arts, Commerce, Design, and Science. It is probably the first comprehensive review of the entire undergraduate curriculum ever conducted at UWA and robustly triangulates several sources of data, including internal and external indicators with surveys of students and staff.

This executive summary focuses on major themes that emerged from the subsequent sections of this report and explores the strengths and possible areas for development related to those themes. The Audit Team notes the richness of information gathered as part of the audit and recommends that the report and data be provided to faculties for more in-depth analysis.

Theme 1: Internationally Recognised and Valued Course Structure

UWA students’ perceptions of their undergraduate courses are compellingly positive and strongly value the internationally recognised course structure. Staff and students hold the view that UWA’s undergraduate courses provide an excellent education, including both breadth and depth of knowledge and transferrable skills. Importantly, students are of the view that UWA’s courses enable them to meet their educational goals. Majors and second majors are generally ‘loved’ by students and are perceived as distinctive, developmental, coherent and engaging.

Theme 2: Clarity of Courses and Length of Pathways

UWA continues to make good progress on global rankings of universities and the introduction of new courses over the initial period of implementation from 2012 to 2014 did not have a discernible impact, either positive or negative, on high-level indicators such as student load, Western Australian Certificate of Education (WACE) first preferences and average student Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank (ATAR) in Cycle 1 degrees. There are, however, some recent trends, such as a decrease in UWA’s Western Australian high school market share, that indicate some students, including high performing students, have chosen to attend other universities. Moreover, many students expressed the view that UWA’s course structure is unclear to prospective students and that the time it takes to complete a professional qualification at UWA is unnecessarily extended. There is a degree of scepticism about the value of the 3+2 structure amongst students and a few expressed their view that the new courses structure was only implemented to increase revenue. As only some proportion of the first cohort of new course students completed Cycle 1 at the end of 2014, it is difficult to clearly ascertain the implications of these factors for UWA, but the data indicates that the extended, quality 3+ 2 structure may be frustrating for some students.


Theme 3: Flexibility

Students identify flexibility as a defining quality of UWA’s courses and appreciate the educational advantages and personal rewards of being able to select a unique combination of majors, broadening units and electives from very different disciplines. Flexibility, however, can be a double edged sword with choices students make early in their degree sometimes limiting the flexibility available for them to change direction, make up failed units, do study abroad, or participate in an extended service learning experience within the standard degree duration. As a consequence, some students said they would prefer more information about the courses, better course counselling and greater flexibility. Moreover, students highlighted their frustration when units, particularly in the Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Design, were consistently unavailable and the lack of options to accelerate their studies.

Theme 4: Broadening

Broadening was a strong theme in feedback from both students and staff. Many students relish having the opportunity to learn in very different disciplines and understand the advantages of thinking from different disciplinary perspectives. Staff identified the benefits of broad knowledge development for students, the value of broadening units for attracting students from outside their discipline, collaboration with other faculties and exploring new ways of teaching classes with mixed backgrounds.

However, the benefits of the broadening aspects of the new courses were, for many major coordinators and particularly those in the Bachelor of Science, in tension with the necessity to develop appropriate levels of disciplinary skills and conceptual understanding. Some students commented on the negative impact of broadening requirements on their course average marks and of having students from other degrees enrol in units in their major. Many staff and students across all degrees consider the definition of broadening units as crude, and anomalies were identified that do not reflect the intention of the broadening experience such as broadening selections that are too close to, or too far away from students’ majors. A strong theme in this report is the need to redefine the broadening unit component of UWA’s undergraduate courses’ structural framework and a number of creative methods of how this might be achieved have been suggested.

Theme 5: Balancing High and Low Enrolment Majors and Efficiencies

Data was provided in all four degrees that identified great variation in enrolments within majors from a maximum of more than 1600 to less than one EFTSL. This variation results in a number of issues and tensions that impact on different disciplines in different ways. One implication seems to be that resources may be distributed in ways that result in an uneven student experience.

Both staff and students identified problems with high enrolment units, including a lack of quality personal interaction between teaching staff and students, reduction in practical and laboratory-based and/or work-oriented or industry-focussed activities, and lower quality teaching of research and communication skills. Importantly, large classes were seen as having a significant impact on the cohort cohesiveness and students’ social experience. Data from national benchmarking surveys such as the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ), the Graduation Destinations Survey (GDS) and internal teaching and learning indicators, such as the Students’ Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF) survey, affirm a comparatively less well-perceived student experience at UWA for the majority of students.


Every degree has majors with comparatively low enrolments. Across all undergraduate degrees, there are 28 majors that have less than 0.5%, and 18 with less than 0.25% of the total UWA undergraduate load. The new course rules require every major to have a minimum of four unique units to ensure a level of distinctiveness. As a consequence, there is a high level of dependence between some majors to minimise the number of units having to be delivered with small enrolments, for example in the suite of majors in the natural and agricultural sciences. This results in low enrolment majors each having at least four units, usually taught at Levels 2 or 3, with comparatively low enrolments because they are only offered as core units within a single major.

It is a challenge for the University to find the appropriate balance between offering a broad number of distinctive and attractive majors and, at the same time, avoiding the inefficiencies of too many low enrolment majors and units and spreading available resources too thinly. It is possible this balance has not yet been achieved with the new courses at UWA. Efficiencies could be gained in a number of ways, for example by combining low enrolment majors and creating specialisations, and/or shifting specialisation to the Honours level. Resources could then potentially be used to implement strategies to improve management and administration and the quality of the pedagogy and student experience within high enrolment majors.

Theme 6: Developmental Progression

Developmental progression was found to be strong in many majors across all degrees with clear developmental pathways defined by prerequisites in core units. Developmental progression is seen by many staff as enabling more sophisticated learning outcomes as students move to Level 2 and 3 units of the major. Developmental progression was identified by some major coordinators to provide the ‘depth’ within the major to balance the ‘breadth’ for the students.

While some major coordinators are comfortable with the new requirement for disciplinary progression, others, particularly in the humanities, are of the view that the requirement has stifled interdisciplinary exploration and is an artificial imposition on the structure of the majors. In Science, some major coordinators were of the view the new course degree structure with only eight units in each major did not allow disciplinary progression to the required depth. A further complication in the Bachelor of Arts is that a number of majors have a comparatively large number of optional core units from which students can select. This means there are a multitude of pathways for students within each major. Ensuring students enrolled in these majors achieve the learning outcomes of the major in a developmental way, and that they achieve the required research and communication outcomes as well as the educational principles, requires complex mapping and/or the imposition of blocks of generic disciplinary outcomes in each unit at each level. It appears that developmental progression in these majors is diffuse and is traded off to advantage student choice in multiple optional units.

Theme 7: Communication and Research Skills

Students from all degrees, and international students in particular, strongly expressed the view that they value the embedding of communication and research skills within their majors. However, students also indicated that the teaching of these skills was not perceived to be excellent. Teachers argued that the perceived poor teaching of communication and research


skills is often due to lack of resources. For example, they are not able to teach a capstone research intensive unit because of the resources required to do so. An interesting anomaly was evident with the Bachelor of Philosophy where students complete a major and units from one of the other four undergraduate Bachelor degrees, but also participate in intensive research training and a research project as a type of internship in a discipline usually related to their major. The Bachelor of Philosophy students indicated very high satisfaction with the teaching of research skills and it is possible there is something to be learnt from this specialised degree that can be applied to the other degrees.

The unit COMM1901 Communication in Practice taught as a complementary unit in 19 of the 28 majors in the Bachelor of Arts was highlighted as a considerable concern. In addition, very few students (26%) agreed that their communication skills were enhanced by undertaking the CARS non-credit module. It is possible that the linkages between various elements of the teaching of communication skills, including the CARS non-credit module, specific communication skills units and the embedding of communication within core units in each major needs to be improved.

Theme 8: Degree-Specific Strengths and Weaknesses

The reports from each of the degrees highlighted a number of strengths and aspects of the new courses to be celebrated and commended, for example:

Increase in the number of students studying units with Indigenous content and growing strength in Indigenous Studies;

Increase in the number of students learning a language at UWA;

High levels of teaching quality and reported student experience in a number of disciplinary areas;

Excellent student feedback for the Bachelor of Philosophy; and

Growing share of the intake in the Bachelor of Commerce.

Student feedback indicated that the Bachelor of Design and the Engineering Science major in the Bachelor of Science were considered less favourably when compared with those from all other undergraduate degrees. Both of these areas had to make considerable changes in the move to new courses; in Engineering from a four year Bachelor of Engineering to a five year degree, and in the Bachelor of Design with considerable changes to studio-based units. Feedback from students and coordinators of the majors in the Bachelor of Design, as well as data relating to attrition, completion and academic performance points to the need for considerable improvement. In particular, the Integrated Design major was a point of weakness with students unable to ascertain the relevance of this major to their chosen career.

The Engineering Science is the largest major in all four undergraduate bachelor degrees. Feedback from students indicated a number of points of dissatisfaction relating to coherence, including better communication and alignment between units, organisation, including the use of LMS, and teaching quality, including clarity of spoken English by some lecturers. Some students complained that the first two years of the major are too broad and showed strong preference for a greater focus on engineering content, stronger links with industry, and more practical, laboratory and field types of activities. While some appreciated


the broadening aspects of the undergraduate degree, many Engineering Science students articulated that the broad-based, five-year pathway to an engineering qualification is not suitable for them.

The Bachelor of Design and the major in Engineering Science have been identified as areas of risk for UWA. In order for the University to retain and increase student numbers in these courses, as well as enhance the quality of the student experience, each of these courses needs to be individually reviewed with a view to improvement. Better communication about the advantages of the 3+ 2 structure of the degree and the professional advantages of this structure is likely to improve the student perception of these degrees.

Theme 9: Peripheral Features of New Courses

There are aspects of new courses, including Indigenous education, service learning and study abroad, which were identified as important but not core features of the new courses structure and, as a consequence, appear to have remained peripheral to the undergraduate student experience.

The inclusion of Australian Indigenous content within the curriculum is growing and the number of UWA students participating in units with Indigenous content is increasing. Moreover, the support for Australian Indigenous students at UWA is excellent. However, the new courses structure provides challenges for Indigenous students and the pathway diplomas, especially to the Juris Doctor, have had limited success.

The number of service learning units on offer is increasing and the number of students participating in service learning and study abroad is growing. Feedback from students who participated in units with Indigenous content, service learning units and study abroad is overwhelmingly positive. In particular, their commentary highlights the transformative potential of these types of activities, especially when they are relevant to their disciplinary majors. For these types of experiences to be brought in from the periphery and considered as key features of the new courses framework, considerably more resources would need to be allocated. There is considerable potential to consolidate these features as the defining and differentiating qualities of UWA’s courses.

Theme 10: Administrative Efficiency and Effectiveness

The introduction of new courses at UWA has resulted in much greater efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and related administrative processes in the following ways:

Simplification and standardisation of the framework of degrees and courses to create greater transparency and flexibility;

Effective academic governance; Consistency in definitions, rules, procedures and nomenclature across the

University; and Reduction of unit proliferation.

The process of conducting the review resulted in a number of challenges for the Review’s Audit Team. These included data aggregation at the faculty and school level which may be useful for financial reporting but seems to be an anachronism that doesn’t allow easy evaluation and planning consistent with the new courses structure. For example, unit codes should be designed to reflect the degree/major/elective/broadening status so that the core


units within a major, for example, can easily be identified and analysed as a group. Another difficulty is that students are not required to nominate a major until completion of 48 points (equating to eight six point units) and while this may enhance the perception of flexibility, it limits the ability for the University to review and plan.

In order to maintain high quality degrees and administrative efficiency and effectiveness a regular cycle of review must now be established. The cycle of review should be appropriate for the new courses structure and consistent with the new Integrated Planning Exercise (IPE) conducted by the faculties and divisions. The disestablishment of the Boards of Studies for each degree and their replacement with the single Curriculum Committee has resulted in efficiencies. The converse of the new arrangement, however, is that there is now no specific oversight of each bachelor degree which may constitute an opportunity for additional academic leadership.

The implementation of new courses at UWA from 2012 was the biggest change to the curriculum in the hundred-year history of the University. UWA now has a consistent structural framework for all undergraduate degrees that provides students with an excellent, broad education in preparation for specialisation or professional learning in a postgraduate degree or for entry into the workforce. The Audit Team noted the well-ordered change management process and hard work from all University staff to implement this comprehensive change.


3 Background Information

3.1 Rationale and Development of New Courses The expectations of the 21st century graduate have been undergoing significant changes since the start of the new millennium. A rapidly developing international interconnectedness and growing interdependence of world markets, advances in science and technology, and the advent of world markets4 have not only changed the global context in which tertiary institutions have been operating but have also imposed pressures for a re-evaluation of higher education around the world. It was in this context that The University of Western Australia (UWA), which has long been distinguished by the high quality of its course offerings and student learning experience5, initiated a review of its curriculum structures in 2006. The UWA Course Structures Review for undergraduate and postgraduate courses was undertaken during 2007/2008 with a view to ensure that the University provides the best possible student learning experience within a coherent framework and one that ensured the relevance and quality of its courses in a rapidly changing global and culturally diverse environment. Accordingly, the Review was designed to examine course structures in relation to the University’s goals, priorities and mission, and also national and international trends with a view to:

Assessing the impact of course structures upon the student learning experience, and the acquisition of graduate attributes; and

Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of course delivery, existing course structures, nomenclature, and aspects of course administration.

The Review entailed the following stages and processes:

Stage 1

The review began with the release of the ‘Course Structures Review Discussion Paper’ in December 2006 for University-wide comments. The consultation process remained open for a period of four months until April 2007.

Stage 2

After consideration of the responses to the Discussion Paper and other relevant information, an ‘Issues and Options’ paper was prepared and released for further comment in September 2007.

Stage 3

The final stage of the Review included a preparation of a Final Report and Proposal paper entitled ‘Education For Tomorrow’s World: Courses for Action’, which was released in April 2008 for discussion, via forums held during the course of the Review, and consideration by appropriate University Committees.

4 Courses For Tomorrow’s World: An Issues and Options Paper on the Structure of Academic Programs at The University of Western Australia (October 2007), p. 9. 5 Review of Course Structures: Discussion Paper (December 2006), p. 1.


The visionary objectives of the Review are expressed as follows:

(i) To meet the future educational needs of students, and therefore the needs of the wider community, at the highest possible standard;

(ii) To position the University well for the future by reinforcing its international reputation for a commitment to excellence;

(iii) To achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and related administrative arrangements, for the benefit of staff and students.6

These objectives were set to ensure that UWA graduates will be recognised as:

EDUCATED – provided not only with specific disciplinary expertise and employability skills but also with a broader understanding that prepares them resourcefully for life and work in a changing and culturally diverse environment.

ENQUIRING – able to bring to every new challenge an open but critical mind, accompanied in analysing and interpreting information, discovering knowledge, and seeking wisdom.

ELOQUENT – equipped with outstanding capability as clear, logical and powerful communicators who are highly articulate in oral and written forms of the English language.

ENGAGED – linked strongly to local, national and international communities in a spirit of ethical participation, social service and responsible leadership.7

The new, simple and flexible new courses‘ structural framework had been designed to ensure that UWA’s undergraduate and postgraduate degrees will have research skills’ development and inquiry-based learning as hallmarks, giving students the foundation for problem-solving and continuous learning throughout their lives. The recommendations of a two-year review, contained in the final report entitled ‘Education For Tomorrow’s World: Courses for Action’ were considered and endorsed by the University’s Academic Board in November 2008. This was then followed by approval of the new courses framework by the University’s governing body, Senate, in December 2008. In 2009, the University commenced planning for the implementation of the new courses to ensure a seamless transition from the previous course structure to the new courses framework, which came into effect in 2012.

6 Education for Tomorrow’s World: Courses of Action – Report of the Review of Course Structures (September 2008), p. 2 7 Ibid. p. 3.


4 Overview of New Courses - Undergraduate Coursework Courses

4.1 UWA Educational Principles and Key Features of Undergraduate Coursework Courses

One of the guiding principles of developing the new courses framework was to rationalise and streamline the University’s course offerings which, at the time, constituted more than 70 named undergraduate degrees, characterised by inconsistent nomenclature and complex admission requirements, rules and regulations. It was agreed that the number of courses should be significantly reduced and that courses should be governed by a simplified and uniform structural framework.

To that effect, the University is now offering five undergraduate Bachelor degrees, typically of three years’ duration:

The Bachelor of Arts; The Bachelor of Commerce; The Bachelor of Design; The Bachelor of Science; and The Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours)8

Across the five degrees, students can choose from over 70 majors, and are able to choose either a single major or combine any two majors of interest. A number of these majors are complemented by postgraduate degrees of two years’ duration, leading to accredited professions such as medicine, law, architecture and engineering. This degree structure has much in common with the European Bologna-style degrees and is often referred to as a 3+2 structure.

The philosophy behind the 3+2 structure is that students achieve a well-rounded education in their undergraduate degree, followed by specialisation in a professional postgraduate qualification which builds on these foundations and focusses on more discipline-specific technical depth, as well as professional capabilities. An overview of accreditation arrangements for UWA’s courses is included at Appendix B. The University is committed to the following Educational Principles and requires that they are incorporated into every undergraduate degree:

1. To develop disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge and skills through study and research-based enquiry, at internationally recognised levels of excellence

2. To further develop the skills required to learn, and to continue through life to learn, from a variety of sources and experiences

3. To develop personal, social, and ethical awareness in an international context 4. To communicate clearly, effectively and appropriately in a range of contexts

8 This integrated honours course (4 years) gives high performing students (minimum ATAR 98) the freedom to choose a

major from any field of study within Arts, Commerce, Design or Science while including intensive research as an integral part of the course. Further information can be found on the UWA website: http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses-and-careers/undergraduate/phil-honours. Note that the required content of the major is not compromised in any way.

http://www.worldclasseducation.uwa.edu.au/student-experience/principles




The following requirements have been defined as mechanisms for ensuring that the above Educational Principles are comprehensively embedded in each undergraduate major:

1. Broadening Units All students are required to study at least four units that sit outside of the Bachelor degree in which their degree-specific major is taught. At least one of the units must focus on some aspect of the globalised and culturally diverse environment. Units which fulfil this requirement are defined as “Category A” Broadening Units and students can choose any unit from an approved list of Category A Broadening Units outside their respective degree. Alternatively, the Category A broadening requirement can be fulfilled by (1) studying abroad, (2) studying a unit in a language other than English (LOTE), provided students complete a major that is not a LOTE major or a major in which language units are available9, or (3) studying a unit offered by the School of Indigenous Studies as all their units qualify as Category A Broadening Units. The remaining three units can be from any discipline of interest taught outside the degree in which students are enrolled (subject to meeting pre-requisite requirements), and are referred to as “Category B” Broadening Units. By incorporating these Broadening Units into the degree structure, UWA ensures that graduates are competent in a global environment.

2. Specific/ Embedded Teaching of Research Skills Every undergraduate major must emphasise inquiry-based learning and research skills development reflective of the research culture of the relevant discipline.

3. Specific/ Embedded Teaching of Communication Skills Both oral and written communication skills must either be embedded within the major or developed in a dedicated complementary unit

The four three-year undergraduate Bachelor degrees subject to this Review are governed by the University Policy on: Undergraduate Degree Courses (UP12/20) which defines both the key features of the new undergraduate coursework courses outlined above and the degree structure outlined below.

9 E.g. the Classics and Ancient History major in the Bachelor of Arts offers units in Greek or Latin.

http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses-and-careers/undergraduate/degree-structure/broadening-units#category-A-units

http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses-and-careers/undergraduate/degree-structure/broadening-units#category-A-units

http://www.governance.uwa.edu.au/procedures/policies/policies-and-procedures?method=document&id=UP12%2F20


4.2 Structure of Undergraduate Coursework Courses

Each three-year undergraduate course comprises 24 units, of which up to 12 can be taken at Level 1 and at least four must be taken at Level 3. Each course includes a degree-specific major, consisting of eight units, which provides the rationale for the nomenclature of the degree, e.g. in order to be awarded a Bachelor of Arts, a student must have completed a degree-specific major from a list of approved majors for that degree.

A Bachelor degree is defined by the requirement to complete at least one major, constituted as eight units with the following standard developmental structure within the same disciplinary field: two Level 1 units, two Level 2 units and four Level 3 units (2+2+4): the two Level 1 units as prerequisites for the Level 2 units which themselves stand as prerequisites for Level 3 units. Disciplinary depth to be achieved in the strong L1 and L2 core; electives in addition to the core might be available at L1 and L2 but not as elements of the major; a wider range of options might exist at L3 from which four might be selected. The outcomes of the major were then delivered through the core at L1 and L2 and through a careful consideration of the possible combinations of options at L3.

An alternative 2+3+3 structure was permitted in the design of majors where it was in alignment with the guiding principles of developmental progression and sound academic justification could be established for a parallel structure at levels 2 and 3 (UP12/20, section 3.3.5). The alternative design was initially developed to accommodate language majors but has spread well beyond that grouping, as evident in the following overview.

Figure 1: Overview of Major Structures

Major Structure No of Majors 2+2+4 Total: 43

Bachelor of Arts: 13 Bachelor of Commerce: 3 Bachelor of Design: 1 Bachelor of Science: 26

2+3+3 Total: 23 Bachelor of Arts: 14 Bachelor of Commerce: 3 Bachelor of Design: 3 Bachelor of Science: 3

Other10 Total: 5 Bachelor of Arts: 1 Bachelor of Commerce: 2 Bachelor of Design: 0 Bachelor of Science: 2

TOTAL: 71

10

Bachelor of Arts: Specialist Music Studies: 0+4+4 Bachelor of Commerce: major in Accounting: 2+3+3 (or 2+2+4) and Economics (double major): 2+5+7 Bachelor of Science: major in Biomedical Science 2+4+8 and Engineering Science: 2+2+4; 2+3+3 for Software Engineering


The degree-specific major may be complemented by up to four further units taken from within the same area of knowledge as the degree-specific major, which meet any prerequisites and/ or co-requisites and ensure that all UWA Educational Principles are embedded in the course. This set of units is referred to as “Complementary Units”.

While a single major is sufficient, students are able to complete two majors, constituting 16 units, together with the four broadening units and the four complementary units featured in each degree.

A small number of double majors also exist, consisting of 14 units within the same disciplinary field with the following structure: two units at Level 1, four units at Level 2 and eight units at Level 3 (2+4+8). The following double majors are currently being offered: Economics (available as a single or double major in Bachelor of Commerce), Biomedical Science (Bachelor of Science) and Psychology (either in the Bachelor of Arts or the Bachelor of Science).

The following diagrams illustrate the building blocks for the new undergraduate course structures:

Figure 2: Diagrams of Undergraduate Course Structures

Bachelor Degree – Single Major (24 units)

Year/Level 1 Year/Level 2 Year/Level 3

In addition to an 8-unit major, this includes 4 complementary units to cater for any prerequisites and ensure the embedding of UWA Educational Principles. There are also 4 broadening units taken from outside the area of knowledge of the major. A single-major degree permits 8 elective units from any area of knowledge. Note: Although this diagram and those below all show a stylised pattern, a student may take up to 12 units at Level 1 and as few as 4 units at Level 3.

Bachelor Degree – Two Majors (24 units)


In the case of a degree with two majors, the eight elective units constitute the second major.

Bachelor Degree – Double Major (24 units)


In a double-major degree, the majors share a common Level 1 foundation of 2 units.

Legend (each cell represents one unit)

Units for degree-specific major Units complementing the degree-specific major Second major units (double major) Second major units (two majors) Broadening units Elective units


4.3 Overview of Major Offerings

Collectively, the four Bachelor degrees subject of this Review comprise a total of 71 majors: the Bachelor of Arts comprises 28 majors, the Bachelor of Commerce eight, the Bachelor of Design four and the Bachelor of Science 31 majors.

Figure 3 provides an overview of each Faculty’s teaching responsibility in terms of the number of majors per degree whose primary delivery is assigned to that Faculty.

Figure 3: Number of Majors taught by each Faculty in each Degree, 2015

The following pie chart illustrates how UWA’s undergraduate student load is distributed between the five undergraduate degrees. For example, the eight majors offered in the Bachelor of Commerce collectively account for 23% of UWA’s Student Load in 2015.

Figure 4: UWA Student Load by Undergraduate Degree, 2015

In addition to the student load by degree illustrated above, the following diagrams and accompanying tables provide an overview of the full-year load in each degree-specific major within the four Bachelor degrees under review over the four year period since new courses commenced, 2012-2015. For each degree, the relative size of each major is thus contextualised.

ALVA ARTS BUSINESS ECM LAW MEDICINE SCIENCE SIS TOTAL

Bachelor of Arts 1 22 1 1 2 1 28

Bachelor of Design 4 4

Bachelor of Commerce 7 1 8

Bachelor of Science 5 5 21 31

TOTAL 5 22 8 5 2 5 23 1 71

DEGREE FACULTY


Figure 5: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Arts (BP001)


2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Arts

No. Major Full-Year Load

2012 2013 2014 2015 1 Anthropology and Sociology 5.625 34.625 63.75 71 2 Archaeology 6.25 16.75 37 34.625 3 Asian Studies 1.25 4.75 11.25 16 4 Chinese 1.25 3.75 6.875 3 5 Classics and Ancient History 2 12.375 26.375 22.875 6 Communication and Media Studies 26.625 151.125 248.5 248.25 7 English and Cultural Studies 13.125 102.25 174.625 153.875 8 French Studies 0.875 22.875 33.375 27.75 9 Gender Studies NULL 0.25 5.5 5.25 10 German Studies NULL 6.5 10.875 6 11 History 5.5 35.25 92 86.875 12 History of Art 2.875 19.5 38.75 33.5 13 Human Geography and Planning 4.75 13.25 44.375 47.625 14 Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage NULL 3 8.25 5.75 15 Indonesian NULL 1 1.5 2.125 16 Italian Studies 2.125 9.75 16.5 13.375 17 Japanese 2.5 10.25 19.5 23.25 18 Korean Studies NULL NULL 0.75 3.5 19 Law and Society 23.125 123.875 266.5 244.25 20 Linguistics 2.25 19.5 35 38.875 21 Medieval and Early Modern Studies 0 2.625 6.25 11.25 22 Music Studies 15 59.125 96.75 89.125 23 Philosophy 3.375 22.25 31.125 33.75 24 Political Science and International Relations 23.75 156.25 264.625 273.125 25 Psychological Science NULL NULL 1.75 0.875 26 Psychology in Society 0.625 163.875 285.625 255.125 27 Social and Applied Psychology 30.5 NULL NULL NULL 28 Work and Employment Relations 1.25 9 16.125 18.125 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major in the Bachelor of Commerce


2012 2013 2014 2015 1 Accounting 38.375 351.625 689 747.625 2 Business Law 16.375 83.125 209.375 214.375 3 Economics (double major) 5.375 19.5 46 57.625 4 Economics (single major) 13.75 117.875 240.375 291.125 5 Finance 25.5 214.125 416.875 503.375 6 Human Resource Management 4.875 55.25 99.5 100.125 7 Management 15.125 85.625 165.875 179.375 8 Marketing 11 99.875 225.375 290.125


Figure 6: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Commerce (BP002)


Figure 7: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Design (BP003)

2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major in the Bachelor of Design

Major Full-Year Load 2012 2013 2014 2015

Architecture 8.4 151.6 306 320.3 Integrated Design 1.4 17.3 32.3 24.8 Landscape Architecture 3.9 14.3 29.8 35.9 Fine Arts

15.4

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2012 2013 2014 2015

EFTSL

2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Design

Architecture

Integrated Design

Landscape Architecture

Fine Arts


Figure 8: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Science (BP004)


Figure 9: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Science (excluding Engineering Science) (BP004)


2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major in the Bachelor of Science


2012 2013 2014 2015 1 Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing NULL 0.375 2.25 2.375 2 Agricultural Science 7.75 20 45 53.75 3 Anatomy and Human Biology 94.875 259.375 462.625 427.5 4 Applied Computing 1 4.625 8.5 5.875 5 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 27.5 46.375 99 87.375 6 Biomedical Science 288.625 257.75 346.375 276 7 Botany 3.125 8.25 17.5 27 8 Chemistry 44.75 92.625 144.375 148.125 9 Computer Science 19 72.125 144.125 163.875 10 Conservation Biology 14.625 29.875 64.875 60.625 11 Engineering Science 358.375 1183.333 1765.625 1652.5 12 Environmental Science 17.5 66.125 149.25 147.5 13 Exercise and Health 13.375 32.375 62.375 48.875 14 Genetics 21.875 40.5 84.25 89.75 15 Geography 1.5 10.625 16.625 18.25 16 Geology 38.625 99.375 138.5 107.375 17 Marine Science 19.125 42.625 79.5 84.625 18 Mathematics and Statistics 7.125 28.25 58 70.625 19 Microbiology and Immunology 7.5 24.375 59.5 90.5 20 Natural Resource Management 3 13.875 20.375 19.5 21 Neuropsychology and Cognitive Science 56.75 NULL NULL NULL 22 Neuroscience 35.375 78.125 146 177.75 23 Pathology and Laboratory Medicine 22.875 60.5 148.25 165.25 24 Pharmacology 35.5 116.875 230.875 246.25 25 Physics 34.75 65.875 107.75 132.125 26 Physiology 30.125 120.375 269.25 269.625 27 Population Health 5.875 25.25 42.75 39.5 28 Quantitative Methods 0.875 1.75 5.25 4.875 29 Science Communication NULL NULL NULL 0.375 30 Sport Science 46.625 128.1875 258.1875 259 31 Zoology 32.875 70.25 139 135.875


5 Performance Overview of Undergraduate Coursework Courses

5.1 University Level Indicators

This section provides a brief overview of data analysing the University’s overall performance in terms of student load (compared to other Go8 and Western Australian universities), Western Australian Certificate of Education (WACE) First Preferences and UWA’s Position in International Institutional Rankings of Universities. The above university level performance indicators provide important contextual information for the Review. In summary, the introduction of new courses in 2012 did not adversely impact longitudinal upward trends.

5.1.1 Student Load

Figure 10 provides UWA data on student load by broad course type for undergraduate coursework compared with all other universities in Western Australia and Australian Go8 universities from 2010 to 2014.

The data shows that UWA’s undergraduate load increased in the period from 2010 to 2012 from 14,993 to 16,659 EFTSL, with the first cohort entering UWA’s new courses in 2012. The load has since flat-lined with 16,877 EFTSL in 2013 and 16,733 EFTSL in 2014. The trend is not markedly different when compared with other universities of similar size, such as the University of Adelaide, where undergraduate load increased from 14,680 to 16,483 over the same five year period. Edith Cowan University’s undergraduate load decreased and Murdoch University’s and Curtin University’s undergraduate load increased in the period from 2010 to 2014. The data indicates that the introduction of UWA’s new courses in 2012 did not have a significant adverse impact on the undergraduate student load. However, the increases in enrolments at Curtin University and Murdoch University over this period may indicate some movement of market share to those universities which needs to be carefully monitored.

Figure 11 provides data on the percentage share of total student load for WA universities from 2010 to 2014. This data shows that UWA’s percentage share of the domestic load in WA decreased slightly from 23.42% in 2010 to 23.05% in 2014, while Curtin’s percentage share of the domestic load increased from 29.48% to 32.43%.


Figure 10: Undergraduate Student Load for WA and Go8, 2010-2014

Figure 11: Percentage Share of Student Load for WA Universities, 2010-2014

Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Domestic Overseas Total Domestic Overseas Total Domestic Overseas Total Domestic Overseas Total Domestic Overseas Total

Curtin University of Technology 29.48% 53.17% 36.83% 28.77% 51.38% 35.40% 29.83% 46.68% 34.59% 31.16% 44.59% 34.79% 32.43% 44.44% 35.57%

Edith Cowan University 22.09% 16.11% 20.23% 22.13% 13.59% 19.62% 21.19% 12.15% 18.63% 20.17% 11.24% 17.76% 19.70% 10.93% 17.41%

Murdoch University 14.22% 13.80% 14.09% 13.97% 17.00% 14.86% 13.82% 23.88% 16.66% 13.29% 27.49% 17.13% 12.64% 27.61% 16.55%

The University of Notre Dame

Australia10.80% 1.44% 7.89% 11.44% 1.25% 8.45% 11.65% 1.21% 8.70% 12.01% 0.91% 9.01% 12.18% 0.80% 9.21%

The University of Western

Australia23.42% 15.49% 20.95% 23.69% 16.79% 21.67% 23.51% 16.07% 21.41% 23.37% 15.77% 21.32% 23.05% 16.22% 21.27%

Grand Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

University

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Equivalent FT

Load Equivalent FT

Load Equivalent FT

Load Equivalent FT

Load Equivalent FT

Load

Undergraduate (including Bachelor, Enabling, Non-Award, Undergraduate Other)

Curtin University of Technology 27,621 26,951 27,614 28,471 29,785 Edith Cowan University 14,459 14,764 14,664 14,283 14,084 Monash University 38,572 39,525 39,515 40,029 40,879 Murdoch University 10,743 11,565 13,527 14,402 14,290 The Australian National University 8,835 8,965 8,948 8,653 8,599 The University of Adelaide 14,680 15,172 15,649 16,057 16,483 The University of Melbourne 25,098 23,999 22,575 22,148 21,951 The University of New South Wales 26,766 27,512 27,561 28,523 29,070 The University of Notre Dame Australia 6,716 7,336 7,777 8,203 8,377 The University of Queensland 27,002 28,156 29,018 30,358 31,545 The University of Western Australia 14,993 16,008 16,659 16,877 16,733 University of Sydney 28,851 28,504 29,231 29,459 29,245 Total 244,337 248,455 252,738 257,461 261,036

Source: Department of Education and Training – Higher Education statistics data cube


5.1.2 Western Australian Certificate of Education (WACE) First Preferences

An indicator of high school students’ perceptions and preferences for UWA’s new undergraduate courses compared with other courses on offer at other universities in Western Australia is the percentage of first preferences selected by students taking the Western Australian Certificate of Education (WACE). Figures 12.1, 12.2 and 12.3 provide UWA’s percentage share of WACE first preferences compared with the other four state universities in Western Australia. UWA’s minimum entry is an Australian Tertiary Admission Rank (ATAR) of 80, with the exception of a small proportion of students from socially, educationally or economically disadvantaged backgrounds, for whom ATAR concessions and alternative pathways are available. Figure 12.1 includes all students who received an ATAR of 80 or above, that is, almost all WACE students eligible for an offer at UWA; Figure 12.2 includes all students with an ATAR greater than or equal to 90 but less than 95; and Figure 12.3 includes all students with an ATAR of 95 or greater.

Figures 12.1 to 12.3 all indicate that UWA retains the largest percentage of first preferences from WACE students with an ATAR above 80, with the percentage share increasing the higher the ATAR. Figure 12.1 shows that prior to the introduction of UWA’s new courses in 2010, the percentage of first preference for WACE students with an ATAR above 80 was 56%. With the introduction of UWA’s new courses in 2012, there was a rise in this percentage to 60%, possibly partially due to UWA’s first ever advertising campaign. Since 2012, this increase in market share has reverted back to the same percentage as in 2010 (56%). This trend of a slight rise and fall in market share appears to be the inverse of the trend at Curtin University where the market share for WACE 80+ ATAR students’ first preferences dropped from 31% to 28% from 2010 to 2012 and then increased to 34% by 2015.

Figures 12.2 and 12.3 show a similar trend of an increase in market share of WACE students with ATARs of 90 ≥ 95 (Figure 12.2) and 95+ (Figure 12.3) first preferences in 2012 (62% and 78% respectively), with a return to pre-new courses market share by 2015 (58% and 73% respectively). While these figures are not alarming, the slight downward trend in UWA’s market share in the past two years, particularly of students with a high ATAR, and the increase in market share by Curtin University are trends that need to be monitored.


Figure 12: First Preference WACE by ATAR

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

%

Year

Figure 12.1: % 1st Preference WACE ATAR 80+ students 2010 - 2015

Curtin

ECU

Murdoch

UWA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

%

Figure 12.2: % 1st Preference WACE ATAR 90≥95 students 2010-2015

Curtin

ECU

Murdoch

UWA


UWA’s Average Student ATAR, 2010-2015

Figure 13 shows UWA’s average student ATAR in Cycle 1 degrees from 2010 to 2015. UWA’s average student ATAR is high compared with other universities in Western Australia and across the Go8 universities. There has been some small variation in the average ATAR across the years 2010 to 2015, with a downward trend shown by the linear representation in Figure 13. In 2015 the average ATAR regained some ground and returned to an average similar to that of 2011 at 91.3.

Figure 13: Average Student ATAR on Entry to UWA’s Cycle 1 Degrees, 2010-2015

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

%

Year

Figure 12.3: 1st Preference WACE ATAR 95+ Students 2010-2015

Curtin

ECU

Murdoch

UWA


5.1.3 UWA’s Position in International Institutional Rankings of Universities, 2010-2015

Figure 14 provides a graph showing UWA’s position in various international institutional rankings of universities over a five year period from 2010-2015. While these rankings are generally focussed on research output and reputation, it is important to consider whether the implementation of UWA’s new courses had a discernible impact on UWA’s position in these rankings. Having met its’ goal to be in the top 100 universities according to the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) in 2012, UWA now has a longer-term aim to be counted among the top 50 universities in the world by 2050. UWA’s reputation as indicated by ARWU continues to improve since the implementation of the new courses in 2012, with its ranking rising from 112 in 2010 to 87 in 2015. While UWA’s ranking has slightly declined in recent years on the QS World University Rankings from 73 in 2011 to 98 in 2015, it has continued to improve on the ARWU as well as on the Times Higher Education World Universities Ranking (THE) and the National Taiwan University (NTU) Ranking.

Figure 14: UWA’s Position in International Rankings of Universities, 2010-2015

Source: International Rankings Agencies


5.2 Teaching and Learning Indicators

This section provides a brief analysis of data selected from several sources with regard to teaching quality. While teaching quality is not part of the Terms of Reference for this Review of Cycle 1 courses, this data provides important contextual information for the Review. The data includes both longitudinal trends and inter-institutional comparisons. Selected data from external surveys such as Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) and Graduate Destinations Survey (DGS) as well as trends in both UWA’s Students’ Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF) and Student Perceptions of Teaching (SPOT) are summarised below.

5.2.1 External: Course Experience Questionnaire and Graduate Destination Survey

In contrast with internal SURF data, external surveys such as the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) indicate a downward trend in recent years in students’ perceptions of teaching at UWA. Figure 15 and Appendix C provide data on UWA’s performance in the CEQ from 2010-2014. The data shows that over this period, the percentage agreement with the aggregated statements within several scales declined, including for overall satisfaction (84.6% to 80.5%); good teaching (64.5% to 60.5%); generic skills (77.6% to 75.7%); graduate qualities (81.7% to 78.3%); and learning community (64.7% to 61.7%) (Figure 15).

Universities Australia warns that CEQ and Graduate Destinations Survey (GDS) data are not suitable for making simplistic (i.e. unqualified) inter-institutional comparisons because institutions have vastly different histories, missions, geographic/socio-economic stations, enrolment profiles and course mixes. Notwithstanding this important point, benchmarking UWA’s quality teaching indicators shows that students’ perceptions at UWA are, in general, not as positive as students from other universities in Western Australia and other Go8 universities.

Appendix C provides more detail on each item from the CEQ across the years 2012 to 2014 in comparison with WA universities and Go8 universities. Some of these items specifically refer to attributes of the students’ course, particularly the generic skills scale and the graduate qualities scale. On most items, UWA consistently received lower percentages of agreement in comparison with other WA universities and other Go8 universities.

UWA introduced its new curriculum and course structure in 2012, and in 2014 graduated the first cohort of students under this structure. It is important to point out the students whose survey results are captured in the 2014 CEQ results are students who completed their studies in 2013 and, therefore, commenced at UWA prior to the new courses being introduced. We are optimistic that the recent upward trend in students’ perceptions of their course and teaching quality within the courses observed in UWA’s internal SURF data will be observable in the external CEQ and other surveys in the next few years.


Figure 15: UWA’s Performance on the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ), 2010-2014

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 CEQ Overall Satisfaction Index- % Agreement 84.6% 84.1% 84.6% 83.1% 80.5% CEQ Good Teaching Scale- % Agreement 64.5% 63.5% 62.4% 62.1% 60.5% CEQ Generic Skills Scale- % Agreement 77.6% 76.7% 75.5% 75.7% 75.7% CEQ Graduate Qualities Scale % Agreement 81.7% 79.8% 80.2% 79.1% 78.3% CEQ Learning Community Scale % Agreement 64.7% 64.0% 62.7% 62.1% 61.7%

5.2.2 Internal: SURF and SPOT

The University measures the satisfaction of students through two main online survey instruments: Students’ Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF) and the Student Perceptions of Teaching (SPOT) survey.

SURF surveys allow students to evaluate their individual units. SURF results provide feedback to the University on students’ educational experiences and promote systemic responsiveness to this feedback. The 6-item questionnaire asks students to express an agreement/ dis-agreement on a 4-point scale with the following statements:

1. It was clear what I was expected to learn in this unit. 2. The assessment requirements were clearly stated. 3. The assessment tasks were closely linked to the unit objectives. 4. The unit was well organised. 5. The learning resources (handouts, text, web resources, etc.) were adequate for

my study in the unit. 6. Overall, this unit was a good educational experience.

From 2014, students are also able to supplement this feedback with some narrative impressions of the relevant unit.

The SURF survey is designed to be administered towards the end of a unit. It relates only to the unit and does not, in principle, seek feedback on an individual’s teaching performance. SURF is used to evaluate all units in the University, except those with special circumstances. The numerical results of the survey are made public within the University to all staff and students. The narrative impressions are made available only to the unit coordinator.

The most recent aggregated report Unit evaluations at UWA: An Analysis of SURF Survey Results, 2010-2014 is included as Appendix D.

Question 6 of the SURF survey seeks a response to “Overall, this unit was a good educational experience”, with the % agreement being the proportion of total non-blank responses with a value of 3 or 4 on the 4 point scale.

Since the implementation of new courses in 2012, SURF scores have been on a continuous upwards trend, with an average score of 3.14 and 3.17 in 2013 and 2014 respectively. This upward trend is an assuring indication that the University’s systems of teaching quality assurance and improvement are effective.


Figure 16: UWA SURF Score Averages, 2010-2014

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 SURF Average 3.11 3.13 3.12 3.14 3.17 Source: Report 15_12 An analysis of SURF survey results 2010-2014. IRU, UWA, March 2015.

Students are further encouraged to provide feedback on teaching and learning through the use of the Student Perceptions of Teaching (SPOT) survey, an evaluation instrument designed to provide qualitative feedback to teachers about their teaching during unit delivery. Unlike the SURF surveys, SPOT surveys are not compulsory, which allows academics to individualise the surveys to obtain feedback on particular aspects of the unit. There is also a comments section where students can give unsolicited feedback regarding the best and worst aspects of the unit and provide recommendations for improvement, thereby making these surveys particularly helpful in monitoring and improving individual teaching performance.

The feedback received from both SURF and SPOT can prompt unit coordinators to reflect on their unit and make changes to their units as part of the University’s Annual Curriculum Review Process.

5.3 Additional Indicators

In addition to University level indicators and teaching and learning indicators, there are aspects of new courses which were identified as important but not core features of the new courses framework, namely service learning, study abroad and Indigenous Education. However, given their potential to enhance the undergraduate student experience and become the defining and differentiating qualities of UWA’s courses, their performance to date is briefly summarised below. Indigenous Education is addressed separately in chapter 12 of this submission.

5.3.1 Service Learning

An initial proposal when UWA’s new courses were being planned was to require all students to participate in at least 20 hours of service learning during their Cycle 1 degree, with service learning specifically referring to community engagement activities that are embedded in units of study, being structured and assessed as formal educational experiences. This proposal, however, was never fully supported because of a number of reasons, including the view that it is contradictory to require students to do something that is inherently a voluntary activity and the challenge of administering and documenting service learning. Instead, the Dean of Coursework Studies was given the role to support and encourage students to participate in service learning.

Since 2012, a service learning website, as well as a process for approving service learning units, has been established. Students now also have their participation in service learning documented on the official addendum to their academic transcript.

http://www.worldclasseducation.uwa.edu.au/student-experience/service-learning2


There are currently 12 undergraduate units offered within the University that are listed as having a service learning component. Figure 17 provides information on total enrolments in officially approved service learning units in the period 2012-2015. The majority of these enrolments are in a Level 1 unit in the Bachelor of Science called BIOL1131 Plant and Animal Biology where students analyse environmental data for a not-for-profit organisation. Another service learning unit with good enrolments is EDUC1102 Learn Effectively: Improving Learning and Teaching offered by the Faculty of Education where UWA students tutor high school or primary school aged children and learn about teaching and learning.

Prior to new courses, there were only five approved service learning units across the entire university. While the total number of service learning units has increased to more than 30 in 2015, most of these are postgraduate coursework units with only 12 undergraduate units currently available to students. The availability of undergraduate service learning units could be increased to provide more opportunities for students to participate in this type of learning.

Figure 17: Total Enrolments in Service Learning Units, 2012-2015

5.3.2 Study Abroad

Increasing the opportunity for undergraduate students to participate in study abroad was a goal of new courses and a number of strategies have been put in place to enable this to happen. For example, all units taken abroad, regardless of their content, are considered Category A or Category B broadening units. A number of challenges face students who would like to study abroad, including the cost of travel and accommodation and the difficulty of finding suitable units offered by overseas universities that can be included as part of their degree study plan. Figure 18 shows that the percentage of domestic bachelor graduates who studied abroad during their course nearly doubled from about six per cent in 2010 to about 11 per cent in 2014.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2012 2013 2014 2015

number of enrolments

Year

Total Enrolments in Service Learning Units 2012-2015


Figure 18: UWA Domestic Undergraduate Student Studying Abroad, 2010-2015

Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance However, on the assumption that students tend to study abroad in the second year of their degree, it will likely be several years before the figures accurately reflect study abroad trends in the new courses structure as the proportion of students in their second year in either 2013 or 2014 is likely to depart from the long-term mean.


6 Quality Assurance Mechanisms: Governance and Curriculum Management

One of the key aims of UWA’s new courses relates to “achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and related administrative processes”11. In particular, this has resulted in:

Simplification and standardisation of the framework of degrees and courses to create greater transparency and flexibility;

Effective academic governance; Consistency in definitions, rules, procedures and nomenclature across the University;

and Reduction of unit proliferation.

The following sections outline how each of the above has been achieved since the development of the new courses framework commenced in 2009.

6.1 Simplification and Standardisation of the New Courses Structural Framework and Curriculum Management Processes

As documented in section 4.1 UWA Educational Principles and Key Features of Undergraduate Coursework Courses above, the introduction of a new, standardised framework for the University’s course offerings resulted in a significant reduction in the University’s degree course offerings from more than 70 named undergraduate degrees to five degrees, each corresponding to a cluster of associated disciplinary fields (referred to as “areas of knowledge”)12. All students are required to enrol in a structure that is standardised and consistent across the four three-year degree courses. The flexible nature of the new course structures led to the development of a streamlined curriculum development process, particularly for the development of majors and units. The curriculum development process for the new undergraduate coursework courses, which commenced in 2009, was conducted as an inclusive and university-wide consultative process and included varying requirements for consultation and documentation, depending on the scale and scope of the proposed course development. It was further informed by early assessment of the viability and risk associated with the course.

11 Education for Tomorrow’s World: Courses of Action – Report of the Review of Course Structures (September 2008), p. 4 12 Ibid. p. 1


Key features of the course development process were as follows: A strong alignment of the structural principles of the new courses framework (both

undergraduate and postgraduate) with the University’s Strategic and Operational Priorities Plans;

Involvement of a range of activities such as planning, consultation, documentation, implementation and monitoring; and

Streamlined and flexible curriculum development process. Since commencement of the implementation of new courses in 2009, the University’s curriculum development and ongoing curriculum management processes have undergone significant transformation, moving from primarily paper-based, faculty-focused and manual administration to a custom-built, UWA-wide online curriculum management system (Curriculum Approvals Information Database online – CAIDi), which not only facilitates curriculum development and management, but also functions as an online repository of the University’s approved and proposed curriculum offerings (both historically and current).

6.2 Academic Governance: Curriculum Approval Process

The University’s curriculum approval process has been one of the cornerstones of its quality assurance arrangements along with annual monitoring and periodic review. Its purpose has been to secure the quality and viability of the curriculum delivered to students. The development and implementation of new courses resulted in significant changes to the University’s governance arrangements for approving curriculum to ensure appropriate quality control mechanisms are in place, responding to and reflective of the new course structure, and approval processes are streamlined and administered efficiently. The Review of Course Structures report Education for Tomorrow’s World recommended that “a Board of Coursework Studies (BCS) be established with responsibility to receive and consider proposals from Faculties for the introduction of (or significant changes) to first-cycle and second-cycle coursework units, majors and courses, and make recommendations to Academic Council on these and associated policy matters” (Rec. 8). However, while BCS was established with a view to ensuring the educational integrity of new courses, it was ascertained at that time that the BCS cannot possess enough disciplinary expertise to assess the detailed information included in major proposals and other discipline-specific curriculum matters. It was vital that the responsibility of Faculties for delivering and devising courses be fully recognised. Although the role envisaged for BCS was intended to facilitate high-quality curriculum development, it was not equipped to generate proposals, undertake preliminary negotiation between schools and faculties on the majors to be offered within the new undergraduate courses, or deciding on related course development matters, such as prerequisites, complementary units, and broadening units.


It was in this context that Interim Boards of Studies were established for each of the following five undergraduate degree courses:

Bachelor of Arts (BA); Bachelor of Commerce (BCom); Bachelor of Design (BDes), Bachelor of Science (BSc); and Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours).

These Interim Boards of Studies provided an avenue for faculty input and scrutiny in relation to the proposed undergraduate courses. It provided faculties with a voice in the development, implementation and quality assurance of new courses. The work of the Interim Boards of Studies began in 2009, resulting in the Call for Expressions of Interest (Concept Plan - Phase 1) for the development of majors and later leading to the development of detailed Phase 2 proposals. At Phase 2, the University received a total of 1047 fully developed proposals across the four degrees. These comprised 81 proposals for majors, 63 for end-on Honours courses, and 903 for units13. Of the unit proposals, 103 were not components of the proposed majors but were unattached electives (including many proposed Category A Broadening Units). Subsequently, the University approved 67 new majors for offering from 2012 across the four undergraduate degree courses. Since then the number of major offerings has marginally increased over time as captured below: Figure 19: Undergraduate Majors, 2012-2015 Degree 2012 2013 2014 2015 Bachelor of Arts 25 26 28 28 Bachelor of Commerce 8 8 8 8 Bachelor of Design 3 3 3 4 Bachelor of Science 31 31 31 31 Total 67 68 70 71 Source: CAIDi In November 2011, the Interim Boards of Studies were converted to permanent Boards of Studies, which effectively governed new courses from 2012.

13 UWA Future Framework Implementation Update – 16 July 2010


In September 2014, the governance arrangements put in place to manage curriculum approval processes in the new courses structure were further reviewed in response to a number of key issues:

The Boards of Studies had been established to manage the major task of introducing and implementing New Courses. The first cohort of students graduated at the end of 2014 and the high level of curriculum-related work at the undergraduate level had greatly reduced;

Changes in the management structure and new portfolio positions, including Pro Vice-Chancellor (International), Dean of Coursework Studies, and Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education Innovation) had provided the opportunity for improved delegations and responsibilities;

Improved policies over the last few years had enabled more efficient decision-making; Improved use of technology and systems to provide curriculum data (CAIDi) had

streamlined agenda documentation, and provided greater transparency and accountability.

In late 2014, the University undertook a review of its education-related committee structure with the objective to enhance the governance effectiveness within the portfolio. The 2014 review of committees resulted in the rationalising of committees and led to the disestablishment of the Board of Coursework Studies and the establishment of a new Education Committee which reports to Academic Council. Further, the five Boards of Studies were replaced with a new Curriculum Committee, which became a standing committee of the Education Committee.

Figure 20: University’s Education-Related Committee Structure


6.3 Regulatory Framework supporting New Courses

Part of the implementation of the new courses was the development of a framework of rules, policy and other documentation that underpinned the new course structures. Among other things, this involved more clearly separating rules from policies (but with cross-linkages) and simplifying the expression of both to make them more user-friendly and student-focused. 6.3.1 Rules

In order to achieve the new courses’ aim of simplifying and standardising not only the University’s course offerings themselves but also associated governance and administration, two common sets of rules now govern all five undergraduate Bachelor courses: (1) Undergraduate Degree Course Rules which focus succinctly on the basic structural components of first-cycle courses, and (2) Student Rules which address a range of administrative matters pertaining specifically to what students are required to do during their time at the University - for example, in relation to admissions, enrolment, fees, assessment and appeals. The shift from having more than 70 separate course rules and degree names to developing a single set of course rules for the new four three-year undergraduate degree courses was a significant regulatory simplification. The University Policy on Names and Abbreviations for Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates (UP07/116) was amended to reflect the nomenclature of the new undergraduate degree courses and clarified that “the major(s) undertaken by a student do not appear in the degree name or on the award certificate but are recorded in the transcript of the student's academic record and in the Australian Higher Education Graduation Statement (AHEGS)”14. 6.3.2 Policies

In light of the introduction of the new courses, the University’s existing policies were reviewed and redrafted. These fell into several categories as follow:

Drafting of new policies to reflect decisions relating to New Courses 2012; Amendment of existing policies to reflect changes relating to New Courses 2012; Policies written to capture the policy context of relevant regulations and associated

rules; and Rewriting of existing policy statements that were in the form of committee resolutions.

The above resulted in the development of a comprehensive policy framework and a suite of academic policies relating to the new courses framework and their implementation. It should, however, be noted that work on academic policies is ongoing, with a renewed focus on further simplifying and streamlining academic policies. An Academic Policies Simplification and Streamlining Project is currently being conducted whose aim it is to simplify policy content without changing the approved principles. The expected outcome of the project is to

14 See University Policy on Names and Abbreviations for Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates (UP07/116)

http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/rules?id=20306

http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/rules?id=55183

http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/rules?id=20303&childfx=on

http://www.governance.uwa.edu.au/procedures/policies/policies-and-procedures?method=document&id=up07%2F116

http://www.governance.uwa.edu.au/procedures/policies/function

http://www.governance.uwa.edu.au/procedures/policies/policies-and-procedures?method=document&id=up07%2F116


reduce the number of academic policies from 92 to about 45 policies and also to have policies that are better contextualised and expressed succinctly and clearly. Part of the implementation of new courses was the development of a comprehensive and definitive glossary of academic terms, and nomenclature relating to key features of the new courses framework (e.g. broadening unit, complementary unit, degree-specific major, electives). Since 2009, the glossary database has been regularly revised as particular terms become established, recorded and officially approved.

6.4 Unit Reduction and Unit Levels

An anticipated goal of introducing new courses was to streamline curriculum administration by significantly reducing the total number of undergraduate units on offer and minimising proliferation. Prior to the introduction of new courses, the University offered a total of 1218 undergraduate units in 2011 (Source: Callista). While the total number of units offered has been increasing at a declining rate over the past five years, the total number of undergraduate units created and offered in the new courses framework remains significantly lower than the total number of undergraduate units offered in pre-2012 courses, hence contributing to achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and related administrative processes within the new courses framework. Figure 21: Undergraduate New Courses Units, 2012-2016

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Level 1 166 178 179 186 188 Level 2 281 301 312 324 324 Level 3 370 375 395 411 424 Total Levels 1-3 817 854 886 921 936 Increase #

37 32 35 15

Increase %

5% 4% 4% 2% Source: CAIDi Additionally, the introduction of new courses saw the development of a new University Policy on Coding System for Courses, Unit Sets and Units (UP07/113) with a view to streamline and more succinctly regulate unit offerings. To that effect, the University established only three levels for the offering of undergraduate units: Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3.

http://www.governance.uwa.edu.au/procedures/policies/glossary





7 Key Stakeholder Surveys – Students and Major Coordinators

7.1 The Student Voice – Student Survey Analysis

In order to ascertain students’ perceptions of UWA’s Cycle 1 courses, an online survey was conducted during August and September of 2015. The survey collected demographic information about the participating students, their responses to 61 questions about the new courses on a four point, strongly agree to strongly disagree scale, and their qualitative written responses to three open-ended questions. A total of 2828 students participated in the survey, a response rate of 22% from the 13,000 students who are currently enrolled or recently graduated from Cycle 1 of UWA’s new courses. A detailed analysis of the student survey findings is included at Appendix E.

Course Structure

The student survey provided rich information about students’ perceptions of UWA’s Cycle 1 courses. Overall, these perceptions were very positive with 87% of survey participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that they value UWA’s internationally recognised course structure. Eight in ten students perceive the course structure as providing them with an excellent education including both breadth and depth of knowledge and transferrable skills, and would recommend UWA’s courses to another student. Generally, the more recently the participants enrolled at UWA, the greater the percentage of positive responses to the survey questions.

The survey results indicated that about a third of participants did not agree with the statement that UWA’s courses are easy to understand and did not agree that it was easy for them to plan their personal course structure. The written responses clarified that many students felt that UWA’s courses need to be more clearly communicated to prospective students and were of the view that better course advice was needed for enrolled students.

Professional Pathways

Seventy per cent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they would prefer a more obvious pathway, and 61% a quicker pathway, to a professional qualification. These responses were strongest for students in the Bachelor of Science (including Engineering Science) and were stronger for international students compared with domestic students. Bachelor of Philosophy and Bachelor of Arts students were notably less likely to agree with these comments. The responses to the open-ended questions indicated some students’ view that the professional pathways are unnecessarily long and hence expensive, and some students’ frustration at having to do content not specifically related to their chosen profession. Other students requested that more specific and clear information about professional pathways be provided.

Flexibility and Broadening

Students very much value the flexibility of UWA’s Cycle 1 degrees, specifically the flexibility to change majors and degrees if they choose to and to take second majors, broadening units and electives from very different disciplines. Many students had suggestions for enhancing this flexibility, for example, with regard to redefining broadening units so that they could do them outside their major but within their degree. Some students expressed a preference for more


summer school units so that they could complete their degree faster, make up failed units, or spread the load across the calendar year to reduce workload and stress.

Majors

The survey indicated that student perceptions of their degree-specific majors and second majors were very positive and that they viewed them as distinctive, developmental, coherent and engaging. The vast majority of students also agreed that they learnt a lot in their degree-specific majors and second majors and would recommend their majors to another student. Improvements of the majors should focus on highlighting cutting-edge content when it is being taught. The qualitative comments indicated that students wanted more practical activities, including laboratory activities and real-world case studies and problem-solving activities to be included in their majors. Students also expressed the view that they would like to see better links with industry and relevant businesses, including the teaching of job-specific skills, and greater opportunities for internships and practicum experiences. Students strongly value the teaching of both communication and research skills in their major, but expressed the view that the teaching of these skills could be improved.

Diversity of Views

Students in the Bachelor of Philosophy generally had more positive views of their course and students in the Bachelor of Design and the Engineering Science major consistently showed less favourable views of their course compared with students in other courses. These less favourable perceptions may in part be attributed to the restrictions on the degree/major as a result of the requirements of professional accreditation. International students generally were more positive about UWA’s courses compared with domestic students.

Study Abroad, Indigenous Content and Service Learning

The inclusion of study abroad, indigenous content and service learning had mixed perceptions from students. Generally, students who chose to participate in these experiences were very positive about them. However, it is evident from the findings that delivery of these aspects of UWA’s courses is less well developed and should continue to be supported and enhanced so that more students have the opportunity to participate in them.

Not-for-Credit Modules

The three compulsory, not-for-credit modules were received with mixed, but generally positive views. For example, more international students (80%), compared with domestic students (65%), felt that the Academic Conduct Essentials (ACE) module made them more aware of plagiarism. About half the respondents (54%) agreed or strongly agreed that the online, not-for-credit module Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE) enhanced their understanding of Indigenous people. Not surprisingly, this percentage was greater for international students (75%) than domestic students (51%). Few students (26%) agreed that their communication skills were enhanced by undertaking the CARS non-credit module, but this low proportion may reflect students’ high self-perception of their personal literacy.


7.2 Major Coordinator Survey

In order to complement the student survey conducted for this Review and to assist the Audit Team with preparing the degrees’ evidence-based self-assessment reports, a survey of major coordinators was conducted during September 2015. The survey was emailed to all major coordinators, asking for their feedback on the following in the context of their majors:

1. Strengths and successes of the new courses framework in general 2. Weaknesses of the new courses framework 3. Developmental progression of the major 4. Level of emphasis on inquiry-based learning and research skill development 5. Methods of teaching communication skills (dedicated unit vs embedded) 6. Major’s contribution to students’ acquisition of cultural competence 7. Overall satisfaction with the major 8. Key improvement suggestion regarding structural framework

Some major coordinators used the context of the survey to conduct comprehensive consultation processes with fellow academics in their discipline, and indicated that the survey responses were reflecting the discipline’s views, rather than solely their personal views as major coordinator. Implicitly, this extended the number of stakeholders providing input to the self-assessment reports and hence the consultations with key University stakeholders in the context of this Review.

Figure 22 provides an overview of the responses received for each degree. Across the four degrees, response rates ranged from 63% for the Bachelor of Commerce to 100% in the Bachelor of Design. Response rates for the two large degrees, Bachelor of Arts (64%) and Bachelor of Science (74%) exceeded expectations and responses adequately represented the discipline diversity within these degrees.

Figure 22: Overview of Major Coordinator Survey Responses by Degree

Degree No of returned surveys Total no. of majors Response rate

Bachelor of Arts 18 28 64%

Bachelor of Commerce 5 8 63%

Bachelor of Design 4 4 100%

Bachelor of Science 23 31 74%

TOTAL 38 71 75%

7.3 Faculty Deans

For completeness, it should be noted that relevant members of the Audit Team also met individually with each Faculty Dean and other senior Faculty staff as nominated by the Deans in July and early August 2015 to ascertain their views about the new courses framework in general and the majors their Faculty offered. The information received in these meetings guided the Audit Team in setting the initial scope and parameters for their respective self-assessment reports and key themes identified in these meetings were subsequently amplified by feedback from students and major coordinators which is discussed in greater detail in the respective degree’s self-assessment report.


8 Bachelor of Arts – Structure and Performance

8.1 Executive Summary

8.1.1 Areas of Success/Commendation (Evidence-based) Perhaps the greatest success within the Bachelor of Arts, and one that has been recognised nationally, is the expansion of language study across the University. This is evidenced not just by substantial increases in enrolments in language units but perhaps more importantly and profoundly by the number of students selecting a language major alongside their first major. A similar success, though one that has not received as much publicity, is the growing strength of Indigenous Studies. While the Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing Major (BSc) on the Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage Major (BA) have relatively few enrolments, the first year units in particular are attracting an increasing number of interested students from across the University. The Faculty of Law has also had considerable success in introducing a new major, Law and Society into the Arts degree. The revised structure and focus on disciplinary progression has been recognised as a success by a number of Major Coordinators in the BA, but this varies by the extent to which the full possibilities of the new design have been embraced. 8.1.2 Areas of Improvements or Changes and Reasons for Change Changes to the structure of majors within the BA, since implementation in 2012, have been towards a 2+3+3 structure and away from a 2+2+4 structure and tend to have favoured the introduction of further options in unit lists in the major, or the replacement of some options with others. These changes may have increased flexibility for teachers and students alike but may have added to the confusion (and sometimes apparent frustration) students feel about not knowing what options will be available when. An important and contested change has been the decision in 2015 to rescind three majors: European Studies, Gender Studies, and Medieval and Early Modern Studies. These majors have struggled within the new structures and have had a high level of dependence on other majors for units. It is too early to tell whether the incorporation of their component units into other majors will help or hinder interdisciplinary studies in these areas but it would be counterproductive for the University if the only way in which an interdisciplinary area might flourish involved it having its own major.

8.1.3 Recommendations for Further Change/ Improvements The most important issue facing the BA is the use of a communication skills complementary unit, COMM1901 Communication in Practice, by 19 of the 28 majors. The unit is not liked by students or staff and it should be recognised that the complementary unit strategy is not only not achieving the desired results but is alienating students. Its existence is not

http://www.humanities.org.au/PolicyResearch/Research/MappingtheHumanitiesArtsSocialSciences.aspx


defended by the discipline unit now responsible for delivering it. However, fixing this problem will not be easy. A majority of the majors dependent on this complementary unit have a very loose structure and manage progression through a set of generic outcomes at each unit level. Embedding communication skills within all the units of these majors thus presents a particular problem, perhaps only solved by one of two options:

1. Relaxing the requirement that discipline-relevant communication skills be taught explicitly or lowering expectations on what explicit teaching means; or

2. Restructuring these majors to include a core within which explicit teaching of communication skills can be situated.

The reorganisation of lists of optional units into a core with electives, the latter having more relaxed requirements (based on volume of relevant learning rather than prerequisites), may also provide greater opportunities for interdisciplinary studies. There are some clear perversities in current arrangements. On the one hand, the close relationships between certain majors that are taught out of separate degrees allows students to comply with the broadening requirements by completing units in a very closely related area of study. On the other hand, BA students have limited opportunities to take what would be obvious and valuable broadening units within the BA – this point was made repeatedly by Music students, for example. Current constraints on broadening units could be usefully reviewed to allow students within the BA to take at least some of their broadening units within the BA. While it may be more complex to administer, this might be achieved by reducing the number of broadening units that have to be taken outside the degree, allowing Category A Broadening Units to be taken within the degree, or dividing the BA into clusters such as Music, Social Sciences, Humanities, Languages and allowing students to take broadening units within their degree but outside their home cluster. The tight relationships between some majors might need to be considered and adjustments made. A very clear issue here is the dependency of the Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing Major (BSc) on the Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage Major (BA). The reliance of the former on four units of the latter limits the potential of the Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage Major to incorporate additional options selected from cognate majors.


8.2 Structure of the Majors

8.2.1 Overview of the Structure of Majors

In the Bachelor of Arts (BA) at UWA, the main focus is on ‘how human beings create, recognise and negotiate social meanings and values’. The following 28 majors have been taught as part of the BA under New Courses. The majority are taught by the Faculty of Arts (22), but additional Majors are offered by the Faculties of: Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts (1); Business (1); Law (1); Science (2); and by the School of Indigenous Studies (1):

Figure 23: Overview of the Majors in the Bachelor of Arts

Twenty-five majors commenced in 2012. European Studies was added in 2013, Gender Studies and Korean Studies in 2014. European Studies, Gender Studies and Medieval and Early Modern Studies will be rescinded from 2016 following a decision at Academic Council in 2015.

The largest five majors each had EFTSL loads of over 150 in both 2014 and 2015. These were: Communication and Media Studies; English and Cultural Studies; Law and Society; Political Science and International Relations; and Psychology in Society. The smallest majors had under 20 EFTSLs in both 2014 and 2015: Asian Studies; Gender Studies; German Studies; Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage; Indonesian; Italian Studies; Medieval and Early Modern Studies; and Work and Employment Relations.

Anthropology and Sociology Archaeology Asian Studies Chinese

Classics and Ancient History

Communication and Media Studies

English and Cultural Studies

European Studies (since 2013; rescinded from

2016) French Studies

Gender Studies (since 2014; rescinded from

2016) German Studies

Human Geography and Planning (Faculty of

Science)

History History of Art (Faculty of

ALVA) Indonesian

Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage (School of

Indigenous Studies) Italian Studies Japanese

Korean Studies (since 2014)

Linguistics Law and Society (Faculty of

Law)

Medieval and Early Modern Studies (rescinded

from 2016) Music Studies Philosophy

Political Science and International Relations

Psychology in Society (Faculty of Science)

Work and Employment Relations (Faculty of

Business) Specialist Music Studies


Figure 24: 2012-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Arts




2012 2013 2014 2015 1 Anthropology and Sociology 5.625 34.625 63.75 71 2 Archaeology 6.25 16.75 37 34.625 3 Asian Studies 1.25 4.75 11.25 16 4 Chinese 1.25 3.75 6.875 3 5 Classics and Ancient History 2 12.375 26.375 22.875 6 Communication and Media Studies 26.625 151.125 248.5 248.25 7 English and Cultural Studies 13.125 102.25 174.625 153.875 8 French Studies 0.875 22.875 33.375 27.75 9 Gender Studies NULL 0.25 5.5 5.25 10 German Studies NULL 6.5 10.875 6 11 History 5.5 35.25 92 86.875 12 History of Art 2.875 19.5 38.75 33.5 13 Human Geography and Planning 4.75 13.25 44.375 47.625 14 Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage NULL 3 8.25 5.75 15 Indonesian NULL 1 1.5 2.125 16 Italian Studies 2.125 9.75 16.5 13.375 17 Japanese 2.5 10.25 19.5 23.25 18 Korean Studies NULL NULL 0.75 3.5 19 Law and Society 23.125 123.875 266.5 244.25 20 Linguistics 2.25 19.5 35 38.875 21 Medieval and Early Modern Studies 0 2.625 6.25 11.25 22 Music Studies 15 59.125 96.75 89.125 23 Philosophy 3.375 22.25 31.125 33.75 24 Political Science and International Relations 23.75 156.25 264.625 273.125 25 Psychological Science NULL NULL 1.75 0.875 26 Psychology in Society 0.625 163.875 285.625 255.125 27 Social and Applied Psychology 30.5 NULL NULL NULL 28 Work and Employment Relations 1.25 9 16.125 18.125 Source: Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance


The relative popularity of majors is shown in Figure 25. This is a count of commencing students nominating their first and second Majors and shows the number of students who have nominated a Major within the BA as either their first or second Major. Note that this is not a count of actual load in units making up the majors:

Figure 25: Relative Popularity of Majors in the BA

Source: Analysis based on the data extracted from Major combinations 2012-2015 data for each Bachelor degree (Arts, Commerce, Design and Science) provided by UWA’s Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

Figure 26 shows for each major, the relative proportion of students selecting it as their first major and then as a second major in either the BA or other degrees. The BPhil data is not included. The Majors are ordered from left to right by highest proportion of students selecting the major within the BA.

Figure 26: Proportional Enrolment of BA Majors by Degree

Source: Analysis based on the data extracted from Major combinations 2012-2015 data for each Bachelor degree (Arts, Commerce, Design and Science) provided by UWA’s Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

PSY

SO

PO

LSC

LWSO

C

CM

MST

EGC

ST

HIS

TY

AN

TSC

JPN

S

FRN

H

MU

SST

HG

YPL

PH

ILY

ITLN

LIN

GO

CLA

NH

AR

CG

Y

HYA

RT

CH

NS

GR

MN

WK

ERL

ASS

TD

KO

RE

MD

EMS

INK

HH

EUR

OS

GN

DST

IND

N

2nd in BDes

2nd in BComm

2nd in BSc

2nd in BA

1st Major

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

MD

EMS

GN

DST

ASS

TD

HIS

TY

HYA

RT

MU

SST

AN

TSC

EGC

ST

CLA

NH

PO

LSC

CM

MST

LWSO

C

EUR

OS

LIN

GO

AR

CG

Y

INK

HH

PH

ILY

WK

ERL

HG

YPL

IND

N

FRN

H

ITLN

GR

MN

PSY

SO

KO

RE

JPN

S

CH

NS

2nd in BDes

2nd in BComm

2nd in BSc

2nd in BA

1st Major


This figure shows that some majors are rarely selected by students outside the BA. Ninety per cent or more of students selecting majors in Medieval and Early Modern Studies, Gender Studies, Asian Studies, History, History of Art, Music Studies, Anthropology and Sociology, and English and Cultural Studies are enrolled in the BA. At the other extreme (and excluding Psychology in Society, which is coupled with the Psychological Science Major in the BSc) the languages are the most popular majors for students enrolled in other degrees. More than 50% of students opting to take Majors in Chinese, Japanese and Korean Studies are enrolled outside the BA.

Looked at from a different perspective, 59% of those BA students identifying a second major on commencement selected a second major in the BA. The corollary is that 41% selected a major outside the BA. 20% of BSc students identifying a second major selected this from the BA. For the BCom and BDes the percentages were 12% and 4% respectively15.

As outlined in detail in section 4.2 Structure of Undergraduate Coursework Courses, the new courses framework envisaged majors as a 2+2+4 structure with a clear developmental progression. An alternative 2+3+3 structure was permitted in the design where good grounds could be established for a parallel structure at levels 2 and 3 — the alternative design was initially developed to accommodate language majors but has spread well beyond that grouping.

Of the current 28 majors in the BA, 12 have a 2+2+4 unit structure and 15 now have a 2+3+3 structure. One major, Specialist Music Studies can only be taken in conjunction with the Music Studies major and has a 0-4-4 unit structure. It is unclear whether the change in emphasis towards 2+3+3 might make it difficult for students to complete eight units at Level 3.

The Political Science and International Relations major is an example of a major with a 2+2+4 structure. The major:

“…is structured around a combination of core courses fixed by the discipline group in the 1st year, and optional courses chosen by students from a range of possibilities in the 2nd and 3rd year. 1st year units provide the critical foundation for students. 2nd year units are designed to broaden their knowledge of key concepts and theories in the Political Science and International Relations discipline. 3rd year units are designed to deepen their knowledge of key concepts and theories in Major sub-fields of the discipline. This focus on equipping students with a gradual progression and balance of broad and specialised knowledge and skills should put students in the best possible position from which to prepare for employment or further study.” (Political Science and International Relations response to survey of Major Coordinators)

History was first designed as a 2+2+4 unit structure, distinguishing between historiography at Level 2 and methodology at Level 3 but was reorganised as a 2+3+3 structure in 2014:

“Our level 3 focus upon methodology is no more important than our level 2 focus upon historiography and should receive equal emphasis in our students’ programs. A 2+2+4 structure will result in poorly balanced student programs which will not achieve the Discipline’s outcomes.” (History response to survey of Major Coordinators)

15 Source: Analysis based on the data extracted from Major combinations 2012-2015 data for each Bachelor degree (Arts, Commerce, Design and Science) provided by UWA’s Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance


The proposed re-balancing between methodology and historiography might have been achieved in other ways, but History’s ability to adopt another design was limited by its decision not to offer core units at any level.

Anthropology and Sociology distinguished between developing knowledge of key concepts and theories at Level 2, and methodology at Level 3 and switched its structure from 2+2+4 to 2+3+3 in 2015 to allow a “balance in the Major that allows students to equally develop specialist skills in both theory and method” (Anthropology and Sociology response to survey of Major Coordinators). Anthropology and Sociology also justified the change in terms of the value of second year analysis and theory units (as opposed to methodology units) to students who are not majoring in Anthropology and Sociology.

Through the process of developing the inaugural BA majors and as a result of subsequent changes, there now exist four different models of core and optional units.

Model 1:

Some Majors offer only core units and no electives in a 2+2+4 formation. This structure occurs in three Majors: Communication and Media Studies, Human Geography and Planning, and Work and Employment Relations.

Communication and Media Studies

2+2+4 2 x L1 core 2 x L2 core 4 x L3 core

Human Geography and Planning 2+2+4 2 x L1 core; 1 x L1 complementary 2 x L2 core; 2 x L2 complementary 4 x L3 core

Work and Employment Relations 2+2+4

2 x L1 core 2 x L2 core 4 x L3 core

Model 2: Some Majors have no core units. English and Cultural Studies, History and Philosophy offer optional units at all year levels with a set of ‘discipline-specific generic learning outcomes’ specified for each year level and which is delivered by every unit at that level. English and Cultural Studies 2+2+4 1 x L1 complementary; 4 x L1 option (take 2)

12 x L2 option (take 2) 12 x L3 option (take 4)

Philosophy 2+2+4 3 x L1 option (take 2); 1 x L1 complementary 6 x L2 option (take 2) 7 x L3 option (take 4)

History 2+3+3 3 x L1 option (take 2); 1 x L1 complementary 14 x L2 option (take 3) 12 x L3 option (take 3)


Model 3: Most Majors offer a blend of core and options. Law and Society, Psychology in Society and Anthropology and Sociology maintain a spine of core units through each year level: Law and Society 2+3+3 2 x L1 core;

1 x L2 core; 8 x L2 option (take 2) 1 x L3 core; 4 x L3 option (take 2)

Psychology in Society 2+2+4 2 x L1 core 1 x L2 core; 4 x L2 option (take 1) 2 x L3 core; 4 x L3 option (take 2)

Anthropology and Sociology 2+3+3 2 x L1 core; 1 x L1 complementary 1 x L2 core; 13 x L2 option (take 2) 1 x L3 core; 7 x L3 option (take 2)

Classics and Ancient History has a core unit at Level 1 with options at Levels 2 and 3. Other Majors have a Level 1 de facto core by virtue of offering only two units at this level, e.g. Asian Studies and Political Science and International Relations. Classics and Ancient History 2+2+4 1 x L1 core; 2 x L1 option (take 1); 1 x L1 complementary

6 x L2 option (take 2); 11 x L3 option (take 4)

Asian Studies 2+2+4 2 x L1 core; 1 x L1 complementary 4 x L2 option (take 2); 6 x L3 option (take 4)

Political Science and International Relations

2+2+4 2 x L1 core; 1 x L1 complementary 10 x L2 option (take 2); 13 x L3 option (take 4)

Linguistics has a Level 1 and Level 2 core with options at Level 3. Tight prerequisites require both Level 1 units to be completed before Level 2 and at least two of the three core Level 2 units before any Level 3 unit. Linguistics 2+3+3 2 x L1 core; 1 x L1 complementary

3 x L2 core; 7 x L3 option (take 3)

Model 4 (Languages): Up to four different (sub)Majors are offered in each language to accommodate the range of entry points. For illustrative purposes, the Chinese and French Majors are presented below. Each of these has four different pathways defined as follows:

B (Beginners)

requires a pass in WACE French: FRE 2A/2B

P (‘Pass’)

requires a pass in WACE French: FRE 3A/3B

I (Intermediate)

available to students assessed by the discipline as near native speaker

A (Advanced)


CHNSB Chinese CHNSP Chinese CHNSI Chinese CHNSA Chinese

Level1 CHIN1401 Chinese 1 CHIN1001 Chinese 3A CHIN1403 Chinese 3 CHIN1405 Chinese 5 CHIN1402 Chinese 2 CHIN1403 Chinese 3 CHIN2404 Chinese 4 CHIN1406 Chinese 6

COMP COMM1901 COMM1901 COMM1901 COMM1901

Level 2

CHIN2001 Chinese 3A CHIN2404 Chinese 4 CHIN2405 Chinese 5 CHIN2407 Chinese 7 CHIN2403 Chinese 3 CHIN2405 Chinese 5 CHIN2406 Chinese 6 CHIN2408 Chinese 8 CHIN2404 Chinese 4 CHIN2406 Chinese 6 ANTH2702 Environment, Power and Disasters in Asia,

ASIA2001 Culture, Society and the State in Asia, ASIA2002 Australia and Asia, OR ASIA 2004 Popular Culture in Asia

Level 3 CHIN3405 Chinese 5 CHIN3407 Chinese 7 CHIN3407 Chinese 7 CHIN3409 Chinese 9 CHIN3406 Chinese 6 CHIN3408 Chinese 8 CHIN3408 Chinese 8 CHIN3410 Chinese 10

ASIA3003 Social Issues in Contemporary China FRNHB French Studies FRNHP French Studies FRNHI French Studies FRNHA French Studies

Level1

FREN1401 French Studies 1

FREN1001 Specialist French Studies 3A







Level 2

FREN2001 Specialist French Studies 3A










FREN2812 Specialist French Studies 12

Level 3









FREN3813 Specialist French Studies 13, OR FREN3814 Specialist French Studies 14 The structure of these two (sets of sub-) majors illustrates the overall pattern of organisation of the language majors at UWA. The four major sequences allow entry at different language skill levels. The tables show the stepped progression through levels (blue shading) and also show that what appears to be a profusion of majors and units is an artefact of coding conventions. Thus the Chinese program includes 11 distinct language units (1-10 and 3A) rather than the 26 distinctly coded units listed in the table above. The same pattern holds for French and for the other language majors, with the caveats that Italian does not offer distinct ‘Pass’ and ‘Intermediate’ majors, Japanese and Indonesian do not offer an ‘Advanced’ major, and Korean Studies offers only a ‘Beginners’ major. It is worth noting some differences between the Chinese and French majors. Firstly, the language units in the Chinese major are rounded out by relevant ‘culture’ units (yellow shading) selected from a list of Anthropology and Sociology and Asian Studies units. This same arrangement holds for the other Asian language majors with the exception of Korean Studies. The corresponding options in the French majors are taught out of French Studies and the outcomes include further development of reading, writing, listening and speaking skills in the French language, along with outcomes reflecting the critical cultural studies content of these units. The same arrangement holds for the other European language majors. Secondly, Chinese and the other Asian language majors list COMM1901 Communication in Practice as a complementary unit. The European language majors incorporate the development of communication skills within each Major. This is discussed further below.


Subsequently, there is no consistent pattern in terms of size of major (number of units available) or the mix of cores and options. In some cases, the apparent wealth of options available is deceptive as the selection of units available in any one year may be fewer than the number of options listed within the description of the major. For example, English and Cultural Studies offer 12 options at each of Level 2 and Level 3, six of the 12 being available in any year and on an alternating pattern. Similarly, History lists 14 options at Level 2 and 12 at Level 3. Five Level 2 units have been available each year and at Level 3 there have been four, six and four units available in each of 2013, 2014 and 2015 respectively. No pattern of rotation is (yet) discernible. The mismatch between the number of units listed and the options available in any year is reflected in student comments received via the Review of Courses’ Student Survey (refer to section 7.1 for details):

There are a number of units I would like to take in my Major (anthropology) which are not available and have not been in 3 years.

There are units listed on the online handbook both in history (and in other areas of study) which have not been offered for a significant number of years. If these units are not likely to be offered in the future then I think removing them from the site would be a good idea to present a more realistic image of what you can study in an undergraduate degree at UWA.

Units that are available need to be stated more clearly. When I first enrolled there were many courses in my Major (History) that were listed as being available, however, each year more and more of these have not run and I found it very disappointing that some of the units I particularly wanted to take were never available throughout the three years I have been at the university.

I want a broader range of history units. What has happened to all of the history units?! I am disappointed in the declining numbers of History units being offered at UWA. For

example, of the 14 level 2 units listed on the UWA website, only 5 are actually being taught. Of the 12 level 3 units, only 4 are being currently offered. While I have no issues with the teaching staff and appreciate their enthusiasm for their chosen subject, I feel that such a narrow offering of units negatively impacts on the quality of my degree.

As the first two responses listed above indicate, the issue of unit unavailability is not confined to History, but a significant number of comments relating to the issue did refer specifically to that major.

Such comments from students suggest that more explicit and reliable patterns of unit rotation (if that is desired) need to be developed for some majors and clearly communicated to students well in advance. Alternatively, some further rationalisation of unit offerings may be required.


8.2.2 The Distinctiveness of Majors

Rules of majors are written to allow (or require) a selection of units of which at least four must be unique to each major. Just nine of the 28 majors in the BA are entirely unique - they include among their identified core or optional units no units taught in any other major:

All other majors allow or require the selection of units that are also available in other majors. For some majors, a student taking the major may have the option of selecting a unit or units also available in another major but also has the option to select a set of eight units available in no other major. Students taking Anthropology and Sociology or Political Science and International Relations may opt to include a specific Asian Studies unit in their major (ASIA2004, ASIA3005 respectively). Archaeology students may select up to three specific units in their major that are also offered in other majors; two are also taught in the Classics and Ancient History major, the other is taught in the History major. Some majors depend on the selection of units taught in other majors for their viability. As noted above, Chinese, Indonesian and Japanese majors use two units from Anthropology and Sociology and Asian Studies to fill out the major. The correlate is of course that the Asian Studies and Anthropology and Sociology majors include units that are not unique to that major but are also available through the language majors. Students selecting the Asian Studies major may take an option from either Anthropology and Sociology or Korean Studies, so Asian Studies is both ‘donor’ and ‘recipient’. A further set of majors are ‘recipients’. European Studies, Gender Studies, and Medieval and Early Modern Studies include five, five and four unique core units respectively and source the remaining units from other majors. European Studies lists 17 options, with eight drawn from English and Cultural Studies and nine from History. Medieval and Early Modern Studies identifies 22 possible options in addition to its four core units; one from Classics and Ancient History, six from English and Cultural Studies, eight from History and seven from History of Art. The variability in availability of units in the larger ‘donor’ majors (discussed above) thus has implications beyond these majors. However, these three majors — European Studies, Gender Studies, and Medieval and Early Modern Studies — have been rescinded from 2016 onwards and some of the unique units of these majors will be subsumed as options into what are currently their ‘donor’ majors.

Communication and Media

Studies French Studies German Studies Italian Studies Linguistics

Music Studies Specialist Music

Studies Philosophy

Psychology in Society


A further three majors show a particularly tight connection to a major taught in a different degree. Human Geography and Planning has a very tight structure permitting no options. Five units are unique to this major; three are shared with Geography, taught in the BSc (and out of the same school: Earth and Environment). If the former major is chosen as a degree-specific first major, then the additional two complementary units taken at Level 2 are the same two units making up the Level 2 core of the Geography major. A student selecting the Human Geography and Planning major as their degree-specific major in the BA will need only three more units to complete the Geography major and will have fulfilled their Category B Broadening requirements in the process. The same equation holds in the opposite direction. In practice, only 6 per cent of those selecting Human Geography and Planning as a first Major in the BA (n=67) since 2012 have identified Geography as their second Major (11 per cent of those who identified any second Major). 28 per cent of those who have selected Geography as their first Major in the BSc (n=28) have identified Human Geography and Planning as their second Major (39 per cent of those who identified a second Major)16. The connection between Workplace and Employment Relations (BA) and Human Resource Management (BCom), both taught out of the Business School, is similar. The two majors share three of their eight units and in this case a student selecting Human Resource Management in the BCom will need just three additional units to complete Workplace and Employment Relations (fulfilling their Category B Broadening requirements in the process). In practice, only 7.9 per cent of those who have selected Human Resource Management as a degree-specific major in the BCom (n=139) identify Workplace and Employment Relations as a second major (9.6 per cent of those identifying a second major). 31 per cent of those selecting Workplace and Employment Relations as a degree-specific major in the BA (n=29) identify Human Resource Management as a second major (39 per cent of those identifying a second major)17. The Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage Major (BA) offered by the School of Indigenous Studies (SIS) and the Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing Major (BSc) offered by the Centre for Aboriginal Medical and Dental Health share four units taught by SIS. The shared status of these units requires SIS to provide an additional four units to ensure the distinctiveness of the Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage Major. In meetings with the Review of Courses’ Audit Team, staff teaching this major expressed some frustration at the situation. They would like to be able to give students the option of including other Indigenous content units in the Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage major but these aspirations are effectively stifled by the dependence of the Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing major on the four shared units. The two majors have relatively few subscribers. Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing to date has only been selected by three students as their degree-specific major, with a further six identifying it as their second major. Eight students have selected Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage as their first major and 20 have identified it as their second major. It may make some sense to consider ways in which the two majors might be combined. 16 Source: Analysis based on the data extracted from Major combinations 2012-2015 data for each Bachelor degree (Arts, Commerce, Design and Science) provided by UWA’s Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

17 Ibid.


8.2.3 Developmental Progression within Majors

As noted earlier, the preferred major structure at initial design was a 2+2+4 structure with a clear progression from Level 1 to Level 3, determined by specific unit prerequisites. Not surprisingly, this progression (if not the division between levels) is most clearly instantiated within the language majors. In a number of other majors, the prerequisites for units determine pathways that, taken together, conspire to ensure that students complete Level 1 units in the major before progressing too far beyond Level 2. This is effectively the case in Linguistics, Psychology in Society and, though not as strictly, Human Geography and Planning and Workplace and Employment Relations. In other majors, the prerequisites are not as tightly drawn and progression to Level 2 depends on completion of a single Level 1 unit. Likewise, progression to Level 3 depends on a single Level 2 unit. This arrangement is a logical consequence of the approach taken in defining progression and major structures with few or no core units. The Board of Studies insisted that progression be defined through the identification of clear learning outcomes (in a unit or units), satisfying the prerequisite knowledge, and skills requirements of a subsequent unit or units. The Board resisted alternative ‘volume of learning’ proposals, for example of the form “completion of n units at the preceding level”. Majors offering no core units but rather a list of options at each level — e.g. English and Cultural Studies and History — were required to develop ‘discipline-specific generic outcomes’ to be met by all the units offered at each Level. This is to ensure that a student taking any of the options at Level 2, for instance, would have achieved outcomes that were comparable to those of another student selecting a different set of options. Thus, both students would ideally be similarly prepared for a unit at Level 3 within the major, and the teachers of Level 3 units could teach based on the understanding that the class had achieved a particular level of skills and knowledge of the discipline. If all units at any of the three levels are equivalent, then progression depends on completion of a single unit at each level and it follows, in effect, that the outcomes of the major can be delivered via just three units, one each of Levels 1, 2 and 3 and a student might achieve these outcomes after just three semesters. In practice, of course, this will almost certainly never occur. Not surprisingly, there remains some tension with respect to the definition of and requirement for progression within the BA. While some are comfortable with the new system, others are of the view that the requirements for disciplinary progression have stifled interdisciplinary exploration in the undergraduate degree. Others see the notion of progression to be inherently antithetical to the ideal of a Humanities teaching program. The survey of Major Coordinators conducted to inform this Review thus elicited a broad range of views on the value of the innovations relating to progression in the New Courses model.


Some Majors have valued the clear and structured progression required by New Courses:

We believe that the progression provided by unit pre-requisites has allowed us to make our upper-level units more focussed and to achieve greater depth. Apart from the progression in specific concepts and methods, it also develops the crucial but difficult to define ’sense of the discipline’ that can only accrete over time. (Linguistics response to survey of Major Coordinators) We think the new degree structure has been a success in educational terms. Its balance between breadth for the student and depth in the Major seems to have worked well. (English and Cultural Studies response to survey of Major Coordinators)

HGP [Human Geography and Planning] has benefitted from this framework for clarity of progression for students and in developing the core HGP and SEE [School of Earth and Environment] strengths that allows breadth beyond the compulsory units within a single degree… (Human Geography and Planning response to survey of Major Coordinators)

This view is held in some cases where New Courses has entailed a significant departure from the previous offerings. The Classics and Ancient History program voluntarily relinquished majors in Greek and Latin, taught alongside an Ancient History major, and built the teaching of the languages into their new Classics and Ancient History major:

In Classics and Ancient History, the introduction of a clear and structured progression from Level 1 to Level 3 has been a tremendous asset. It has allowed a substantial increase in sophistication of learning to take place at Level 3, as we can be confident that the entire class has been exposed to key disciplinary methodologies and content in Levels 1 and 2; students are able to build upon their shared background understandings in a very effective and collaborative fashion. The structuring of the progression has also had some very beneficial consequences for the social experience of the students. Students seem to have a much more defined sense of being part of a cohort now that they are moving units in a sequential way; this has greatly enhanced social interaction and cooperation within the student body. (Classics and Ancient History response to survey of Major Coordinators)

According to this coordinator, an increased sense of student cohort identity has contributed to the creation of a student society based around Classics and Ancient History that has provided peer assistance for student learning. Other coordinators are far less supportive of current arrangements, calling for greater flexibility. One coordinator, for example, argued that progression either is not plausible in Humanities in principle or is being evaded by students to the point that the intention of New Courses is compromised:


THERE IS NO REASON WHY IN THIS DEGREE A STUDENT WHO HAS DONE 2 UNITS CANNOT SIT ALONGSIDE A STUDENT WHO HAS DONE 7 UNITS… To say that there are 3 distinct skill levels in a humanities Majors misunderstands the whole point of a humanities degree, whose skills are not threefold but multiple!... It's a bureaucratic sham, whose consequences have been an increasing bureaucratisation of the degree structures and internal forms for everyone… (History of Art response to survey of Major Coordinators)

Some coordinators argued for greater flexibility on the basis that students may obtain sufficient preparation in other majors to allow them to enter units in their major at a higher level without meeting prerequisites.

The way in which the new structure has imposed quite restrictive prerequisites on level 2 and 3 units in the ‘name’ of progression seems to be somewhat artificial at least in the Arts Faculty. For example, in our group we can see no valid reason why a student who would take a first year Asian Studies unit could not handle the sort of unit work that would be required of them in a second year unit in history, politics or anthropology or other cognate disciplines and of course vice versa. There may be a handful of specific units within the structure of some Majors (in the arts I am thinking of primarily here) where a good case can be made for this degree of restriction however as a blanket practice it seems rather absurd. Our group believe this is a weakness in that in some instances at least it restricts the ability of students to explore areas of study that otherwise might be both appealing and useful to them. (Japanese response to survey of Major Coordinators)

This was seen as a particular obstacle for interdisciplinary majors:

The prerequisites structure is too limiting. There is no reason that a student who has passed a Level 1 unit in any Humanities discipline (other than languages) shouldn’t be able to take a Level 2 unit in another Humanities discipline (other than languages). (European Studies response to survey of Major Coordinators) Further problems related to the anti-interdisciplinarity of New Courses can be observed in relation to a level three unit called ‘Feminist Thought’. This unit is an advanced theoretical unit which canvasses feminist thought from disciplines such as literary studies, history, anthropology, political science, psychology, linguistics, and philosophy. Before New Courses, students enrolled in all of these Majors could take this unit and they performed well, because their existing disciplinary backgrounds gave them the necessary knowledge to grapple with the issues raised. But, within New Courses, only students who had taken all of the level 1 and 2 Gender Studies units could enrol, thus strangling enrolments. (Gender Studies response to survey of Major Coordinators)

Indeed, having struggled to attract students to its major, Gender Studies argued that New Courses had ‘protected and favoured’ traditional disciplines at the expense of interdisciplinary study.


A number of coordinators of the language majors identify a different problem with the progression arrangements. They report finding the limited number of entry points and the requirement that students maintain a sequence too inflexible, contending that this discouraged students entering at the appropriate level or going on international exchange:

While the developmental progression works well for most students, it is too inflexible. In languages, in particular, we have students with very different backgrounds and previous exposure to the language. The prerequisites often prevent us from placing individual students at the correct level. We have a diagnostic test which allows us to assess and determine the correct level for the student, but are often prevented from allowing broadening students to take the units that would be of the most advantage to them. Students going on exchange often find it difficult to identify suitable units to meet the exchange requirements. When they return [they] can experience considerable difficulties meeting the prerequisites to continue their studies. There has been a subsequent drop in exchange participation which is of concern for our Major. (German response to survey of Major Coordinators)

For example (and all our languages have similar issues), a new student with language level equivalent to Japanese 7 (JAPN2407/3407) cannot take this or any other Japanese units because of the prerequisites rule, which means we are losing highly talented students who in the past would pick these units up to improve their level of proficiency. This inflexibility is not good for some students who again to use the Japanese example cannot complete a Major officially due to the progression rule/s but who can meet the points requirement. If as students because of a degree of existing proficiency starts from JAPN1405 and completes JAPN1406, 2407, 2408 and the exchange program, though they earn enough credit points can under existing rules still not receive recognition of having completed a Major […] With regards to the language Majors specifically, it is our view that the unit coordinators should have some degree of control over whether or not a student can take a particular unit based on their existing knowledge of the language. (Asian Studies/Chinese/Indonesian/Korean Studies/Japanese response to survey of Major Coordinators)

If the rules are indeed preventing such progression, then they are perverse. The European Language Majors currently define the language learning outcomes of units in the major using defined levels in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. It should be possible to write the prerequisites for units in terms of these common standards (e.g. ‘German 3 or equivalent’). Students completing exchange programs can be assessed against this framework. Similar arrangements for Asian languages should also be possible.

8.3 Communication Skills The University Policy on: Undergraduate Degree Courses (UP12/20) requires that ‘communication skills must either be embedded within each degree-specific Major or developed as a complementary unit’ (s3.6.1). These skills need to include ‘written skills; oral



and presentation skills; critical thinking and information literacy skills; and relevant interpersonal skills, such as active listening, teamwork and negotiation’ (s3.6.2b). Within the BA, 19 of the 28 Majors opted to meet this requirement through a Level 1 complementary unit - COMM1901 Communication in Practice. The unit is taught by the Faculty of Arts in both semesters 1 and 2 and, as a result of its status as a mandated complementary unit as well as a Category B Broadening unit, has high student enrolment (averaging 614 students over the past four years, with 76 per cent of these enrolments in the BA18). Most BA majors taught outside the Faculty of Arts – Law and Society, Psychology in Society, Work and Employment Relations and History of Art – have taken the deliberate decision to embed communication skills within units of the major. For example:

All units in [Human Geography and Planning] meet this requirement at a level-appropriate progression of core skills that prepare graduates for work and further academic work. Core examples of this include PLNG3304 (a Level 3 core unit ‘Geographical and Planning Field Studies’) which includes guided inquiry-based learning with an explicit focus on oral and written communication skills… (Human Geography and Planning response to survey of Major coordinators)

Of those majors taught by the Faculty of Arts, only Communication and Media Studies, the three European language Majors and European Studies, and the two Music Majors explicitly embed communication skills within the major. This naturally raises some questions. If communication skills development can be embedded within the teaching of French, Italian and German, why is it not in the teaching of Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese and Korean Studies? If it is embedded within Communication and Media Studies, why is it not in Linguistics? In the Review of Courses 2015 - Student Survey conducted to inform this review, BA students were the least likely of any degree student cohort to value communication skills being taught within their Major (71% compared to a University average of 79%). This might be because they thought they already possessed such skills, because they perceived the development of such skills to be an implicit part of their degree or because they were less impressed than other students with the way that they were being taught communication skills. This last interpretation might be supported by the finding that only 51% of BA students thought the training that they were receiving was excellent (albeit a finding that was close to the University average). Where the complementary unit COMM1901 Communication in Practice was specifically mentioned, student feedback via the Review of New Courses 2015 – Student Survey was very critical of this unit. A few students reported that they had tried to manipulate their major to avoid having to take the unit or that they regretted having to drop other units in order to take this unit late in their degree:

18 Data extracted from the files provided to the audit team, specifically: Total plus BP001 unit enrolments.xlsx by UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance.


… also don't force arts students to have to do a compulsory communications unit, it's a bad unit and is less challenging than year 10 English.

COMM1901 is the biggest waste of time and money. As students at UWA we are required to have met a level of English [sic] competency anyway, so why do we have to do this unit when we come to university? It is somewhat condescending and teaches skills most kids learned in year 10 English

No compulsory communication unit for the BA-comm1901 was a waste of money

I ended up making French my first Major instead of Ancient History (my original

choice) so I wouldn't have to do Arts communication.

These comments are not inconsistent with the Students’ Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF) survey results for the unit. On the survey item ‘Overall, this unit was a good educational experience’, the unit scores an average of 2.7 (on a 4-point Likert scale) (note units svcoring equal to or below 2.8 are considered unsatisfactory) when 501 combined responses from the past five semesters are considered. Fifty-six per cent of all respondents over the past five semesters disagreed or strongly disagreed with the survey item statement. On the 2015 Semester 1 survey, the unit scored a very poor 2.4. Staff in Communication and Media Studies were also critical of this unit and recognised both the poor fit between the unit and their own expertise, and the lack of student enthusiasm:

…other Majors in the BA make use of a unit COMM1901 which recently was shifted to our discipline group to host. This is a difficult undertaking, as it requires substantial dedication to a unit outside of our Major by our staff... My very strong recommendation is that basic oral/written communication skills be embedded across units in Majors rather than be outsourced to an area that has skills in ‘media communication’ but DOES NOT have any special or specific teaching or research capabilities in written/oral communication. (Communication and Media Studies response to survey of Major Coordinators)

It is ironic that a group that has chosen to embed the development of these skills within its own Major now faces the prospect of managing this problem. The apparent solution to the problem would be to jettison the unit. However, with 19 majors depending on the unit to meet the policy requirements, this would then mean redesigning these 19 majors to ensure that the skills to be developed are explicitly taught within each major. For majors with a well-developed core, this would be quite feasible. For majors that provide a wealth of optional units and where outcomes need to be delivered in each unit at a particular level, there is the strong likelihood that students would be covering similar material in a number of units. Alternatively, these majors would need to reconsider the decision not to structure the major around core units.


8.4 Research Skills The University Policy on: Undergraduate Degree Courses (UP12/20) requires research skills to be embedded within each Major and that requires the Major to cover: the evolution of the discipline; methods; practice; and discourse. In the Review of Courses 2015 – Student Survey conducted for this review, 88% of BA students valued being taught research skills within their major, though only 65% considered the training to be of excellent quality (both findings close to the university average). Major coordinators were asked to comment on how effectively their major meets this requirement, and most feedback was positive:

Staff have noted in general terms a marked improvement in students’ grasp of (and ability to apply) research methodologies since the introduction of the New Courses in 2012. (Classics and Ancient History response to survey of Major Coordinators)

Political Science and International Relations notes that research skills are addressed in its second and third year units:

Two of the learning outcomes in 2nd year units are ‘undertake enquiry-based learning and research on topics related to the field’, and ‘demonstrate research skills appropriate for locating and assessing relevant primary and secondary materials’. Similarly, two of the learning outcomes in 3rd year units are ‘demonstrate research skills appropriate for locating, assessing and making sophisticated use of relevant primary and secondary materials’; and ‘undertake independent, enquiry-based learning and research which reflects advanced knowledge of the subfield’, or their variants (e.g., ‘conduct individual research using Political Science and International Relations research methods on a topic pertaining to this unit’ for POLS3334 The International Politics of Africa). (Political Science and International Relations response to survey of Major Coordinators)

Given that all third year units are options from which a number must be selected, these learning outcomes must be replicated across all units in order to be certain that graduates of the major have an opportunity to attain these skills. A number of the larger majors face the same challenge:

We believe we have met the research requirements very well, as we set essay questions which invite critical reflection on current issues in the field, and ask students to research their responses. We provide guidance to students through reading lists. (English and Cultural Studies response to survey of Major Coordinators)


Others have suggested that available resources limit their ability to deliver on the requirement to embed research skill acquisition as effectively as they might wish to:

Across all our units in the Majors there is a strong emphasis through a variety of assessments and activities to have students develop strength in inquiry based learning (EBL) and research practices. Without question the biggest impediment to this (for all Majors at least in the arts) is not the way in which this requirement is built into our units and Major but the increasingly heavy workloads that people have to deal with which are resulting in larger and larger class sizes leading to difficulties in supervising and directing students. The ideal of EBL as we understand it is to develop skilled independent researchers/learners but this does not happen by simply setting some tasks it requires a considerable degree of hands on guidance and oversight. (Asian Studies/Chinese/Indonesian/Korean Studies/Japanese response to survey of Major Coordinators) We believe the major meets this effectively. However the structural constraints on Majors, and resourcing factors, prevent us from providing the keystone unit we previously offered that had a central focus on research skills, our Linguistics Field Research unit. This was a 12pt unit that is not readily re-sized to a 6pt unit. It also had a relatively high cost. (Linguistics response to survey of Major Coordinators)

In the student survey conducted to inform this review, few comments on this aspect of New Courses were received from students in the BA relative to the number commenting on communication skills or the number of comments received from students in the Bachelor of Science. A few explicitly mentioned research development among the things they liked about the courses:

Opportunities for sustained research. / Informative dialogues with experts in the field. / Opportunities to pursue personal areas of interest.

I appreciate the quality of the units and lecturers. I appreciate their availability to help. I like developing my skills in research and writing.

The courses are generally of a high standard and I have developed far better research, analytical and communication skills in the process of this degree.

A small number of negative comments were also received:

Despite UWA's emphasis on research, there are very few opportunities within the

arts degree to develop or be introduced to research skills needed for further study. It would be good if there were units at an undergraduate level with a specific emphasis on research.

Less emphasis on making students into researchers (not everyone who graduates from psychology wants a career in research).


[In Anthropology]…There is little real engagement with methodological process, real fieldwork and original research. To have a degree mostly focused on library based work does not prepare you [sic] for the workforce at all which is a real flaw in the course structure. The honours year is, however, excellently organised and the content is helpful to develop research skill and real life work experience. But this engagement is missing in the rest of the Anthropology course.

It is perhaps too soon to make an assessment of the effectiveness of this aspect of the new courses structure. However, the opportunity will arise in the 2016 Review of the Honours courses. In the context of that review it will be possible to ask students to comment on how well they believed the research skills development provided in their undergraduate Majors prepared them for their Honours research, and to ask Honours coordinators whether they have noticed any improvement in the research skills of New Courses graduates compared with those in previous Honours cohorts.

8.5 Complementary Units

The University Policy on: Undergraduate Degree Courses (UP12/20) allows that a ‘degree-specific Major may be supplemented by no more than four complementary units, which must be necessary adjuncts to the Major and be taken from within the same area of knowledge as the degree-specific Major’ (s3.4.1). Complementary units cannot be required as part of a second Major. Complementary units have been used quite sparingly within the BA. The notable exception is the common listing of COMM1901 Communication in Practice as a complementary unit across the majority of BA majors as discussed in detail in section 8.3 above. There are just two majors specifying complementary units other than COMM1901. The Music Studies major includes four complementary units at Level 1. When taken together with the Specialist Music Studies major (which can only be taken as an accompanying second major), the combination makes up 20 of the 24 units of the degree — the remaining four must then be completed as broadening units (see below) which leaves Music students with no opportunity to pick other units within the BA. Human Geography and Planning requires students to take two complementary units at Level 2 (EART2201 Geographic Information Systems and PLNG2203 Environmental Policy and Planning), both of which are core units in the Geography major (as discussed above). Technically, this arrangement is in conflict with the policy requirement that complementary units ‘must … be taken from within the same area of knowledge as the degree-specific major.’ Here, the degree-specific major is in the BA and the complementary units are core units of a major in the BSc.


A different reading of ‘complementary’ persists in some of the feedback received for the review:

c. The ‘complementary unit’ concept appears to be incoherent as implemented across the different Majors. It was intended as a way of recognising the inter-connections between disciplines while placing a narrow focus on discipline Majors. However, firstly, it allows only obligatory connections, and secondly, it does this in a way that presents the complementary unit as external to the Major. I can report a number of comments from students where complementary units are preceived [sic] as peripheral. d. Following on from the preceding, there is no structural place for a Major to recommend or suggest other disciplines which have specific relationships to the Major. For example, a Linguistics Major may want to recommend that studying a Major in Linguistics may benefit from doing language units, or psychology units, etc – where those related areas could not be an obligatory complementary unit. (Linguistics response to survey of Major Coordinators)

The ‘complementary’ concept was not in fact intended in the sense described above but rather to allow for the inclusion of skills and knowledge development understood to be essential to those undertaking the major as a first, degree-specific major.

8.6 Units – Categories and Individual Performance Determining the individual performance of units across the BA has proven difficult to assess from the available data. While the University is able to provide load data by unit, units are not coded by major and degree but by Faculty. Since majors most often do not consist of a set of units sharing a unit letter code exclusive to that major, the evaluation of majors as a whole depends on manual operations. Similarly, results of student surveys — Student’s Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF) — are aggregated by School and Faculty and not by major or by degree. Thus, without checking units individually, it is not possible to get an overall picture of the perceived quality of teaching in Majors or the courses through this mechanism. We have relied here on the qualitative students’ comments data collected as part of the Review of Course 2015 – Student Survey and SURF outlier reports. The latter reports list units that have consistently returned excellent or unsatisfactory results respectively on one or more of the six test items across the six semesters; Semester 2, 2012 to Semester 1, 2015. Units with fewer than six responses and units that have not been taught at least once in the most recent three semesters are excluded form analysis. Units with well above average scores (> 3.4 on a four item Likert scale) are regarded as ‘excellent’; units with well below average scores (< 2.8) are regarded as ‘unsatisfactory’. For the purposes of this comparison, we have considered only those units with a consistent score for the item, ‘Overall, this unit was a good educational experience.’ In 2014, a total of 886 units at Levels 1, 2 and 3 were offered across all four three year undergraduate Bachelor degrees. Fifty-two per cent of these (equating to 460 units) were listed in the BA. Of the total 886 units offered, 160 were identified as consistently ‘excellent’,


and of these, 96 (60%) are units of the BA (only two of which are electives, thus we can infer that 94 of the 96 units in the BA rated excellent are units within majors). Language units are well represented, making up 21% of all units in the ‘excellent’ list. Smaller upper level units are more likely to perform well in student evaluations, but in the set of BA units the spread of ‘excellent’ units across year levels is not especially skewed. Of the 96 units, 28 are at Level 1, 29 are at Level 2 and 39 are at Level 3. Overall, approximately 20% of units offered in the BA were rated as ‘excellent”. The list of units identified as consistently ‘unsatisfactory’ includes 47 units at Levels 1, 2 and 3 across all four Bachelor degrees. Of these, only eight (17%) are BA units, of which six are units taught within the majors, one is an elective and one is the complementary unit COMM1901 discussed in section 8.3 above. The eight units account for less than 2 per cent of the units taught in the BA. The generally high quality of teaching across the BA suggested by this comparison is reinforced by qualitative student comments made in the Student Survey conducted as part of the review. BA student responses to the question, ‘What do you like about UWA's courses?’ included:

Excellent teaching, for the most part, with much commitment to students’ educational requirements. / Good facilities; feeling of community in certain faculties/disciplines.

I love the quality of the teaching - all my lecturers and tutors have been excellent! / I also love that my courses were smaller than others, so I was able to learn from and interact with other students in my classes much more easily. / I appreciate the range of knowledge to be gained from the variety of core units available in my first and second Majors.

they have some interesting courses with passionate teachers / the skills i learn

generally are very helpful and i can see them translating well to the real-life world

I love the ways that we are encourage to think and formulate arguments, and I really value the way theories and case studies are always used to help us express ourselves and our ideas. I have been made to think about things I never have before, and it has made me so much more aware of the processes going on in society and everyday life.

However, in the same survey and in response to the question, ‘What can be improved about UWA’s courses?’ several students drew the attention of the review to a small number of contact hours, a shorter taught semester and the limited opportunities that existed in some BA majors for students to work with academics in small groups. This was particularly confronting for students who reportedly sought interaction, found that it was difficult to achieve within large tutorials and alleged that they were then penalised when their participation was assessed:


Allow smaller class sizes for more efficient learning. As class numbers increase, learning efficiency and understanding significantly decreases…

…I am very frustrated by the large size of tutorials, and the 'participation' requirement. With everyone having a go, my preparation is less important, making my learning less important.

Smaller tutorials and lectures, this will allow more interaction with the lecturer/tutor

and will enable people to participate in tutorials and get their participation marks which is near impossible in large tutorials…

Improve the teaching quality! Smaller tutorial sizes! Actually care about investing in

teaching students properly!! Make the teaching weeks for 13 weeks not 10 or even 9 in some cases! That means there are 3 weeks of semester of us not learning! Surely there is more stuff they can teach!

While I have enjoyed studying History and Medieval and Early Modern Studies at university I feel like the courses are very expensive considering a majority of our work is done alone, which is why I state that I have not learnt a lot from my course. We do our own research, write our assignments independently, go to workshops that have a huge number of students in them which prevent us from receiving a decent amount of the tutor's attention, and a majority of the time watch lectures (whose content are not assessed) online. While I understand that a major aspect of the History discipline is being able to research independently I feel that we are also left to learn independently which is in my opinion a waste of money if we are teaching ourselves the content. While I would still recommend UWA's History Major I do believe there is a lot of room for improvement.

While there are issues here that certainly need to be considered and addressed, they are not fundamentally dependent on the new courses structures. It has proven difficult to get meaningful data that would allow an assessment of how units within the BA identified as Category A and Category B perform as broadening units. In almost all cases, units categorised as Category A are also units of a defined major. Students in the BA are able to take language units to fulfil the Category A broadening requirements of their degree and hence need not venture beyond the BA. Nevertheless, it is clear that language units in particular have been especially successful in attracting students enrolled in other degrees. Of those units in the BA that attract 80% or more of their enrolments from outside the BA, half are language units. The success of Languages at UWA has been recognised by John Hajek, President of the Languages and Cultures Network for Australian Universities in Mapping the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences in Australia:

The universities of Western Australia (UWA) and of Melbourne are well known, for instance, for restructuring degrees to guarantee students in any undergraduate course (e.g. engineering) access to study outside their faculty at all year levels. Enrolments in languages have risen dramatically as a result, particularly at UWA, which has gone furthest in opening out language study to all students. (2014, p.22)

http://www.humanities.org.au/PolicyResearch/Research/MappingtheHumanitiesArtsSocialSciences.aspx


As noted above, the language units are also well represented in the lists of units receiving ‘excellent’ SURF results. Unit Code Unit Name avg. enrolment % non BA ANTH2901 Religion & Globalisation 67 93% ANTH2902 Aust. Aboriginal Art & Society 27 89% COMM1901 Communication in Practice 614 24% COMM3901 Television & Video Production 20 11% LING1901 Language Learning & Multilingual World 81 76% MUSC1981 Music Ensemble 1 268 85% MUSC1982 Music Ensemble 2 33 80% MUSC2981 Music Ensemble 3 26 77% MUSC2982 Music Ensemble 4 7 73%

8.7 Indigenous Education In keeping with the University’s commitment to Indigenous Education, a number of units have been formally identified as having Indigenous content, and students have been specifically encouraged towards these. The table below lists the current set of units identified as having Indigenous content, the 2015 enrolment, average enrolment in these units since 2012 and the percentage of these averages enrolled in the BA.

Unit Code Unit Name 2015 enrol avg. enrol %BA enrol HIST1002 Age of Violence: Making of Modern World 210 266 53% HIST2015 Aust.Public Hist.:the Uses of the Past 34 34 53% HIST3014 Intimate Strangers:Jrn.Indig.&N-Indig.Au 39 39 72% INDG1150 Abor Encs: Strangers in our Backyard 570 231 33% INDG1160 Boodjar Moort Katitjin 433 433 25% INDG2300 Indig Knowledge: Mind, Body, Spirit 67 34 40% INDG2500 Looking North: The Wild West 57 33 45%

INDG2700 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin 160 160 15%

INDG3300 Indigenous Research 14 9 52% INDG3400 Indigenous People and Global Issues 10 11 77% INDG3800 Indigenous Ways of Knowing 10 14 36% VISA2051 Curatorial Practices 14 14 79%

Source: List of Units flagged as containing indigenous content for 2015; recorded in CAIDi based on Faculty advice


There are (at least) eight other units taught within the BA alone that might also be expected to contain Indigenous content but which the responsible teaching organisation has are not currently formally registered as such in the University’s Curriculum Management System:

LAWS2225 Indigenous Peoples and the Law ANTH2601 Indigenous Australia ANTH3601 Global Indigeneities ARCY2004 The Archaeology of Rock Art ARCY2005 Rock Art Field Unit ARCY3005 Archaeology of Indigenous Australia LING3007 Linguistics of Australian Indigenous Languages VISA2266 Aboriginal Contemporary Art

8.8 Study Abroad

For the three years’ (2013-15) for which data is available, a greater proportion of BA students studied abroad compared to the other three undergraduate degrees. The 2014 figure of 1.8% of student load fell below the old Operational Priorities Plan 2014 target of 1.9%. On the assumption that students tend to study abroad in the second year of their degree, we may need to wait several years before the figures accurately reflect student trends as the proportion of students in their second year in either 2013 or 2014 is likely to depart from the long-term mean, and the progress of the 2015 “half-cohort” again will make projections more difficult. Figure 27: UWA Domestic Undergraduate Students Studying Abroad, 2010-2015

Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance Where BA students commented on study abroad options or experiences in the student survey, their responses were universally positive:

[T]he option to study abroad is great- that opportunity really enhances learning and cultural consciousness. / There is no way I could have pursued parallel passions for Law, Economics, French and Ancient History in most other unis, so for this I am extremely grateful.


Study Abroad is also a great initiative that definitely developed my interest in History of Art, on the Rome Tour.

I enjoyed the heavy emphasis on research. The opportunity to study abroad and have two majors.

8.9 Quality Assurance Mechanisms and Curriculum Management

Each Faculty involved in the teaching of the majors in the BA has an Associate Dean responsible for Education/Teaching and Learning and a corresponding Teaching and Learning Committee. Until the end of 2014, there was also a Board of Studies for the BA that drew its members from across the Faculties (and the School of Indigenous Studies) teaching into the degree. Since the beginning of 2015, there has been no single body whose prime responsibility lies with this degree. Matters proceed from School and Faculty Teaching and Learning committees through Faculty Boards (or via delegated authorities) to the Office of the University’s Dean of Coursework Studies and the University-level Curriculum Committee. While this may have removed a step in the governance process, it has also removed the one dedicated body that might have moved from the development phase of the BA to play a role in coordinating initiatives and regular evidence-based review across the whole of the degree.

Two responses by Major coordinators were critical of what they saw as interference in their majors, albeit of rather different kinds:

The weaknesses are that when it was originally administered it proved very stringent: minor changes were subject to review, leaving qualified academics wishing to experiment and adapt with limited options. More recently this has been alleviated. (English and Cultural Studies response to survey of Major Coordinators)

I would like to see more widespread academic involvement and less from professional/clerical staff. There are too many junior clerical staff and admin assistants bearing an influence on major structures and curriculum more broadly—without doctorates or a special understanding of the field (e.g., substantial professional experience in a specific vocational area) they are not qualified to do so. (Communication and Media Studies response to survey of Major Coordinators)

The BA takes part in the Go8 Quality Verification System (QVS). According to data released in October 2015, in 2014 Level 3 units from History (1 + 1 pending), Philosophy (2), English (2), Chinese (2) were reviewed. In 2015, two units from Anthropology and Sociology and from Political Science and International Relations were scheduled for review.

Two of the Majors taught within the BA are subject to Professional Accreditation requirements and are reviewed within that context: Psychology in Society and Human Geography and Planning.


8.10 Other Generic Issues

8.10.1 Flexibility and Broadening

Many BA students were very positive about the flexibility and breadth of New Courses, including the requirement that they take broadening units. In the Review of Courses 2015 - Student Survey, 73% of BA students valued doing broadening units and believed that such units enhanced their educational experience – far higher than the university average of 66%. 40% of comments received in response to the survey question, ‘What do you like about UWA’s courses’ mentioned flexibility, equivalent to the average across all degrees; 17% mentioned broadening/electives, slightly less than the average of 22%:

I very much like the fact that UWA strives to offer a broad education that isn't solely focused on one area of study. I think the requirement to undertake broadening units is of great value to students' learning, as it gives them a more expansive area of knowledge, which is very important once you enter the workforce, though many students may not realise it at the time.

I like the flexibility of UWA courses. Other universities and universities in other countries seldom allow students to freely choose units they are interested in and study them as broadening units.

However, the implementation of rules relating to broadening units has led to a set of consequences that students find hard to understand and that the University might find difficult to justify. For example, it is arguable whether the idea of broadening envisaged Bachelor of Design students meeting their broadening requirements through History of Art, Bachelor of Commerce students doing so through Work and Employment Relations, and for Bachelor of Science students (not doing a double Major in Psychology) to do so through Psychology in Society or Human Geography and Planning, the latter especially so when combined with a Geography major in the BSc. Similarly, BA students can use Business Law units (a major taught within the Bachelor of Commerce) as broadening units alongside a Law and Society major (and the reverse is also true). However, if these are seen as reasonable ways of fulfilling the broadening requirements, then the following complaints from students surely warrant close attention. Various BA students reported to the 2015 Review of Courses – Student Survey that they didn’t want to do broadening units at all:

I think broadening units are unnecessary and I would far rather be given the opportunity to decide myself what would enhance my degree, as an adult. I think the opportunity to study more units within my Major would be more valuable to me than studying a unit in physics or pharmacy, which is irrelevant to my degree in law [sic] and history.

In some cases, some reported subsequently changing their minds, having found such units to be both interesting and valuable. Others accepted the idea of taking units outside their major or majors but could not see why they could not take such units within the BA, a sentiment shared by 83% of BA students. Sometimes, this reflected their range of interests,


and it is difficult to argue that a Philosophy student cannot take Music Studies as a broadening unit given the various situations that we have discussed above.

…many students would much prefer to take more electives from outside their major but within their Faculty to enhance their understanding.

I believe students should be given a wider range of elective opportunities – some of which can be within the same bachelor – but need not be outside as the broadening units are.

I would rather not be forced to do broadening units when there is so much more I want to learn from electives within my Majors and outside of them but still within my degree.

For students taking both Music majors, the issue is felt particularly strongly. In restricting the New Courses curriculum to just four three year degrees, the once separate Bachelor of Music was rescinded and replaced by the current double major structure. However, the combination of Music Studies with its required complementary units and Specialist Music Studies leaves room for just four additional units to complete the degree. Students selecting the Music majors thus have no further options within the BA but language units.

As a double Music major I can't take education and philosophy courses despite those courses being very useful to my major. This is because the university got rid of BMus, making the equivalent double major part of BA. And the way the double music major is structured it's already been condensed into too short of a time frame, putting a ridiculous amount of physical and psychological stress as well as time pressure on the students that take it, as well as leaving no room for electives. Allow musicians studying a double major in music to study other units within Arts eg. Psychology. Many music students have an interest in taking music into through to studying the psychological side/neuroscience side and the limit of not being able to take Psych is so frustrating for those who need to take to go on to a Masters in Music Therapy or Music Psychology. The double major in music is important for the musical train[ing] you need for these courses but you are only left with 4 broadening units which do not allow for taking Psychology. It is extremely annoying for international students who have paid a lot of money to study here to find the course that was advertised as flexible to be in practice completely inflexible to their needs. This is my only major flaw with the university.

Some of the wider objections to broadening units were similarly practical in nature. While 71% of BA students valued doing a Category A Broadening Unit and only 45% would have preferred not to have done one, only 51% had been able to find sufficient Category A units that interested them. Some reported looking in vain for appropriate Category A Broadening Units outside the BA or had been deeply disappointed by those units that they had taken which they felt trivialised issues that had been central to their own majors. This might be particularly pertinent for students who had postponed taking broadening units until late in


their degree and were now confronted by a choice of units that they saw as too easy or to be pointless at their stage of education.

The category A units also seemed inconsistent in terms of the aims/purpose of 'broadening': I developed a far greater understanding of cultural difference studying units offered by my Major than by taking broadening units. For example, ENGL3401: National and Transnational Cinemas facilitates a sustained inquiry into notions of postcoloniality, nationhood, diasporic identity, and global citizenship, but did not qualify as a broadening unit for my degree. In contrast, LACH1020: The Culture of Nature discusses primarily eurocentric understandings of nature in a very (very!) abridged history of how humans have interacted with the world we inhabit. The former fulfilled the aims of a broadening unit, but didn't qualify, the latter did not, but did. In short: come up with a list of units that fulfil, the aim of broadening. Let students select any units from that list, even if they fall within a student's Major. This broadening unit [outside Arts] was terrible – for a second year unit it was more appropriate for 14 year olds.

One student who had entered UWA via a mature-age entry program (MAP) rather than the WACE, complained of not meeting many of the prerequisites for Science broadening units which greatly diminished the number of broadening units available to them as a BA student. Even where Arts students met the prerequisites, some struggled with the numeracy skills required by, for example, an introductory Economics subject. Another student noted that charges for broadening units outside the BA were generally higher than for BA units, which was likely to increase resentment when students were already taking broadening units under sufferance. 41% of BA students who responded to the survey complained that the requirement that they take broadening units had reduced their GPA and WAMs. Finally, one student lamented the impact of studying an Arts major whose first year units had proven attractive as broadening units to non-Arts students. This respondent suggested that those with a genuine interest in the unit were swamped by those who did not and that this inhibited the development of a sense of student cohort:

Broadening units negatively affect the experience of people who have chosen those courses as Majors in the first year. It is off putting having 500 other people enrol in your core courses and lack interest in the content. The course structure inhibits you from meeting like-minded people within your course.


9 Bachelor of Commerce – Structure and Performance


Academic Council at its meeting of 7 April 2011 approved the following statement of knowledge paradigm for the Bachelor of Commerce (BCom): “The main focus of a BCom course is on factors that drive economic behaviour at individual and organisational levels.” The following majors were approved by Academic Council, and were offered from 2012. These majors are in knowledge areas that are normally offered in business/commerce degrees:

Accounting; Business Law; Economics (single and double major); Finance; Human Resource Management; Management; and Marketing.

A double major in Economics was also approved by Academic Council to replace the program of study offered within the Bachelor of Economics degree that was offered prior to the introduction of New Courses. A number of majors in the BCom are currently accredited by two international accrediting bodies: the American Association for Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) and the European Quality Improvement System (EQUIS). The design and content of the majors must therefore also meet the required accreditation standards posed by these bodies. In addition, the School has designed the accounting major so that it meets the accreditation requirements imposed by Australian professional accounting bodies – Australian Certified Practicing Accountants (CPA), The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and the Institute of Public Accountants. Since the introduction of New Courses, the intake into the BCom (as a percentage of the overall University intake into the four courses) has steadily increased from about 17% in 2012 to about 27% in 2015.


9.1.1 Areas of Success Streamlining of Majors

A major advantage of the introduction of the New Courses structure is the streamlining and consolidation of majors. Prior to the introduction of New Courses 2012, the Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Economics programs offered a long list of majors and minors. Several of these majors contained an overlap of a significant number of units. For example, within accounting, students could complete a financial accounting major and a management accounting major, with a number of common units in the majors. Similarly, three overlapping majors were offered in finance - corporate finance, investment finance and quantitative finance. Under New Courses, the number of majors was reduced, in alignment with its goal to streamline course offerings and ensuring that at least 50% of any one major are unique. Complementary Units

The BCom requires all students to complete five units that reflect subject areas offered by the major business disciplines. Their inclusion as core units within the BCom is in part to meet accreditation requirements of international bodies such as the AACSB and EQUIS which require graduates from business programs to have acquired knowledge in a broad range of business disciplines.

Broadening Units

The requirement that students complete four ‘broadening’ units (i.e. subjects from outside the commerce degree) adds a valuable dimension to students’ studies and provides knowledge beyond the fields in which students’ choose to specialize. 75% of BCom respondents to the student survey conducted for the Review of Courses indicated that they value doing broadening units and 76% believe that broadening units enhance their educational experience. They further provide a valuable opportunity for students from various disciplines to mix and interact with each other. Communication and Research Skills

All students are required to develop and demonstrate communication and research skills relevant to their discipline and the student survey indicates that these skills are valued by BCom students (82% of respondents value communication skills and 84% value research skills being taught in their majors). Quality of Student Cohort

The quality of the student cohort has remained strong. At the undergraduate level (which accounts for 85% of the School’s EFTSL load), students are drawn from the top tier of school leavers within the State. Quality of the Course

Overwhelmingly, the BCom is positively perceived by students. 90% of BCom students who responded to the student survey conducted to inform this Review felt that their educational goals would be met by their chosen degree, and 85% felt that the BCom degree would enable them to develop both the depth and breadth of disciplinary knowledge. 87% of respondents would recommend the BCom degree to another student.


9.1.2 Recommendations for Further Change/ Improvements The Role of Broadening Units and Flexibility of Studies

Qualitative feedback regarding broadening units from students, major coordinators and Heads of Discipline obtained in the context of preparing the degree’s self-assessment report has been mixed. While many see the intended educational benefits from taking broadening units, some would prefer to complete two majors in commerce and to concentrate their studies in related disciplines. The requirement that broadening units must be outside the BCom prevents students from enrolling in units offered in other disciplines within their degree but outside their Commerce major(s). Additionally, while students have many opportunities to obtain international experience in their degrees through Study Abroad, short term programs and their enrolment in Category A Broadening Units, the structure of the degree is somewhat restrictive for students who do not have a clear view of how their studies will proceed over three years. Therefore, the choices that students make early in their degree can limit their opportunities to complete exchange or alternative major combinations within the standard degree duration. Student and discipline feedback suggests that the nature of broadening units and their requirements should be reconsidered to enhance the flexibility of student choice. One option for consideration is to require a minimum of two broadening units outside the degree in which the degree-specific major is taught, and allowing the other two to be taken from other majors within the degree in which the degree-specific major is taught. This will allow those who value completing more than two units outside their degree to still do so. The other option is to reduce the number of broadening units from the current four.

Delivering Communication and Research Skills

Communication and research skills are valued by the majority (75%) of students in the BCom but fewer students indicated that the training in these skills was of an excellent quality (53% for communication skills and 62% for research skills). While students value these skills, the embedding in units has yet to capitalise on the perceived value, and disciplines should revisit how both research and communication skills are embedded within each major. Given that BCom students are required to complete prescribed complementary units, a separate communication skills unit is not required as these are embedded within the complementary units. However, the large class sizes in these units raise questions regarding sufficient administrative support and how effective embedding of communication skills can best be achieved.

Managing an Increasing International Student Cohort

The BCom’s share of the University’s undergraduate international student EFTSL is growing rapidly and significantly (42% in 2015 up from 28% in 2012). The UWA student experience must therefore be effectively managed in order to cater for the changing student cohort mix.


Clarifying the Role of Service Learning

In response to the question in the student survey about Service Learning, more than 80% of BCom students value the ability to complete this (83%), and would recommend it to others (82%). However, it is unclear that students understand the nature of service learning and the opportunities that it provides. Only 7% of respondents to the student survey clearly identified as partaking in service learning in their course. The University needs to provide clarity around the nature and role of service learning with all degrees.

Double Major in Economics

The ‘double major in Economics’ was introduced under new courses to replace the Bachelor of Economics degree which was very successful in providing the training ground for professional economists. It currently attracts some of the best students in the BCom, but the numbers completing the double major could be higher. More work could be done to market this option to those who intend to pursue a career as an economist.

9.2 Course Intake and Student Quality

9.2.1 Admission Statistics

Figure 28 shows the number of commencing enrolments in the BCom (BP002) and its degree-specific majors, as well as the equivalent student load (EFTSL) for the period 2012-2015. Note that students don’t have to nominate their degree- specific major until their second year. Additionally, the data below show their nominated degree specific majors only – as shown later, some BCom students choose to also complete their second major from the list of BCom majors.

The overall intake in 2015 for the whole University of 4,151 students is lower than the number for the preceding two years (5,173 in 2014 and 5,19I in 2013) and reflects the ‘half year cohort’19 issue experienced by WA schools. It is interesting to note that the percentage intake into the BCom (as a percentage of the overall University intake into the four courses (Arts, Commerce, Design and Science) has steadily increased from about 17% in 2012 to about 27% in 2015, a 10 percentage point increase, which is indeed significant. As shown in Figure 28, Accounting is the most popular degree-specific major nominated by students, followed by Finance.

Figure 29 shows the total enrolments and EFTSL for the BCom over the 2012-2015 period, and the BCom’s share as a percentage of the University’s enrolments for the four undergraduate degree courses. Again, the increasing share of the BCom is apparent from these figures. Its EFTSL share has increased from about 17% in 2012 to about 24% in 2015.

19

In 2001, the Western Australian Government increased the pre-school and school entry age by six months to align with other Australian states and territories. This change reduced the kindergarten cohort in 2001 by approximately 60 per cent. By the end of 2014, this “half cohort” resulted in a Year 12 school-leaver cohort of approximately 13,000 students, compared to 21,000 students in the previous year. This will particularly impact commencing student numbers at WA universities in 2015 and 2016, with school-leavers constituting a significant proportion of commencing domestic undergraduate enrolments.


The split of total enrolments and EFTSL between Commonwealth Supported Students and International Students is shown in Figure 30. The BCom has approximately 42% of international undergraduate students in 2015 which is a significant growth in the proportion of the University’s total international undergraduate EFTSL since the introduction of New Courses (28% in 2012).


Figure 28: Commencing Enrolments and Load for BP002 Students by First Major, 2012-2015

First Major

2012 2013 2014 2015

Enrols

EFTSL

Enrols

EFTSL

Enrols

EFTSL

Enrols

EFTSL 1st

Half 2nd Half Total

1st Half

2nd Half Total

1st Half

2nd Half Total

1st Half

2nd Half Total

Accounting 41 13.8 20.1 33.9 160 40.0 75.6 115.6 270 96.6 122.9 219.5 232 73.4 107.8 181.1

Business Law 22 7.9 9.8 17.6 38 13.8 18.3 32.0 97 35.6 45.4 81.0 81 32.5 32.6 65.1

Economics (double major) 7 3.0 2.4 5.4 6 1.5 2.1 3.6 26 9.8 10.5 20.3 24 8.4 9.6 18.0

Economics (single major) 17 5.8 7.4 13.1 50 15.3 22.0 37.3 80 34.0 35.4 69.4 97 32.0 39.1 71.1

Finance 26 10.0 11.1 21.1 82 23.4 38.5 61.9 160 51.3 73.1 124.4 187 58.0 83.4 141.4

Human Resource Management 7 2.6 3.3 5.9 22 6.0 10.4 16.4 35 9.4 12.9 22.3 35 10.0 14.5 24.5

Management 17 5.9 6.4 12.3 37 10.8 16.1 26.9 78 26.1 33.1 59.3 74 23.6 29.5 53.1

Marketing 12 5.4 4.6 10.0 50 13.1 22.0 35.1 110 35.8 43.4 79.1 119 37.5 50.0 87.5

No First Major 759 300.8 327.5 628.3 604 260.3 263.4 523.6 349 124.1 151.0 275.1 267 89.8 113.6 203.4

TOTAL BP002 908 355 393 748 1,049 384 468 852 1,205 423 528 950 1,116 365 480 845

TOTAL for University 5,388 2,123 2,230 4,353 5,191 2,026 2,207 4,233 5,173 1,953 2,148 4,102 4,151 1,462 1,715 3,177

% BP002 16.85 16.72 17.60 17.17 20.21 18.95 21.23 20.14 23.29 21.64 24.56 23.17 26.89 24.97 27.99 26.60 Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance – customized using Executive Information System (EIS) data sets


Figure 29: Bachelor of Commerce - Enrolments and Load 2012-2015

First Major

2012 2013 2014 2015

Enrols

EFTSL

Enrols

EFTSL

Enrols

EFTSL

Enrols

EFTSL 1st

Half 2nd Half Total

1st Half

2nd Half Total

1st Half

2nd Half Total

1st Half

2nd Half Total

Accounting 46 15.9 22.5 38.4 423 162.4 190.8 353.1 805 343.6 354.0 697.6 939 389.3 372.6 761.8 Business Law 23 7.9 9.8 17.6 96 41.6 42.5 84.1 248 104.6 106.8 211.4 264 111.6 104.0 215.6 Economics (double major) 7 3.0 2.4 5.4 25 9.3 10.3 19.5 57 22.3 23.8 46.0 72 30.6 27.0 57.6 Economics (single major) 18 6.4 7.9 14.3 149 56.5 62.4 118.9 277 124.4 116.8 241.1 368 148.8 144.8 293.6 Finance 31 11.8 13.8 25.5 257 101.8 112.9 214.6 511 203.4 221.6 425.0 647 263.9 247.4 511.3 Human Resource Management 7 2.6 3.3 5.9 70 25.4 29.9 55.3 128 49.1 50.4 99.5 141 51.5 51.1 102.6 Management 21 7.5 8.1 15.6 106 41.3 45.4 86.6 211 83.5 86.1 169.6 254 99.1 86.4 185.5 Marketing 13 5.9 5.1 11.0 123 47.5 53.9 101.4 281 112.6 114.3 226.9 382 150.0 144.1 294.1 No First Major 775 306.1 334.0 640.1 630 268.4 271.8 540.1 385 132.3 161.6 293.9 306 103.8 127.3 231.0 TOTAL for BP002 941 367 407 774 1,879 754 820 1,574 2,903 1,176 1,235 2,411 3,373 1,349 1,305 2,653 TOTAL for the University 5,528 2,176 2,289 4,465 9,870 4,103 4,112 8,215 13,671 5,660 5,579 11,240 14,208 5,691 5,388 11,079 % BP002 17.02 16.87 17.77 17.33 19.04 18.38 19.93 19.16 21.23 20.77 22.14 21.45 23.74 23.69 24.21 23.95

Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance – customized using Executive Information System (EIS) data sets


Figure 30: Bachelor of Commerce - Domestic/International Enrolments and Load by First Major, 2012-2015

First Major

Domestic - C'wealth Supported International - On-shore

2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015 Enrol

s EFTS

L Enrols EFTS

L Enrols EFTS

L Enrols EFTSL Enrol

s EFTS

L Enrol

s EFTS

L Enrol

s EFTS

L Enrol

s EFTSL

Accounting 29 25.0 240 203.4 488 421.4 577 465.1 17 13.4 183 149.8 317 276.3 362 296.8 Business Law 23 17.6 92 82.1 235 201.0 249 202.6

4 2.0 13 10.4 15 13.0

Economics (double major) 7 5.4 22 16.5 43 33.6 57 45.5

3 3.0 14 12.4 15 12.1 Economics (single major) 16 12.4 121 97.4 239 208.8 308 244.6 2 1.9 28 21.5 38 32.4 60 49.0 Finance 25 20.6 177 147.9 367 303.5 461 369.1 6 4.9 80 66.8 144 121.5 186 142.1 Human Resource Management 7 5.9 61 48.5 114 88.4 121 87.3

9 6.8 14 11.1 20 15.3

Management 15 12.6 83 68.6 169 137.4 198 141.1 6 3.0 23 18.0 42 32.3 56 44.4 Marketing 13 11.0 97 80.9 224 180.1 302 227.8

26 20.5 57 46.8 80 66.3

No First Major 659 549.3 589 510.4 339 260.9 274 210.0 116 90.9 41 29.8 46 33.0 32 21.0

TOTAL BP002 794 660 1,482 1,256 2,218 1,835 2,547 1,993 147 114 397 318 685 576 826 660 TOTAL for the University 5,024 4,062 8,744 7,295 11,969 9,803 12,279 9,536 504 403 1,126 920 1,702 1,437 1,929 1,544 Percentage BP002 15.80 16.24 16.95 17.21 18.53 18.72 20.74 20.90 29.17 28.28 35.26 34.57 40.25 40.09 42.82 42.75

Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance – customized using Executive Information System (EIS) data sets


9.2.2 Quality of Student Intake

The distributions of ATAR scores for school leaver entrants into the BCom for the two most recent years are shown in Figure 31. Although the cut-off for entry is an ATAR of 80, the distributions clearly show that in both years, more than 80% of students have ATAR scores above 85, and more than 50% have ATAR scores above 90.

Figure 31: ATAR Score Distribution for School Leavers Enrolled in BCom, 2014 and 2015

Source: Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Distribution of ATAR Score for School Leavers Enrolled in Bachelor of Commerce, 2014

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Distribution of ATAR Score for

School Leavers Enrolled in Bachelor of Commerce, 2015


Average and Median ATAR scores for school leaver entrants in each of the BCom majors are tabulated in Figure 32. Entrants into the Economics, Business Law and Finance majors have average and median ATAR scores above 90 in all four years, with the other majors attracting students with median scores in the high 80s.

The percentages of non-ATAR entrants into each of the majors in the BCom are shown in Figure 33. These include international students. The percentages do vary from year to year, and it is interesting to note that over the four year period, about a third of the intake into the accounting major comes from non-school leavers, possibly reflecting the international student cohort completing that major.

Figure 32: Average ATAR Scores for Degree-Specific Majors in BCom, 2012-2015

Degree Specific Major Average ATAR Score Median ATAR Score

2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015

MJD-ACCTG 91.0 91.8 90.6 90.1 91.3 92.5 91.1 89.6

MJD-BSLAW 91.6 91.7 91.2 91.4 92.0 91.7 91.6 92.7

MJD-ECNDM 89.3 91.3 89.7 93.7 89.5 92.6 90.5 96.1

MJD-ECNSM 92.9 92.8 91.7 92.1 94.6 93.6 91.6 93.3

MJD-FINCE 92.6 91.3 91.2 90.8 94.1 92.3 92.2 90.6

MJD-HRSMT 87.4 90.2 86.7 88.9 87.0 90.4 86.6 89.0

MJD-MGMNT 90.1 88.4 88.3 88.1 91.4 88.2 87.2 86.7

MJD-MRKTG 90.0 90.1 89.2 88.2 89.7 91.0 89.3 88.5

NA 90.3 89.5 90.2 89.6 90.3 90.0 90.6 89.0

Total 91.0 90.9 90.4 90.0 91.4 91.5 90.6 90.2

Source: Callista

Figure 33: Non ATAR Entrants for Degree-Specific Majors in BCom, 2012-2015

Degree Major 2012 2013 2014 2015

MJD-ACCTG 29.6% 31.2% 31.4% 37.4%

MJD-BSLAW 21.7% 7.7% 19.0% 13.4%

MJD-ECNDM 0.0% 17.6% 23.5% 20.0%

MJD-ECNSM 13.9% 12.9% 16.4% 27.1%

MJD-FINCE 20.9% 21.3% 22.2% 26.5%

MJD-HRSMT 20.0% 21.4% 44.4% 20.8%

MJD-MGMNT 24.1% 19.6% 30.3% 18.2%

MJD-MRKTG 12.5% 25.0% 26.2% 25.3%

NA 28.3% 23.1% 26.1% 25.6%

Grand Total 23.8% 21.9% 26.0% 26.3%

Source: Callista


9.2.3 Course Completion Data

In 2014, the first year in which students could complete the BCom, a total 379 students graduated across the eight available degree-specific majors. The average WAM of graduating students across all majors (Figure 34) is 70.4, with individual majors graduating students with average WAMs in the range of 67.9-75.2.

It was noted earlier that students entering the Finance, Business Law and Economics majors had the highest average and median ATAR scores, and here, we note that they also have the highest WAM.

Figure 34: BCom Course Completion by Degree Major, 2014

Degree

Major

Count Average

WAM

MJD-ACCTG 143 70.0

MJD-BSLAW 23 72.4

MJD-ECNDM 7 75.2

MJD-ECNSM 44 71.4

MJD-FINCE 80 71.2

MJD-HRSMT 19 68.8

MJD-MGMNT 28 69.8

MJD-MRKTG 35 67.9

Grand Total

379

70.4

Source: Callista

Of the 379 students graduating with a BCom, 251 (66.2%) completed a second major in Commerce, 34 (9%) completed a second major in Arts, 47 (12.4%) completed a second major in Science, with the remainder (47 or 12.4%) unknown or did not have a second major (refer to Appendix F for details). Of the Science majors, Engineering Science was the most popular second major, with 29 of the 47 completing that major. Communication Studies was the most common Arts major, with 11 of the 34 students completing it.

9.2.4 Course Attrition Rates

Figure 35 presents the number of students who have discontinued their BCom enrolment. These numbers include those students who have transferred to another course at UWA as well as those who have discontinued their studies for a variety of reasons. The annual totals presented are cumulative. For example, the number of discontinued students in 2014 includes students who commenced in 2012 and 2013 but discontinued their enrolment in the BCom in 2014.


Figure 35: Attrition Rates for BCom, 2012-2015

2012 2013 2014 2015

No. of Discontinuation 40 128 225 164

Total BCom Enrolments 945 1,889 2,909 3,383

Attrition Rate 4.2% 6.8% 7.7% 4.8% Source: Callista

For each year, the top three reasons for discontinuation are depicted in Figure 36, with transferring to a different course being the most dominant reason. A detailed breakdown of reasons contributing to discontinued studies is shown in Appendix G.

Figure 36: Reasons for Discontinuation in BCom, 2012-2015

Reason for discontinuation 2012 2013 2014 2015

Course transfer within UWA 40.0% 39.1% 35.1% 43.9%

Enrolment Lapsed 12.5% 31.3% 25.8% 23.2%

Move to other tertiary institution 10.0% 16.4% 16.0% 14.0%

Other 37.5% 13.2% 23.1% 18.9%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: Callista

9.2.5 The Extent of Service Learning

Service Learning refers specifically to community engagement activities that are embedded in units of study, being structured and assessed as formal educational experiences. There are currently 12 undergraduate units offered within the University that are listed as having a service learning component. None of these units are within the Bachelor of Commerce degree, and BCom students could, potentially, complete them as a broadening unit.

While not formally listed as a service learning unit, the unit BUSN3348 Business Practicum offered by the Business School is available to BCom students. This unit provides students in their second or third year with the opportunity to undertake a supervised placement within an organisation outside the University. Placements typically involve a specific project which involves working with the organisation on a particular issue, or an unpaid internship, where students gain relevant work experience in a business environment. Depending on the nature of the project and/or organisation, these placements may involve aspects of service learning. Since the introduction of New Courses, 15 students in the BCom have formally enrolled in this unit. Where students undertake workplace placements, an academic coordinator is nominated to supervise the placement and to assess the student’s learning outcomes (pass/fail).


In 2016, the Business School will also commence offering the following unit SVLG1001 Fundamentals of Service Learning, which will be offered as an elective to BCom students and available to other degree students as a broadening unit.

In response to the question in the Student Survey about Service Learning, more than 80% of BCom students value the ability to complete service learning (83%), and would recommend it to others (82%). However, it is unclear that students understand the nature of service learning and the opportunities that it provides. Only 7% of respondents to the student survey clearly identified as partaking in service learning in their course.

9.3 Structure of the Majors

9.3.1 Overview of the Structure of Majors

A summary of the structure of each of the majors, including the list of core and option requirements as they are in 2015, are shown in Figure 37. Appendix H provides detailed information on changes to requirements for some of the majors and the rationale behind them.

Under New Courses, there is a requirement that each student must complete at least four units at level 3, with the 2+2+4 structure chosen as the preferred option. Several majors within the BCom have been given approval for a 2+3+3 structure with the requirement that the structure be flexible enough to allow students to add a fourth level-3 unit in the same field or to complete a second major. Students in the BCom typically complete two majors, either from another major offered in the BCom, or from another degree, and the structure of the majors facilitates a wide range of combinations.

Figure 37: Overview of the Structure of BCom Majors

Code Title Structure Detailed structure

MJD-ACCTG Accounting 2+3+3 (or

2+2+4)

2+3+3 (or 2+2+4) structure comprising: 4 x L1 complementary 2 x L1 core 2 x L2 core and 1 x L2 option 3 x L3 option (from a list of 7)

MJD-BSLAW Business Law 2+3+3

2+3+3 structure comprising 4 x L1 complementary 2 x L1 core 3 x L2 core 3 x L3 core

MJD-ECNDM Economics (Double Major) 2+5+7

2+5+7 structure comprising 4 x L1 complementary 2 x L1 core 5 x L2 core 4 x L3 option (from a list of 12) 3 x L3 core


Code Title Structure Detailed structure

MJD-FINCE Finance 2+3+3

2+3+3 structure comprising 4 x L1 complementary; 2 x L1 core 1 x L2 core 2 x L2 option (from a list of 3) 1 x L3 core 2 x L3 option (from a list of 5)

MJD-HRSMT

Human Resource Management 2+2+4

2+2+4 structure comprising 4x L1 complementary 2 x L1 core 2 x L2 core 4 x L3 core

MJD-MGMNT Management 2+2+4

2+2+4 structure comprising 4x L1 complementary 2 x L1 core 5 x L2 option (take 2); 11 x L3 option (take 4)

MJD-MRKTG Marketing 2+2+4

2+2+4 structure comprising 4x L1 complementary; 2 x L1 core 1 x L2 core 1 x L2 option (from a list of 2); 1 x L3 core 3 x L3 option (from a list of 6);

As reflected in comments by some major coordinators, while there continues to be discussion within disciplines regarding the content of majors, in general, the structure of the majors enables a coherent progression and scaffolding of content.

9.3.2 Enrolment in Majors

Figure 38 shows the combination of degree-specific and second majors taken by BCom students as of September 2015. Accounting and Finance majors, which were the most popular combination taken by students in the BCom in 2013, remain the most popular combination today. Other popular combinations are Economics and Finance, Human Resource Management and Management, and Marketing and Management. It is also interesting to note that a popular choice amongst students completing the Marketing major as part of the BCom is the Communications major offered as part of the BA. Law and Society, Political Science and International Relations, Psychology in Society, Communication Studies are the most popular second majors chosen from the BA, and Engineering Science is the most popular major from the BSc. Languages make up the bulk of the “other BA” majors. Students who responded to the UWA Student Survey responded positively to the flexibility that New Courses offer them. 86% of students in the BCom agree that units in their degree-specific major “collectively provide a coherent program of study” and “increase their depth of


knowledge” as they progress through the major. A resounding majority (98%) value having the option to complete a second major, and this clearly shows in the data presented in Figure 38. Their responses to questions about coherence and depth of knowledge in their second major are relatively similar to those for their degree-specific major. More than 80% of respondents would recommend their majors to others (83% and 86% for degree-specific and second majors respectively). Figure 38: Combinations of BCom Majors, 2015

2015

BACHELOR OF COMMERCE

MAJOR – DEGREE SPECIFIC

ACCTG FINCE ECNSM ECNDM HRSMT MGMNT MRKTG BSLAW SECOND MAJOR TOTAL

SE

CO

ND

MAJ

OR

ACCTG 210* 178 17 1 7 6 12 31 252

FINCE 427 125* 126 3 4 10 19 29 618

ECNSM 27 127 68* 2 9 14 32 211

ECNDM 61* 0

HRMST 17 6 2 24* 25 21 7 78

MGMNT 51 24 12 33 75* 90 19 229

MRKTG 39 34 20 23 68 106* 20 204

BSLAW 116 47 28 11 16 8 47* 226

ENGSC 11 47 15 3 1 77

CMMST 2 1 1 1 38 3 46

LWSOC 1 6 1 2 2 18 30

POLSC 2 4 22 2 1 2 5 16 54

PSYSO 2 4 13 22 5 46

PSYSC 2 2 3 1 5 2 15

IDSGN 3 3

WKEMP 11 11

Other BA 15 7 26 5 7 22 18 100

Other BSc 12 25 30 1 4 12 10 7 103

DEG SPECIFIC TOTAL

934 627 362 70 139 249 380 255

*Single major only Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance


Some student comments from the Student Survey conducted for the Review of Courses on the ability to complete two majors are reproduced below:

The requirements are clear and understandable/ Allows me the option to complete two majors

Flexibility to explore majors before selecting a major to complete in second year. Overall great choices!

I can do two majors, from two different areas as well as a language (from another area again) for all my broadening units. Combined this is ideal for the career path I would like to end up on.

I like the simplified structure of the new courses in that every undergraduate degree is 3 years and every student is limited to two majors. This provides more comparable university experience. / - As an Accounting and Finance student I like how the previous course structure of multiple accounting and finance majors have been consolidated into one major. This again provides a more standardised and comparable university experience

9.3.3 Complementary Units for Majors offered in the BCom

The BCom requires all students to complete five units that reflect subject areas offered by the major business disciplines. Their inclusion as core units within the BCom is in part to meet accreditation requirements of international bodies such as the AACSB and EQUIS which require graduates from business programs to have acquired knowledge in a broad range of business disciplines. These units are:

ACCT1101 Financial Accounting (other than for Accounting, Finance and Business Law majors, for which it is a core unit)

ECON1101 Microeconomics: Prices and Markets (other than for the Economics major – core for this major)

STAT1520 Economic and Business Statistics MGMT1135 Organisational Behaviour (other than for Management and HR/ER major

– core for these majors) MKTG1203 Marketing Management (other than for Marketing major – core for this

major)

As noted above, one of the five units is also a core unit within each of the BCom majors. Consequently, students need to complete the other four as complementary units under each of the degree specific major.


9.3.4 Distinctiveness of Majors

While there are some units that are shared across majors, all approved majors offered within the BCom have at least four unique units. The greatest overlap exists between the Human Resource Management and Management majors which have an overlap of two units at Level 1 (same core), one unit at Level 2 (core in HRM and option in Management) and one unit at Level 3 (now core in HRM and option in Management).This overlap constitutes 50% of the HRM major and 22% of the Management major. However, given that the HRM major develops specialised learning outcomes underpinned by general management principles, this overlap is considered to be appropriate and provides distinctive learning in the respective majors.

For some majors, it is possible for students to complete Level 2 and Level 3 units that provide a particular focus, or ‘implicit streaming’ within the specific major. For example, in the Finance major, students can complete units that have a focus on ‘investment finance’ or ‘corporate finance’. In Marketing, they can choose an ‘entrepreneurial’ stream. In these instances, students are given guidance on their choice of units if they wish to specialise in these focus areas.

9.3.5 Progression within Majors

Students completing the BCom typically will complete the complementary units in their first year. Because one of these units also form part of the Level 1 core unit in each of the BCom majors, their completion means that students can progress in their selected major. Our observation is that students typically will complete the second Level 1 core unit in their chosen majors, and a broadening unit in their first year of the BCom. This allows students to progress through their majors and meet relevant prerequisite requirements and knowledge. This progression can sometimes become more complicated when students combine their studies with majors from other faculties. This is especially so when students are required to undertake more than 8 units for the major. For instance, if a BCom student plans to enroll in Engineering Science as a second major and is also required to complete bridging units for that major, then the structure for that student is less straightforward. In these situations, students are either not in a position to complete both majors within standard time, or need to focus on completing the requirements of one major prior to the other.

A couple of comments from BCom students about the ease of progression are reproduced below (from the student survey conducted to inform this Review):

I like the progression from simple units to the more complex in depth units in the final years. The UWA course provides a well-balanced course, which is recognisable by top recruiters, which has helped me get work experience.

I like the opportunity to do electives and broadening units, and the yearly progression of units in my degree (ie. ECON2234 follows on from ECON1102)


9.3.6 Changes to the Structure of Majors

The structure of the approved majors has not changed since their introduction in 2012. The changes that have been made since 2012 have predominantly been to provide some flexibility in the choice of options of Level 2 and Level 3 units.

The majors with the greatest change are Economics (single and double majors) and the Management Human Resource Management and Marketing majors. The changes to the Economics majors have been made to assist with the limited Level 2 options and provide for a wider array of options at Level 3. Changes to prerequisites in the Management, Human Resource Management and Marketing majors have been made to provide greater flexibility in students’ choice of level 2 and 3 units.

9.3.7 Embedding of Communication and Research Skills

Communication skills are embedded within units offered in each major, rather than through the offering of a single communications unit. As students completing the BCom are required to complete five common units (four of them as complementary units), they will be introduced to the essentials of business communication in these units, as well as through the compulsory Introductory Research and Information Skills (IRIS) program, in addition to coverage in core units in the major. How communication and research skills are embedded in each of the majors are discussed further in section 9.6.1 below.

9.4 Units – Categories and Individual Performance

9.4.1 Teaching Performance

The average Students’ Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF) scores for Q6 – “Overall this unit was a good educational experience” – are tabulated in Figure 39 for core and elective units offered in each of the BCom majors. It is pleasing to see that in cases where they needed improving, the SURF scores have indeed improved over the four year period. For example, in both the single and double majors in Economics, the average scores for both the core and elective units are above 3 in 2014 and 2015, compared with 2.9 (2.8) and 2.8 (2.3) in 2012 and 2013. The same can be said for elective units in the Marketing major.


Figure 39: Mean SURF Scores for Core and Elective Units in BCom Majors

Mean Q6 SURF

Overall this unit was a good educational experience

2012 2013 2014 2015

ACCTG

Core units 2.9 2.9 3.1 3.0

Elective units 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.0

BSLAW

Core units 3.3 3.2 3.5

Elective units NA NA NA NA

ECNDM

Core units 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9


ECNSM

Core units 3.1 2.9 3.1 3.1


FINCE

Core units 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.2


HRSMT

Core units 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.1

Elective units NA NA NA NA

MGMNT

Core 3.0 3.2 3.1 3.1


MRKTG

Core units 3.0 2.9 3.2 3.0


Source: SURF Online The process for making improvements to units based on SURF data involves the Associate Dean of Education, together with Discipline Heads, reviewing all SURF results (comments and scores) to identify units which do not achieve benchmark scores. For all units which score less than or equal to 2.7 on any item, the Associate Dean Education and /or Head of Discipline meets with the unit coordinator to discuss the underlying reasons for lower than expected performance and to identify ways that scores could be improved. When requested, the Associate Dean of Education sits in on classes and provides peer feedback on teaching. More broadly, the following initiatives have been implemented aimed at raising SURF scores more generally across BCom majors:

Running workshops for academic staff to showcase innovations in teaching The employment of two staff with expertise in online and blended learning to assist

staff in making better use of online resources and helping staff move to a more blended approach

Facilitating Centre for English Language Teaching (CELT) to run workshops on English language support for teaching staff.


9.5 Student Experience

9.5.1 Study Abroad

Results of the Student Survey suggest that students do value their study abroad experience. 70% of BCom respondents indicated that they have or will participate in Study Abroad, with 82% agreeing that they will recommend it to another student. Data on outgoing BCom students for Semester or Year Exchange program by country over the 2013 – 2015 period are presented in Figure 40 below. Canada, the UK and USA are the three most popular destinations. Figure 40: Outgoing BCom Semester/Year Exchange Program by Country, 2013-2015

Outgoing BCom Semester or Year Exchange Program by Country

2013-2015

Country 2013 2014 2015

Austria

1

Canada 4 11 2

China

1

Denmark 1 4 3

France 1 3 6

Germany

1

Italy 2

2

Japan 1

1

Netherlands 2 1 2

New Zealand

1

Norway

1

Singapore

2 1

Spain

1

Sweden 1 1 1

Switzerland 1

1

UK 10 7 7

USA 2 6 6

Total 25 38 35

Source: Study Abroad Reporting Information System (SARIS)

Data on students participating in short-term programs is provided in Figure 41 below, with China, France, the UK and USA shown as the most popular countries.


Figure 41: Outgoing BCom Short-Term Program by Country, 2013-2015

Short-Term Program 2013 2014 2015 China 9 29 5 Denmark

1

France 1 10 14 Germany

1 2

Hong Kong

4 1 Indonesia 1 4 4

Italy 2 1 4 Korea

4 7

Singapore

5 5 UK 1 10 12 USA 3 17 16 Total 17 86 70

Source: Study Abroad Reporting Information System (SARIS)

BCom students have the opportunity to get involved in a number of global educational programs and these are publicised regularly by the Business School. As presented above, the number of BCom students gaining degree-relevant experiences through university exchange, short-courses, study abroad programs, overseas internships and international conference attendance is growing since 2013.

9.6 Communication and Research Skills

9.6.1 Communication Skills

As noted earlier, the embedding of communication skills within the BCom is done through the compulsory complementary units. In designing the BCom for New Courses, it was decided that the most suitable units for embedding communication skills would be MKTG1203 Marketing Management and MGMT1135 Organisational Behaviour, as both are required by all BCom students. Given the desire to retain flexibility in the course and a focus on Commerce education, embedding communication skills in these units was preferred over the requirement for students to complete a dedicated communication skills unit. One of the learning outcomes for MKTG1203 is: ‘students are able to demonstrate an acceptable level of written and verbal communication skills to enhance marketing performance’. This unit is designed to develop graduate qualities of verbal and written communication skills - skills that are vital in marketing and commercial endeavours. To assess these skills, the unit includes a major group project which tests a student's verbal communication skills by requiring them to give a formal presentation of their findings in their tutorial. Students are also assessed on their written communication skills through the final exam as well as the book exercises.


One of the learning outcomes for MGMT1135 Organisational Behaviour (OB) is that ‘students are able to locate and critique research in the field of organisational behaviour’. One of the assessment items in this unit is a research essay where each student can choose either to participate actively in OB research (up to 5 surveys or experiments) or alternatively, write answers to 5 essay-style questions about research methods in OB. In addition to MKTG1203 and MGMT1135 for embedding communication skills, as part of the implementation of the new majors in the Bachelor of Commerce, each discipline area was required to map for each major the following:

For communication skills – in relevant units offered in the major, were these skills: (T)aught, (P)racticed, or (A)ssessed and at what level: (B)eginning, (D)eveloping, (A)dvanced, or (P)rofessional. Results from the Student Survey shows that while BCom students generally value the communication skills being taught in their major (82% agree), few (only 53%) agree that the training is of excellent quality. There is therefore room for improvement here.

9.6.2 Research Skills

The unit MGMT1135 Organisational Behaviour introduces students to the research process, with discipline research skills embedded within higher level units offered by each of the majors. When New Courses were introduced, details of how research skills were embedded into the content, pedagogy and assessment of each major were detailed across four elements:

Element A The evolution of the discipline, including its history, philosophy and theorising Element B The methods of enquiry that the discipline uses, including the methods of

research ethics Element C The practice of enquiry-based thinking relevant to the discipline Element D The discourse conventions of the discipline For each major, disciplines were required to map out how research skills are covered and assessed (refer to Appendix I for details):

(1) minor, (2) moderate, or (3) substantial.

A summary of how research skills are embedded in each major is provided below in Figure 42. The embedding of research skills has essentially continued in each major as as originally planned.

As with communication skills, most students value what is being taught (84%), and can identify when research skills are being taught (78%). However, only 62% of respondents agree that the research skills’ training is of excellent quality.


Figure 42: Embedding of Research Skills in BCom Majors

Accounting Bus Law Economics – Single and Double

Finance HRM Management Marketing

Element A: The evolution of the discipline including its history, philosophy and theorising

Level 1 –Minor Level 2 – Minor to Moderate Level 3 – Moderate to Substantial

Level 1 – Minor Level 2 – Moderate Level 3 - Substantial



Level 1 – Minor to Moderate Level 2 – Minor Level 3 – Moderate to Substantial

Level 1 – Minor to Moderate Level 2 - Minor to Moderate Level 3 – Moderate to Substantial

Level 1 – Moderate Level 2 – Minor Level 3 – Minor to Substantial

Element B: The methods of enquiry that the discipline uses including the methods of research ethics





Level 1 - Moderate Level 2 – Moderate Level 3 – Moderate to Substantial

Level 1 – Moderate Level 2 – Moderate to Substantial Level 3 -– Moderate to Substantial

Level 1 – Minor to Moderate Level 2 – Minor Level 3 Moderate to Substantial

Element C: The practice of enquiry-based thinking relevant to the discipline



Level 1 – Minor Level 2 – Moderate to Substantial Level 3 - Substantial


Level 1 – Moderate Level 2 – Moderate Level 3 – Moderate to Substantial

Level 1 – Moderate Level 2 – Moderate to Substantial Level 3 -– Substantial

Level 1 – Minor to Moderate Level 2 – Moderate to Substantial Level 3 – Moderate to Substantial

Element D: The discourse conventions of the discipline


Level 1 – Minor Level 2 – Moderate to Substantial Level 3 - Substantial



Level 1 – Moderate Level 2 – Moderate Level 3 – Moderate to Substantial

Level 1 – Moderate Level 2 – Moderate to Substantial Level 3 -– Substantial

Level 1 – Minor Level 2 – Moderate Level 3 – Minor to Substantial

Source: New Courses Bachelor of Commerce Implementation Working Group


9.7 Indigenous Education

Between 2012-2015, students undertaking the BCom degree enrolled in the following units that have content relating to indigenous matters:

INDG1400 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin INDG1150 Aboriginal Encounters: Strangers in our Backyard INDG1160 Boodjar Moort Katitjin INDG2300 Indigenous Knowledge: Mind, Body, Spirit INDG2400 Looking South: Noongar Voices INDG2500 Looking North: Wild West

The respective unit enrolments are tabled below. It is interesting to note the significant increase in the number of enrolments in 2015.

Figure 43: Enrolments in INDG Units by BCom Students, 2012-2015

EFTSL Enrolments

Unit Code Unit Name 2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015 INDG1150 Abor Encs: Strangers in our Backyard 0.1 0.4 2.0 10.8 1 3 16 87 INDG1160 Boodjar Moort Katitjin 0 0 0 6.5 0 0 0 52 INDG2300 Indig Knowledge: Mind, Body, Spirit 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 2 INDG2500 Looking North: The Wild West 0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0 2 1 1

INDG2700 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 26

INDG3800 Indigenous Ways of Knowing 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 1 TOTAL 1.3 2.8 4.8 20.8 10 22 38 180 Source: Callista

9.8 Quality Assurance Mechanisms/ Curriculum Management

9.8.1 Current Review and Improvement Processes

Some of the majors in the BCom are required to meet international accreditation standards that have as their main focus quality improvement programs across all of the School’s activities. These requirements include the implementation of relevant and regular review processes within each of the courses offered by the School, which include the BCom and associated majors, including Business Law, which is offered by the Faculty of Law.

There is a requirement that each major is reviewed every 2 to 3 years, and evidence on Assurance of Learning is collected as part of this cycle of reviews. Assurance of Learning involves a process of identifying opportunities to improve student learning where the end goal is continuous improvement in student learning and achievement.


9.8.2 School Governance and Curriculum Management

The assurance and management of the curricula is governed by a distributed structure. Discipline groups responsible for majors have primary responsibility for monitoring the quality of curricula and proposing changes to units and major structures. A Board of Undergraduate Studies reviews change proposals and requests and makes recommendations to the School’s Faculty Board.

The process for making changes to undergraduate majors includes: Proposer advises Head of Discipline Discipline meeting considers proposal Board of Undergraduate Studies reviews proposal Faculty Board reviews recommendations and forwards them to the UWA Curriculum

Committee

Membership of the Board of Undergraduate Studies is designed to provide input from relevant stakeholders. The Business School’s Education Committee makes recommendations in relation to pedagogical issues. 9.8.3 Curriculum Mapping Requirements and Implementation

The Business School is strongly committed to enhancing the student learning experience through comprehensive assurance of learning procedures embedded within the curriculum.

The majors within the BCom have broad goals and specific objectives that align with the University’s Educational Principles and the Business School’s Educational Operational Priorities.

The BCom program learning goals include: Major-specific knowledge and skills; Oral and written communication skills; Interpersonal skills such as the ability to work both independently and as part of a

team; Social and ethical awareness in an international context; and Information literacy and critical thinking skills conducive to lifelong learning.

Curriculum maps across the degree identify where program objectives are taught, practiced and assessed. These matrices form the basis of the Business School’s ongoing assurance of learning process which has a focus on improving student learning and ongoing curriculum improvement.

9.8.4 Professional Accreditation Requirements

In addition to meeting international accreditation standards, the Accounting major offered in the BCom degree is accredited by Australian and international professional bodies as a step towards gaining professional accreditation. Students can seek accreditation with CPA Australia, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and New Zealand (CAANZ) and the Institute of Public Accountants (IPA). Some additional electives may be required to meet the professional accreditation requirements.


10 Bachelor of Design

10.1 Bachelor of Design – Executive Summary

10.1.1 Overview of the Degree

The Bachelor of Design (BDes) is the smallest of the University’s four undergraduate Bachelor degrees, both in terms of student enrolments and number of majors offered. At commencement in 2012, the degree included three majors: Architecture, Integrated Design, and Landscape Architecture. These majors were partly a reformatting of two previous undergraduate programmes taught in the Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts (ALVA) and leading to professional qualifications:

1. The former Bachelor of Environmental Design (the three year full-time degree articulating to the two year Master of Architecture) was restructured as two co-requisite majors in Architecture and Integrated Design, leading to the remodelled Master of Architecture; and

2. The former four year Bachelor of Landscape Architecture was restructured as the Landscape Architecture major, leading to the new Master of Landscape Architecture.

An additional major in Fine Arts was introduced in 2015, following high numbers of enrolments in Visual Arts elective units from 2012 onwards. The Architecture major is the largest in the degree, representing approximately 83% of total EFTSL in 2015. Landscape Architecture has almost 9% of EFTSL and Integrated Design as a degree-specific major 6%. Fine Arts does not yet figure in data collections for continuing students but in 2015 has 21 students enrolled in the degree-specific major (15.3 EFTSL), representing almost 11% of commencing enrolments. Figure 44: Continuing Enrolments and Load for BP003 Students by First Major, 2013-2015

First Major 2013 2014 2015

Enrols EFTSL Enrols EFTSL Enrols EFTSL

Architecture 147 126.1 276 228.5 345 262.3 Integrated Design 15 12.4 30 21.6 27 19.5 Landscape Architecture 13 9.9 27 19.0 42 27.5 No First Major 15 10.4 9 5.1 10 5.8 TOTAL 190 159 342 274 424 315

The four existing majors correspond closely to the degree paradigm statement: ‘The main focus of the Bachelor of Design course at UWA is on devising and producing objects, places, spaces and processes.’ It is hoped that in future the major offerings in Design will increase in number and expand in disciplinary scope, and that a greater number of UWA staff external to ALVA will contribute to teaching within the degree. It was envisaged at the


time of implementation of the new courses that the Bachelor of Design degree could accommodate a wide range of disciplinary majors that would feed into a number of distinct Masters programmes. 10.1.2 Areas of Success/Commendation – Evidence-Based From the student perspective, the major successes of new courses have been the flexibility of structure and the ability to take two majors from different degrees. This holds true for three of the four majors in the Design degree (Fine Arts, Integrated Design and Landscape Architecture), with many students commenting positively on the value of flexibility and choice in regard to majors, electives and broadening units. However, it is not the case for the largest major, Architecture, which must be taken with Integrated Design as a co-requisite major, primarily for reasons of meeting professional accreditation requirements, thus eliminating for this group of students the flexibility and opportunity to choose from a wide range of major and elective offerings. Responses to the Student Survey indicate that Bachelor of Design students value UWA’s internationally recognised course structure (82% agreement) and agree that their degree enables them to meet their educational goals (76%), to develop both depth and breadth of disciplinary knowledge (75%) as well as learn skills transferrable to other study or work (81%). Students value the opportunity to do a second major (89%), though are less enthusiastic about the quality of their second major (with only 62% finding the second major distinctive and only 66% would recommend their second major to another student). Most students value communication skills being taught in their major (90%) though a much smaller number considers the training in these skills to be of excellent quality (only 49% agreement). Most students value research skills being taught in their major (83%) but a minority consider the research training to be of excellent quality (only 36%). Students also commented favourably on the interesting content in their chosen degree. 78% of Bachelor of Design students valued Study Abroad as part of their degree. However, most respondents indicated that it is too expensive an undertaking (88% agreement). All Bachelor of Design students appeared to value Service Learning (100% agreement). Major Coordinators identified a number of successes of the new courses framework. These included, for the Architecture major coordinator, the ‘ease with which students can sample a broad range of disciplines’ as well as ‘the admission of many students into the units taught [in ALVA] through the “broadening unit” rubric, with the result that many more students than was previously the case have exposure to subjects in art, art history and basic design and drawing. A positive outcome for ALVA has been the opportunity to ‘redefine its undergraduate offerings with a broader scope and more adventurous content’. For the Fine Arts Major Coordinator, a key success has been the ‘diversity of student experience’ and opening up of fields of study to students from a broad range of educational backgrounds, and for the Landscape Architecture Major Coordinator main strengths have been flexibility, more logical sequencing of units and better alignment of cognate fields. The Integrated Design major represents a new and innovative initiative for the University and while student and staff responses to this major have been mixed, the Major Coordinator recognises that the new courses framework has facilitated the capacity for


collaborative learning on multi-disciplinary projects with students from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds. 10.1.3 Areas of Improvements/Change and Rationale For introduction in 2015, a number of minor changes to units and unit sequences were made concurrently to the Architecture and Integrated Design (ID) majors, primarily to enhance progression in the studio-based design units in both majors. This was intended particularly to benefit students enrolling in ID as a degree-specific major, providing them with design studio units in each academic year level.

10.1.4 Recommendations for Further Change/Improvements (Evidence-Based) Data and commentary gathered for the purpose of informing this Review have underlined the need for those responsible for the Bachelor of Design degree to investigate areas of possible change and improvement in structure, organisation, content and delivery at both the unit and the major level. Student survey results indicate that the responses of Design students when compared with those from all other undergraduate degrees differ by 10% or more on about half of the questions. Coupled with qualitative commentary from Design students and Design Major Coordinators, as well as data relating to attrition, completion and academic performance (including WAM) of Design students, the evidence points to the need for improvement in order for the University to retain and increase student numbers in Design as well as to enhance the quality of the learning experience in this degree. The following Issues emerged from the tabulated Student Survey data and qualitative student comments therein:

64% of Design students believe that the UWA Course structure provides them with an excellent education (compared with 78% average across all degrees) and only 57% believe that it provides educational flexibility (compared with 77% average). Only 60% would recommend UWA’s courses to another student (compared with 81% average); only 65% would recommend their degree (compared with 81% average) and only 66% would recommend their degree-specific major (compared with 80% average) and 66% would recommend their second major (compared with 83% average). Academic coherence of degree-specific major and second major score only 69% and 67% (compared with 79% and 84% averages);

Co-requisite nature of Architecture and Integrated Design majors – students are unable to appreciate the relevance of the ID units to their architectural aspirations, suggesting a need for greater clarity about the reasons for the co-requisite requirement;

Flexibility – there is a view that greater flexibility is required in relation to (i) choice of second major alongside Architecture, and (ii) timetabling, especially making units available more frequently in both semesters;

Graduate outcomes – students completing the Bachelor of Design do not feel ‘job ready’ and point to a need for an increase in design studio unit weighting from 6 to 12 points as well as increased instruction in construction/technology and computing subjects;


Workload – students are concerned about excessive workload demands; Quality of teaching and resources – students are frustrated by what they see as

excessive learning through reference to internet sources rather than from direct instruction, particularly in relation to computer programmes; and

Communication and Research Skills - 90% of Design students value communication skills being taught in their major (compared with 79% average), though only 49% considered the training to be of excellent quality. Equally, 83% of Design students value research skills being taught in their major (compared with 88% average), though only 36% considered the training to be of excellent quality (compared with 64% average).

Coordinators of majors in the degree recommend improvements in the following areas:

Accommodate flexibility in the type and duration (credit point weighting or workload) of units (and specifically increase the weighting in design studio units from 6 to 12 points);

Invest in resources and infrastructure that matches the ambition of New Courses; Create better aligned community outreach programs; Implement new strategies to support the collaborative learning opportunities for

students (especially in the case of the Integrated Design major); and Set up a dedicated (physical and digital) space for Integrated Design in order to

create an identity for it.


10.2 Quality of the Course 10.2.1 Course Completion Data

In 2014, 48 students completed the Bachelor of Design, including: 43 in the co-requisite Architecture and Integrated Design majors (including 5

International students); and 5 in the Landscape Architecture major.

In 2015, 58 students are due to complete the Bachelor of Design, including:

53 in the co-requisite Architecture and Integrated Design majors (including 6 International students);

2 in the Landscape Architecture major; and 3 in the Integrated Design degree-specific major (including one International student).

Approximately 65% of the students completing the Bachelor of Design in 2014 and 2015 completed in three years or less (commencing in 2012 or 2013); the remainder completing in more than three years, predominantly due to part-time enrolment and/or the need to repeat units. This is consistent with completion times for the former Bachelor of Environmental Design degree (in 2013, for example, 66% of students completed in three years or less). However, overall numbers completing the Bachelor of Design so far (106) are lower than the numbers for the previous Bachelor of Environmental Design and Bachelor of Landscape Architecture ( for example, in 2013, 131 and 11 completions respectively). 10.2.2 Course Attrition Rates

Between 2012 and 2015, 1,011 students have enrolled in the Bachelor of Design as their degree. Of these, 344 have been discontinued since 2012 for the reasons listed below (representing a total attrition rate of 34%): Figure 45: Course Attrition Rates for Bachelor of Design, 2012-2015 Points of study completed

Discontinuation reason Total Number

International students 0 6-24 30-

48 54-72 78+

Change of course 18 1 15 2 - 1 - Course transfer within UWA 109 7 10 65 18 11 5 Dissatisfaction with course 11 - 3 6 1 1 - Employment/work commitments 6 - 2 1 2 1 - Financial difficulty 4 - 3 - 1 - - Move to other Tertiary institution 31 4 9 14 4 1 3 Enrolment lapsed 119 2 33 51 23 6 6 Medical reasons 3 - 3 - - - - Never enrolled in course 3 - 3 - - - - Other reason 3 1 1 1 - - 1 Personal reasons 14 1 8 3 2 - 1 O/S/interstate move 4 - - 2 - 1 - Study/workload 2 - 2 - - - - Unspecified reason 13 - 12 - 1 - - Unsatisfactory academic course progression

4 - - 2 1 - 1


Other figures show clearly that there has been a decline in numbers of students applying for and enrolling in the Bachelor of Design since 2013. Even allowing for reduced numbers in 2015 (owing to the half-cohort graduating from WA secondary schools in 2014 and entering universities in 201520), WA school-leaver applicants dropped markedly from 2013 to 2014 and WA non-school leaver applications also dropped from 2014 to 2015. Figure 46: Number of Enrolments by TISC Applicants in Bachelor of Design, 2013-2015

Offered Course TISC code Year WA school-leavers

WA non-school-leavers

Others new to tertiary

All others Total

Design (BDes) UWDES 2013 112 33 5 3 153 2014 84 41 1 126 2015 72 24 5 101

Commencing enrolments in the Bachelor of Design have declined each year since 2012, though given the impact of the half-cohort, numbers commencing Design this year reflect a positive growth in relative terms. Figure 47: Commencing Enrolments and Load for Bachelor of Design Students by First Major, 2012-2015

First Major 2012 2013 2014 2015

Enrols EFTSL Enrols EFTSL Enrols EFTSL Enrols EFTSL

Architecture 12 8.4 42 25.5 104 77.5 78 60.8 Fine Arts

21 15.3

Integrated Design 2 1.4 9 4.9 17 10.6 10 5.4 Landscape Architecture 6 3.9 8 4.4 19 10.8 16 10.5 No First Major 264 184.5 193 149.8 83 59.8 71 50.8 TOTAL 284 198 252 185 223 159 196 143

ALVA has compiled a list of reasons for withdrawal prior to Census date from Semester 1 2015 units, which may help explain the larger picture of attrition in the Bachelor of Design degree. 49 students who responded to the Faculty survey indicated one or more of the below reasons for their withdrawal:

Influences on life/study balance - 17 Unit was different to expectations - 12 Greater than expected workload - 13 Content not aligned with student interests - 13 Other (timetable, financial, course management) – 10

20

In 2001, the Western Australian Government increased the pre-school and school entry age by six months to align with other Australian states and territories. This change reduced the kindergarten cohort in 2001 by approximately 60 per cent. By the end of 2014, this “half cohort” resulted in a Year 12 school-leaver cohort of approximately 13,000 students, compared to 21,000 students in the previous year. This will particularly impact commencing student numbers at WA universities in 2015 and 2016, with school-leavers constituting a significant proportion of commencing domestic undergraduate enrolments.


10.3 Structure of the Majors 10.3.1 Overview of the Structure of Majors

Since introduction of the new courses in 2012, the majors in the Bachelor of Design have undergone minimal change. The Architecture major has maintained its 2+2+4 structure. The Integrated Design major has moved from a 2+2+4 to a 2+3+3 structure as a result of relatively minor swapping of Level 2 and 3 units across the ID and Architecture majors, primarily to enable the offering of one Integrated Design Studio unit in each of the three years of the ID major. In 2015, the new Fine Arts major is being taught for the first time (and like Integrated Design and Landscape Architecture has a 2+3+3 structure). 10.3.2 Distinctiveness of the Majors and Content Overlap

The major offerings in the Design degree contain minimal overlap, partly because each has a distinct set of units tailored to meet professional (and accreditation) requirements. Overlapping units are limited to:

IDES1000 Integrated Design Studio: core unit in both Architecture and Integrated Design majors

IDES1041 Techniques of Visualisation: core unit in both Integrated Design and Landscape Architecture majors

ARCT1030 Structures and Natural Systems: complementary unit in both Architecture and Landscape Architecture majors

VISA1001 Art, Technology and Society: complementary unit in Integrated Design major and core unit in History of Art major

IDES2040 Future Making: core unit in Integrated Design major and complementary unit in Landscape Architecture major.

Majors are distinctive in terms of disciplinary content, though student feedback suggests that there is some lack of clarity around the ID major sequence and its co-requisite relationship with the Architecture major.


Figure 48: Overview of the Structure of Majors in the Bachelor of Design Major Code Major Name Structure Units MJD-ARCTR Architecture 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1 Core x 2

IDES1000 Integrated Design ARCT1001 Architecture Studio 1

Level 1 Complementary x 2 ARCT1010 Drawing History ARCT1030 Structures and Natural Systems

Level 2 Core x 2 ARCT2000 Architecture Studio 2 ARCT2050 Environmental Design

Level 2 Complementary x 2 ARCT2010 Parallel Modernities in Art & Architecture ARCT2030 Materials & Small Construction

Level 3 Core x 4 ARCT3000 (12 pts) Architecture Studio 3 ARCT3010 History & Theories of Built Environment ARCT3030 Construction

MJD-FNART Fine Arts 2 + 3 + 3 Level 1 Option x 2 Choose 2 Level 2 Option x 3 Choose 3 Level 3 Core x 3 VISA3050 Advanced Studio

VISA3051 Advanced Major Project (12 pts) MJD-IDSGN Integrated Design 2 + 3 + 3 Level 1 Core x 2

IDES1000 Studio Fundamentals IDES1040 Techniques of Visualisation

Level 1 Complementary x 1 VISA1001 Art, Technology and Society Level 2 Core x 3 IDES2000 Integrated Design Studio 2 - Making

IDES2001 Design Communication IDES2040 Future Making

Level 3 Core x 3 IDES3000 Integrated Design Studio 3 – Complex (12 pts) IDES3010 Advanced Design Thinking

MJD-LDARC Landscape Architecture

2 + 3 + 3 Level 1 Core x 2

LACH1000 Landscape Architecture Studio – Groundings IDES1040 Techniques of Visualisation

Level 1 Complementary x 2 LACH1010 History & Theory of Landscape Architecture ARCT1030 Structures and Natural Systems

Level 2 Core x 3 LACH2000 Landscape Architecture Studio – Considerations LACH2001 Landscape Architecture Studio – Speculations LACH2030 Site Manipulation

Level 2 Complementary x 1 IDES2040 Future Making Level 3 Core LACH3000 Landscape Architecture Studio – Expansions

LACH3001 Landscape Architecture Studio – Resolutions LACH3030 Plants and Landscape Systems

As illustrated above, all four majors are characterised by the fact that the majority of units are core rather than options. The Architecture, Integrated Design and Landscape Architecture majors contain all core units. The Fine Arts major contains five option units at Levels 1 and 2 plus two Level 3 core units (with VISA3051 being a 12-point unit). 10.3.3 Complementary Units

Complementary units have been employed on the basis that they are necessary adjuncts to the core sequence of units in the Architecture, Integrated Design and Landscape Architecture majors (four units, one unit and three units respectively). Staff and students seem clear on the purpose of complementary units in relation to the majors. There were no comments made by either students or major coordinators in the Review questionnaires in relation to the concept or experience of complementary units.


10.4 Units – Categories and Individual Performance 10.4.1 Unit Enrolments and SURF

SURF results for the units included in Design majors are difficult to disaggregate from results for the former Bachelors of Environmental Design, Landscape Architecture and Fine Arts, as well as from the Master of Architecture. Additionally, SURF continues to be tabulated according to Faculty, rather than aligned with the new undergraduate degrees. The report Unit evaluations at UWA - An Analysis of SURF Survey Results, 2010-2014 compiled by the then Institutional Research Unit (IRU, now Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance, March 2015), for example, provides summaries of units in ALVA but this aggregates old and new units, undergraduate and postgraduate units, so is not especially informative for the purpose of the Review. This is something that might need to be addressed if results are to be useful in the context of measuring and tracking degree performance.

For the purpose of this report, the list of ‘Units Consistently Excellent on one or more SURF items during the 6 semesters from Semester 2 2012 – Semester 1 2015’ compiled by the IRU includes seven units in Design majors (ARCT2000, ARCT3000, IDES1000, LACH1010, VISA1050, VISA1054 and VISA2272).

In addition, seven units in Design majors have been identified as consistently being regarded by students as unsatisfactory on one or more SURF item (ARCT2030, ARCT3030, IDES2000, IDES3000, LACH2030, LACH3030 and VISA1051). It is encouraging to note that in 2015 only three of these units have continued to score lower than 2.8 scores in SURF (ARCT3030, IDES3000, LACH3030).

10.4.2 Performance of Category A and B Broadening Units

Units in the Design degree that are available as Category A Broadening Units to students in other degrees include:

Unit Code Unit Name Enrolment numbers

2012 2013 2014 2015 VISA1000 Great Moments in Art 145 126 159 111 VISA1053 Video Art: Methods and Means 128 179 163 159 LACH1020 The Culture of Nature 103 85 90 47 VISA2270 International Studio for Arts and Culture - 17 17 23 VISA2276 The Art of Printmaking: A Cultural

History - 23 - 7

VISA3385 Cubism and its Diasporas - 17 - - The availability of Fine Arts units as Broadening Category A and B resulted in large student enrolments in 2012 and 2013, which led to the development of the Fine Arts major for introduction in 2015. This has been one of the success stories in the new courses structure, following the low enrolments in the former Bachelor of Fine Arts (which had combined practice and theory units, now split between the Fine Arts and the History of Art majors).


10.4.3 Completion of Category A Broadening Requirement

While accurate calculation of student numbers in the various Category A Broadening pathways is not possible, the relatively low proportion of Design students undertaking Study Abroad, and low numbers of Design students in Indigenous unit enrolments (refer to Figure 49 below) suggests that the majority are completing this requirement via specific Category A Broadening units. 10.4.4 Electives and LOTE

Design students enrol in small numbers yet across a wide range of elective units. The largest cohort of students in Design are enrolled in the co-requisite majors, Architecture and Integrated Design, which leaves space only for four Broadening units within their course.

Aggregated by School, the below table shows Bachelor of Design student enrolments in non-Design units, many of which will feature as electives in their course plans. Design students are most numerous in Humanities, Social Sciences, Business and Earth & Environment units.

Figure 49: Broadening Units taken by Bachelor of Design Students by School, 2012-2015

School 2012 2013 2014 2015 Humanities 75 124 107 106 Music 7 20 34 33 Social Sciences 74 106 99 101 Business School 42 77 90 94 Graduate School of Education 3 8 16 26 Engineering, Computing & Mathematics 11 22 19 21 Indigenous Studies* 8 27 37 33 Law 5 13 8 11 Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences 4 13 13 15 Agricultural and Resource Economics 8 27 20 13 Anatomy, Physiology & Human Biology 3 6 12 10 Animal Biology 5 12 22 9 Chemistry and Biochemistry 5 4 3 4 Earth and Environment 29 45 61 57 Physics 9 28 20 8 Plant Biology 4 6 10 10 Psychology 13 26 19 21 Sport Science, Exercise and Health 7 25 22 29 * Note that Indigenous Studies Essentials online module is not counted for the purpose of this table. Design students have enrolled in LOTE units in the following total numbers between 2012 and 2015: French (99), Japanese (92), Italian (57), Chinese (38), German (38), Korean (35) and Indonesian (12).

10.5 Embedding Communication and Research Skills

The majors in the Design degree have all been structured in accordance with the new courses’ aims relating to the development of communication and research skills. In the majority of cases these skills have been embedded across a number of units, though IDES2001 Design Communication is a core unit in the Integrated Design major (and hence


studied by all students enrolled in the ID major as well as the co-requisite Architecture major), focusing on the various graphic and verbal communication techniques used by design practitioners to design and present their projects. Communication and research skills are predominantly embedded across a range of units in each major, though at present the mapping of these skills within ALVA is in progress. Learning of graphic and oral communication and presentation skills is a central feature in the studio-based units in all of the Design majors. Additionally, in the Integrated Design major, IDES2001 Design Communication explicitly teaches graphic and verbal communication and presentation skills and techniques: VISA1001 Art, Technology and Society, IDES1040 Techniques of Visualization, IDES2040 Future Making, and IDES3010 Advanced Design Thinking have an explicit focus on oral and written communication skills. In relation to the delivery of research skills, major coordinators considered that the Design majors managed this effectively, though the Architecture Major coordinator noted that the reduction in studio unit weighting from the former 12 points to the more standard 6 points in fact reduced the amount of time that students used to devote to this kind of learning. Evidence from the Student Survey suggests that Design students highly value the teaching of communication skills (90%, compared with UWA average of 79%), but that the skills training needs to be improved. Likewise students place a high value on the teaching of research skills (83%), but only 36% consider the teaching to be of excellent quality.

10.6 Indigenous Education

Responses to the student survey provide evidence that approximately half of the students enrolled in the Design degree consider that the online non-credit module Indigenous Studies Essentials enhanced their understanding of Indigenous people. Only 43% agreed that they could select units that improved their knowledge of Indigenous Australian people (compared with 61% UWA average), yet only 37% believed that there should be more Indigenous content in UWA’s degrees (compared with 47% UWA average). Figure 50: Indigenous Unit Enrolment – BP003 Students, 2012-2015

Unit Code

Unit Name

Semester

EFTSL Enrolments 2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015

INDG1150 Abor Encs: Strangers in our Backyard SEM-1 0.1 1.0 1.3 2.0 1 8 10 17

INDG1160 Boodjar Moort Katitjin SEM-2 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 11

INDG2300 Indig Knowledge: Mind, Body, Spirit SEM-1 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 2

INDG2500 Looking North: The Wild West SEM-2 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 1

INDG2700 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin SEM-2 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 4

TOTAL 1.3 2.5 1.6 4.9 10 20 13 42 Source: Callista


10.7 Quality of Students / Student Experience Despite entering the Bachelor of Design course with high ATARs (see below), Design students have the lowest performance figures amongst all undergraduate degrees. Since 2012, pass rates for Design students have increased along with the rates for all other degrees, but overall the pass rates for Design students have been the lowest each year. This may be partly inflated by the number of late submissions lodged by students, particularly in the design studio units. In many cases, the lateness and resulting marking penalty results in a failed unit.

10.7.1 Course WAM on Completion

As illustrated in Figure 51, in 2013 and 2014, students completed the Bachelor of Design with a mean WAM slightly below the UWA average. Furthermore, the median WAM for Design students was the lowest of the four degrees in both 2014 and 2015, and the range of WAM was the narrowest, particularly in 2015. Figure 51: Weighted Average Mark in Bachelor Courses, 2013-2015

Course 2013 2014 2015

Mean 25th

percentile 75th

percentile Mean 25th

percentile 75th

percentile Mean 25th

percentile 75th

percentile BP001 70.7 65.9 75.6 72.2 68.2 76.3 68.3 64.8 71.9 BP002 72.5 65.9 79.1 70.3 65.4 75.4 66.8 61.5 71.6 BP003

71.8 68.7 74.0 67.0 63.5 70.3

BP004 72.4 65.9 78.1 72.7 67.3 77.8 67.3 62.5 71.7 ALL 72.1 72.1 67.3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2012 2013 2014

Unit Outcomes for BP003 Students, 2012-2014

Incomplete

Failed

Withdrawn

Passed

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

BP001 BP002 BP003 BP004

Unit Pass Rates for All Bachelor Courses, 2012-2014

2012

2013

2014


10.7.2 Quality of Student Intake (ATAR)

In general, Bachelor of Design students show high ATAR performance (which interestingly is consistent with the ATAR scores of students entering the former Bachelor of Environmental Design degree). In 2014, the majority of school-leavers enrolling in the Bachelor of Design (32%) had an ATAR in the range 85.0-90.0. In 2015, almost 35% (the majority) of school-leavers enrolling in the degree had an ATAR in the range 90.0-95.0.

76.3 75.4 74.0 77.8

0

20

40

60

80

100

BP001 BP002 BP003 BP004

Median and Range of WAM for Students in Bachelor Courses, 2014

71.9 71.6 70.3 71.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

BP001 BP002 BP003 BP004

Median and Range of WAM for Students in Bachelor Courses, 2015

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

< 5

0.0

55

.0-<

60

.0

60

.0-<

65

.0

65

.0-<

70

.0

70

.0-<

75

.0

75

.0-<

80

.0

80

.0-<

85

.0

85

.0-<

90

.0

90

.0-<

95

.0

95

.0-<

98

.0

98

.0-<

99

.0

>=

99

.0

Distribution of ATAR Score for School Leavers Enrolled in Bachelor of Design, 2014

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

50

.0-<

55

.0

55

.0-<

60

.0

60

.0-<

65

.0

65

.0-<

70

.0

70

.0-<

75

.0

75

.0-<

80

.0

80

.0-<

85

.0

85

.0-<

90

.0

90

.0-<

95

.0

95

.0-<

98

.0

98

.0-<

99

.0

>=

99

.0

Distribution of ATAR Score for School Leavers Enrolled in Bachelor of Design, 2015


10.8 Study Abroad Advice from the Study Abroad Office for Design students indicates that in 2014, 59 undergraduates studied overseas. The figures available in the table below suggest that Design students consistently have the lowest rate of Study Abroad experience amongst UWA undergraduates, and particularly so in both 2013 and 2015. Figure 52: UWA Domestic Undergraduate Students Studying Abroad, 2010-2015

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Domestic Bachelor's Load (EFTSL)* 12,037 12,812 13,504 13,827 13,652 11635 % Bachelor's Studied Abroad 1.1% 1.6% 1.4% 1.7% 1.5% 1.2% Total Domestic New Courses Load (EFTSL)

4082 7317 9830 9517

% New Courses Studied Abroad 0.0% 0.9% 1.3% 1.1% BP001

0.0% 1.1% 1.8% 1.8%

BP002

0.0% 0.9% 1.2% 1.1% BP003

0.0% 0.3% 1.1% 0.4%

BP004

0.1% 0.8% 1.2% 0.8% Graduates With Study Abroad Experience During Course 6.3% 8.5% 9.0% 10.3% 11.0% * Full year load data for 2015 are preliminary as at 7 October

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2012 2013 2014 2015

Study Abroad As Percentage of Total Domestic Student Load in New Courses

BP001 BP002

BP003 BP004

Total New Courses


10.9 Service Learning Very few Design students appear to have enrolled in Service Learning units. This is interesting given the responses to the Student Survey, in which Design respondents indicated most strongly that they valued service learning, and that they would recommend a Service Learning unit to another UWA student. Figure 53: Service Learning Unit Enrolments - BP003 Students, 2012-2015

Unit Code Unit Name Semester EFTSL Enrolments 2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015

BIOL1131 Plant & Animal Biology SEM-2 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.5 4 2 4 8 BIOL3360 Saving Endangered Species SEM-1 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 2 EDUC1102 Learn Effectively: Imp Learn & Teach SEM-1 0.1 0.8 0.3 1.0 1 6 2 8 INDG2700 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin SEM-2 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 4 TOTAL 0.4 0.9 0.5 1.9 5 8 6 22

Source: Callista

10.10 Quality Assurance Mechanisms: Governance and Curriculum Management

ALVA Faculty staff are currently working towards an internal review of the undergraduate majors in Design. This is particularly to address accreditation-related issues prior to the 5-yearly accreditation of the Master of Architecture program scheduled for late 2016. Curriculum management within ALVA, and pertinent to the Design degree, is largely the task of the Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee led by the Associate Dean (Education). ALVA Associate Dean (Education) is currently undertaking curriculum mapping across the majors in Design, due for completion later this year. This Review of New Courses is likely to provide direction and feedback that will assist with this process.

10.11 Professional Accreditation Requirements One of the main challenges faced by ALVA staff when developing majors aligned with the new courses framework was to embrace the opportunities offered by the breadth and flexibility of the new structure, while at the same time preserving core content and delivery of skills necessary to meet accreditation requirements for the professional Architecture and Landscape Architecture programmes. The Architecture course has a 5-year accreditation visit scheduled for late 2016. At that point, the first cohort of students will be nearing completion of the remodelled Master of Architecture articulating from the Bachelor of Design. Prior to the accreditation process, the Faculty is planning a review of the undergraduate majors and the Master of Architecture to map course content and ensure that required professional competencies are being met.


10.12 Other Degree-Specific Issues Many degree-specific issues have emerged from the compilation of data and survey responses. However, a few issues stand out as worthy of further attention during or subsequent to this Review.

1. Staff and students have expressed concern about the reduction in all but Level 3 capstone studio-based units (across all majors in Design) from 12 point to 6 point studio units. Students feel that this loss of time and reduction in contact hours with staff disadvantages them relative to students enrolled at other institutions where design studios are more heavily weighted. For staff, the reduction in studio contact time has had direct consequences for the preparation of students for the Master of Architecture, and many staff believe that students are not as well equipped as they were prior to New Courses for the expectations of the Masters programme.

2. The Integrated Design major was created jointly by staff from ALVA and the Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics (ECM) in response to the spirit of New Courses, while preserving course content for professional accreditation. However, the departure of key ECM staff plus disappointing lack of involvement by other faculties has resulted in the ID major being largely taught by ALVA staff to ALVA students alongside a small number of students from other disciplines. In addition, many students enrolled in the co-requisite Architecture and ID majors do not appreciate the relevance of the broader design-based focus of the ID major. Being a significant shift away from conventional architectural education, it is only to be expected that staff and students will take time to adapt to the multidisciplinary potential of the ID major. However, it is clear from the evidence collected for this Review that there are many areas of concern that need to be addressed in relation to the ID major and its relationship to the Architecture major.

3. Workload for students in Design majors seems to be a factor leading to part-time enrolments and possibly contributing to the high rate of attrition from the degree. Comparison of completion statistics (Bachelor of Design compared to Bachelor of Environmental Design + Bachelor of Landscape Architecture) points to a possible increase in part-time enrolments to accommodate workload demands. Another factor here could be the increase in full-time semester load for Bachelor of Design students to four units (4 x 6 pts) from three units (2 x 6 pts plus 1 x 12 pts) prior to new courses. In simple terms, full-time students now have four units to manage each semester (including at least one studio-based unit) and in many cases unit workload exceeds the 150-hour expectation.


11 Bachelor of Science

11.1 Executive Summary The Bachelor of Science is the largest of the five degrees operating in the new courses framework. A diverse range of Science disciplines spanning Biological, Physical and Human Sciences contribute to a total 31 BSc majors. The first full cohort of BSc students graduated at the end of 2014, and the majority of majors appear to be operating successfully. This document presents an account of the BSc and its majors using the results of recent staff and student surveys together with key background data on degree structure, enrolments and student performance. The key features of the BSc are as follows:

Enrolments: Just over half of all undergraduate students enrolled since the introduction of the new courses framework have been in the BSc, with the remainder distributed among the BA, BCom, BDes and BPhil. Distribution of student load among BSc majors is very heterogeneous, varying in 2014 from 34% of total BSc load in Engineering Science, 30% across the six Biomedical Science disciplines, to less than 1% or less in each of the 12 lowest enrolled majors.

Developmental progression of discipline content: Most BSc majors provide students with a logical, developmental progression of discipline coverage. While each major is clearly distinctive, many cognate disciplines share units at Level 1. Streaming at upper levels is used to ensure coverage of critical mass in some disciplines. In a small number of majors, there is a strong view that the appropriate critical mass of discipline knowledge cannot be reached due to the structural design of the new courses framework. In some cases, this was also linked to a loss of cohort identity.

Characteristics of the BSc student cohort: The quality of students entering the BSc is very high, with a median ATAR score of >92 (in the case of school leavers). The ATAR distribution varies considerably between majors, with highest levels observed for Physics, Chemistry and the Biomedical Science disciplines. International students make up just over 10% of the BSc student cohort, but again this varies enormously among majors (e.g. Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Engineering Science and Biomedical Science each had almost twice the overall average).

Student performance: Academic achievement by BSc students has been very strong overall. On the other hand, one area of concern is the variance in grade distribution among majors. This will be addressed directly by the new, university-wide policy on assessment.

Student satisfaction: The extent to which BSc students are satisfied with their experience at UWA was overwhelmingly positive (as measured by the usual metrics such as the SURF survey). Nevertheless, marked variance among majors in student satisfaction clearly points to the need for improvement in the quality of teaching and/or teaching infrastructure in some areas.

Key concerns about the current BSC structure: Review-specific surveys of students and major coordinators identified two key areas of concern for the BSc overall. Thus, while many students viewed broadening units positively, there appear to be concerns


that relate specifically to Science students, including the inability to choose broadening units from within Science. Secondly, staff in particular but also students expressed concerns about the loss of discipline content due to the restraints of the new courses structure.

11.2 Overview of the Bachelor of Science The Bachelor of Science (BSc) is the most popular choice of degree among the four main offerings in the new courses structure, with 53% of the total undergraduate EFTSL load over 2012-2015. The remaining load is shared among the BA (19%), BCom (24%) and BDes (4%) (UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance). In part, this simply reflects the prominence of Science disciplines across the University (e.g. 23 of the 31 UWA Schools are STEM-based, including Medical fields, and 31 of the 71 undergraduate majors on offer (44%) sit within the BSc). Overall commencing enrolments, total enrolments and domestic/international breakdown are shown in Figure 54. Total commencing enrolments decreased from a maximum of 2,974 in 2012 to 2,663 in 2014, a substantial fall even before the arrival of the ‘half cohort’ year in 2015.

Figure 54: Annual Enrolments for the BSc, 2012-2015

2012 2013 2014 2015

Commencing Enrolments 2,974

2,758

2,663

2,065

Commencing EFTSL 2,477

2,321

2,188

1,644

Total Enrolments 3,060 5,455

7,405

7,511

Total EFTSL 2,548

4,638

6,221

5,999

Domestic (Commonwealth supported)

2,797

4,895

6,645

6,686

EFTSL 2,333

4,173

5,560

5,330

International (on shore) 263

560 760

825

EFTSL 215

466

661

668



There is enormous variation in the cohort size among the 31 majors, with Engineering Science having by far the greatest load (almost four-fold greater than the next highest). Figure 55 shows total load in both 2014 and 2015 for all majors except Engineering Science (excluded here because its high EFTSL value distorts the graph). This figure highlights the very high student load shared among the Biomedical disciplines, most notably Anatomy and Human Biology, the Biomedical Science double major, Physiology and Pharmacology. The Sports Science student load was similar to each of these Biomedical disciplines. The majors with the lowest enrolments were Science Communication (which can only be taken with another Science major), Aboriginal Health & Wellbeing, Quantitative Methods and Applied Computing (name changed to Data Science in 2015).

Because ‘Biomedical Science’ is the only double major offered in the BSc, the clear majority of students have the opportunity to take a second major either within or outside Science (refer to Appendix J for details). The majority of students do choose to take a second major; for example, among those commencing in 2013, 61% nominated a second major (UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance). Interestingly, while the clear majority of second majors were selected from within Science (>80% for most majors), choices did vary depending on their discipline-specific major. For example, for Conservation Biology majors, 71% of those taking a second major chose another Science discipline, with only 6% choosing majors from the BCom and 3% from the BA.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

An

ato

my

and

Hu

man

Bio

logy

Bio

med

ical

Sci

ence

Ph

ysio

logy

Spo

rt S

cien

ce

Ph

arm

aco

logy

Envi

ron

men

tal S

cien

ce

Pat

ho

logy

an

d L

abo

rato

ry M

ed

icin

e

Neu

rosc

ien

ce

Ch

emis

try

Co

mp

ute

r Sc

ien

ce

Zoo

logy

Geo

logy

Ph

ysic

s

Bio

chem

istr

y an

d M

ole

cula

r B

iolo

gy

Gen

etic

s

Mar

ine

Scie

nce

Co

nse

rvat

ion

Bio

logy

Exe

rcis

e a

nd

Hea

lth

Mic

rob

iolo

gy a

nd

Imm

un

olo

gy

Mat

hem

atic

s an

d S

tati

stic

s

Agr

icu

ltu

ral S

cien

ce

Po

pu

lati

on

He

alth

Nat

ura

l Res

ou

rce

Man

agem

ent

Bo

tan

y

Geo

grap

hy

Ap

plie

d C

om

pu

tin

g

Qu

anti

tati

ve M

eth

od

s

Ab

ori

gin

al H

ealt

h a

nd

Wel

lbei

ng

Scie

nce

Co

mm

un

icat

ion

EFTSL

Figure 55: 2014-2015 Full-Year Load in each Degree-Specific Major within the Bachelor of Science (without Engineering Science)


In contrast, 28% of the second majors taken by both Agricultural Science and Engineering Science students were from the BCom. The highest uptake by BSc students of second majors from the BA were for those majoring in Psychological Science (79%), Geography (50%) and Population Health (26%). This high value for Psychology students primarily reflects take up of the Psychology in Society major from the BA, a combination that is compulsory in the pathway to Honours and postgraduate Clinical Psychology.

In 2014, the Faculty of Science began a formal review of each of the 20 BSc and 2 BA single majors delivered by its 9 Schools. This involved collection of key data for each major (e.g. student load, background, retention etc), and these were also provided for majors delivered by the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health Science (FMDHS). This data set is accessible here and various parts of it are referred to throughout this report (referenced as “Faculty of Science Review of UG Majors, 2014”). It is important to note that this data set does not include information for the majors delivered by the Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics (ECM). Nevertheless, the data do cover 26 of the 31 majors and thus provide a reasonable overview of the BSc.

11.3 Structure of the Bachelor of Science

a) Core and complementary units: The majority of the 31 majors in the BSc follow the regular structure of 2+2+4 core units at Levels 1, 2 and 3 respectively (refer to Appendix K for details). In most cases, there is little choice available within core units, and all but 3 majors include at least one complementary unit. Although complementary units are compulsory for degree-specific majors, students do have a choice of complementary units in some majors (e.g. Neuroscience at Level 1 and Pathology & Laboratory Medicine at Level 2). In the case of Engineering Science, complementary units must also be included when it is taken as a second major (by special approval). Biomedical Science is the only double major currently offered in the BSc, but from 2016 Psychology will also be available as a double major in both the BSc and the BA.

b) Distinctiveness: While any two majors may share up to 50% of units, most are quite distinctive beyond Level 1. Overlap at Level 1 is consistent with the need to introduce fundamental material that underpins various disciplines, and has the advantage of enabling students to delay choosing their major until the start of Level 2. This is most evident for a cluster of majors in the Natural & Agricultural Sciences, all of which share the complementary units SCIE1103 Science, Society & Data Analysis and SCIE1104 Science, Society & Communication (Figure 56). Most of these majors also require one Level 1 Biology unit. Similarly, a number of Biomedical Science and related majors all require Level 1 units that cover introductory Biology, Chemistry and Statistics (see Figure 57).

c) Biomedical Science Double Major: Biomedical Science includes a range of stand-alone disciplines that have either a pre-clinical (e.g. Anatomy & Human Biology, Physiology and Biochemistry & Molecular Biology) or para-clinical (e.g. Microbiology & Immunology, Pathology & Laboratory Medicine and Pharmacology) focus. While these six disciplines are all offered as separate majors in the BSc, each can also be

http://files.science.uwa.edu.au/SCI/Review%20of%20UG%20Majors%20-%202014/Background%20Data%20-%20All%20Majors/


studied within the Biomedical Science double major. This was developed in response to expected student demand to study across all of these areas (in anticipation of progressing to postgraduate Medicine and related professions). Accordingly, the double major covers these six Biomedical disciplines at Levels 1 and 2, after which students choose a Level 3 specialisation. The latter comprises the four Level 3 units from one of the stand-alone majors. Regardless of the chosen specialisation, the double major is rounded out by completion of four additional units at Level 3 (specific units dependent on the chosen specialisation) to provide coverage of the remaining disciplines. As such, these additional Level 3 units are the only unique components of the Biomedical Science double major (i.e. the only units not shared with another major).

d) Engineering Science: To ensure coverage of the full range of sub-disciplines in the Engineering Science major, students must choose a specialisation at Level 3. Thus, following relatively limited choice of units at Levels 1 and 2, students choose one of seven specialisations: Chemical, Civil, Electrical and Electronic, Environmental, Mechanical, Mining or Software Engineering.

Figure 56: Distribution of shared Level 1 units among majors in the Natural and Agricultural Science disciplines

Major SCIE1103 SCIE1104 BIOL1130 BIOL1131 EART1105

Agricultural Science ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Botany ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Conservation Biology ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Environmental Science ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Geography ✔ ✔ ✔

Geology ✔ ✔ ✔

Marine Science ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Natural Resource Management

✔ ✔ ✔

Zoology

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Source: CAIDi


Figure 57: Distribution of shared Level 1 units among Biomedical Science and related majors

Major ANHB 1101

ANHB 1102

BIOL 1130

SCIE 1106

CHEM 1003*

CHEM 1002

CHEM 1004

STAT 1400

SCOM 1101

Anatomy & Human Biology

✔ ✔

Biochemistry & Molecular Biology

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Biomedical Science

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Genetics ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Microbiology & Immunology

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Neuroscience ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Pathology & Laboratory Medicine

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Pharmacology ✔ ✔ ✔

Physiology ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

*Or CHEM1101 if students have completed WACE Chemistry 3A/3B (or equivalent) Source: CAIDi

11.4 Developmental Progression of Discipline Content

Majors approved within the new courses structure should logically provide students with a developmental progression of discipline coverage, and by and large this has been achieved in the BSc. For majors with broad overlap, shared units are common at Level 1 (e.g. as shown in Figures 56 and 57) but thereafter each major features a discipline-specific focus with increasing depth. In some cases, streaming at Level 3 is used to ensure that the critical mass of discipline content is covered. This is most prevalent in the Engineering Science major, as well as in the unusual case of the Biomedical Science double major. But in other areas, there is a view that the appropriate critical mass of discipline knowledge cannot be reached due to the restraints of the rules governing structures of majors in the new courses framework.

Indeed, in the survey of major coordinators, more than half indicated that the new courses structure restrained the amount/ nature of the discipline content of their major compared to its previous form. In some cases, this was identified indirectly by reference to a loss of cohort identity (e.g. Agricultural Science), with the implication that cohort integrity from Level 1 can support greater consistency in discipline coverage. An important point of context here is that prior to 2012, some majors offered from the previous Faculty of Natural & Agricultural Sciences were taken as part of a 4-year program with integrated Honours. This format


provided substantially more opportunity for exposure of students to discipline content and a clear cohort identity. But concern about loss of discipline content extends beyond this set of majors. The following examples highlight the nature of these concerns:

Physics relies heavily on mathematical concepts, particularly given the research expertise that students encounter in this major. The limit of 8 core units in the major has severely hindered inclusion of sufficient Mathematics content, and this threatened accreditation of this major by the Australian Institute of Physics. Although the latter was achieved, the view from Physics is that its graduates have less expertise than those from other Go8 universities due to the new courses rules.

The Mathematics and Statistics major is also viewed by its coordinator to be well short of discipline content. While this is linked to the new courses model, it also appears to be due to the decision to develop only a single major encompassing Pure Mathematics, Applied Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics. Accordingly, graduates may not be sufficiently prepared for Honours and Cycle 2.

A similar concern about loss of Mathematics content was expressed in relation to the Engineering Science major. An added concern here is that content previously presented in 3 units is now compressed into 2 units, with less-able students not coping well (also identified as problematic in the Physics submission). There is a view that content related to some Engineering sub-disciplines is not covered adequately at Levels 1 and 2, and this has negative implications for preparation of students for postgraduate Engineering.

Loss of discipline content in Natural Resource Management was considered sufficiently significant in the recent Faculty of Science Review of Majors that this discipline is putting forward a number of structural changes to the major for introduction in 2017.

The Geology response also indicated a serious concern with the ‘one-size-fits-all’ definition for new courses majors. The loss of discipline content in Geology has left its graduates at a disadvantage relative to those from other institutions. Lack of science content coverage at Level 1 is singled out as a particular problem in this major (compared to the pre-2012 model of ‘Foundation Packages’ in the BSc). A similar concern about loss of introductory material (e.g. Chemistry and Physics) was raised in relation to the Environmental Science major.

Computer Science identified loss of discipline-specific content as problematic, and suggested an alternative course structure comprising a Major (14 units), Minor (8 units) and two Broadening units.

Loss of cohort identity was identified as problematic by several majors (Agricultural Science, Conservation Biology, Environmental Science and Population Health). Although not necessarily related to loss of discipline content, cohort identity is likely to provide uniformity and staff-student familiarity that can enhance content delivery.

A subset of major coordinators felt that the loss of discipline content associated with the new course structure has resulted in a loss of competitive edge for their


discipline. Computer Science states clearly that current graduates are not as strong or ‘job-ready’ as previous cohorts, to the extent that the accreditation of the major was threatened. Geology expressed similar concerns, drawing attention to its associated loss of competitiveness with University of Melbourne and Curtin University. The latter has an Applied Geology degree with almost 100% units in Geology. Mathematics and Statistics also feel their graduates are no longer competitive with those from other Go8 universities.

11.5 Characteristics of the BSc Student Cohort

11.5.1 ATAR Scores

The quality of the overall BSc student cohort is very high, with the median ATAR score of commencing School leavers being approximately 92. As expected, however, the ATAR score of commencing students varied substantially between majors, ranging from a maximum of > 50% of students in the top ATAR quartile for Physics, to < 10% for several majors including Geography, Geology, Natural Resource Management and Sports Science (see Figure 58 overleaf).

11.5.2 High School Background

There was also considerable variance among majors in terms of geographical origin of students (from Metropolitan versus Regional High Schools), with around 25% regional for Agricultural Science and Conservation Biology, and 20% for Botany, Marine Science, Zoology, Sports Science and Exercise & Health Science. For the remainder of majors around 10% of students were from regional areas (Data from FoS UG Majors Review, 2014).

11.5.3 International Students

International enrolments in the BSc have been 10-11% overall since 2012, but this varies markedly among the BSc majors. As shown in Appendix L, the highest percentage of international student enrolments over 2013 to 2015 was seen in Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Natural Resource Management, Engineering Science, Agricultural Science, Environmental Science, Biochemistry & Molecular Biology and Biomedical Science (all with at least one of these years with >15% international enrolments). Quantitative Methods also had a high proportion of international students but these were part of a very low total enrolment (not shown graphically in Appendix L). Three majors (Aboriginal Health & Wellbeing, Geography and Science Communication) had no international student enrolments over 2013-2015, and Data Science had none in its first year of operation (2015).


Figure 58: Distribution of Student Load (%EFTSL) by ATAR Entry Score (shown as quartiles) for each Major

Source: Data from Faculty of Science UG Majors Review, 2014


11.6 Student Performance in BSc Majors

Grade Distribution: As part of the Faculty of Science Review of Undergraduate Majors (2014), grade distributions were determined for all BSc majors other than those administered by the Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics (ECM). As shown in Figure 59, the distribution of grades varied substantially across majors; for example, in the Aboriginal Health & Wellbeing and Population Health majors, 73-74% of awarded grades were Distinction (D) or Higher Distinction (HD), whereas corresponding figures for Geology and Natural Resource Management majors were 32% and 41% respectively. This degree of variance among majors is cause for concern, and will be addressed directly by the new university-wide Assessment Policy.

While this grade variation among majors might be expected due to differences in the ability of the students who select certain majors, an interesting picture emerges if adjustments are made for student quality. As shown in Figure 60, when grade distributions are adjusted for student entry score (i.e. using ATAR as a proxy for student quality), a different pattern of variation is apparent. Specifically, this data suggests that an ‘average’ student is less likely to receive a Distinction or Higher Distinction in certain majors, most notably as Physics and Chemistry. The data indicates that the more able the cohort of students is, the more difficult it is for a given student to achieve a high grade. This suggests that we may teach and assess at a higher level when the capability of the students (as a cohort) is higher.


Figure 59: Unadjusted Grade Distribution in BSc Majors, 2012-2014*

Source: Faculty of Science Review of UG Majors, 2014 ; *excluding majors offered by ECM


Figure 60: Adjusted Grade Distribution in BSc Majors, 2012-2014*

Source: Faculty of Science Review of UG Majors, 2014


11.7 Student Retention / Mobility among BSc Majors

The extent to which students remain within a given major may provide some indication of their satisfaction with either the discipline content or its level of difficulty. Importantly, student mobility among majors will also be determined by the amount of overlap and thus ease of transition from one to another. Because students are not required to nominate a major until after Level 1, the loss or gain of students between Levels 2 and 3 provides a more reliable guide to student mobility. Figure 62 indicates that most majors showed a net loss, with only five either remaining stable or, in the case of Science Communication, gaining students. Losses of >25% were observed for five majors, the greatest being Biomedical Science (net loss of 66%).

This high net loss from the Biomedical Science double major is likely attributable to two distinct factors: firstly, some students may have found coverage of all six Biomedical disciplines at Level 2 too challenging, and secondly, these and other students may have decided that the Biomedical Science double major may not provide the most strategic pathway for entry to postgraduate medicine. In any event, most of the students leaving the Biomedical double major transferred to one of the related Biomedical disciplines (see Figure 61).

Figure 61: Destination Major for those Students moving from the Biomedical Science Double Major between Levels 2 and 3 (2012-2014)21

21 Abbreviations: PHYGY: Physiology; ANHBY: Anatomy & Human Biology; PHARY: Pharmacology; PLMED: Pathology & Laboratory Medicine; MCBIM: Microbiology & Immunology; BCHMB: Biochemistry & Molecular Biology).


Figure 62: Retention, Gain and Loss across BSc Majors between Levels 2 and 3, 2012-2014*

Source: Faculty of Science Review of UG Majors, 2014; *excluding those majors offered by ECM


11.8 Broadening Units

In order to ensure breadth as well as depth, each student is required to undertake four broadening units that must be taken outside the student’s degree. Science students therefore source these four units from the BA, BCom and BDes.

11.8.1 Broadening Unit Choices made by BSc Students

The distribution of broadening units taken by students completing the 26 majors delivered by the Faculty of Science and FMDHS (i.e. excluding ECM majors) is shown in Figure 64. Not surprisingly, a large proportion of broadening units for these BSc students are drawn from the BA, although a significant proportion also come from the BCom, most notably for Agricultural Science majors (66%). An example of the distribution of Broadening Units for one major (Sports Science) is shown in Figure 63, which shows the percentage of broadening units taken in the various faculties by students in this major. Note that Faculty of Science appears as one provider of broadening units in this example, which reflects units offered by Schools in this faculty into the BA (e.g. units from Human Geography & Planning). The overall distribution in this example highlights the breadth of choice available to students.

Figure 63: Broadening Unit Load for Sport Science Students in 2014

Source: Faculty of Science Review of UG Majors, 2014


Figure 64: Distribution of Broadening Units across 27 Science Majors in 2014

Source: Faculty of Science Review of UG Majors, 2014; Abbreviations: ECM: Engineering, Computing & Mathematics; MDHS: Medicine, Dentistry & Health Science; EDUC: Education; SCU: Science; IS: Indigenous Studies; ALVA: Architecture, Landscape & Visual Arts; BUS: Business.


11.8.2 Views of Staff and Students on Broadening Units

Despite the available breadth and the widely acknowledged benefits of broadening units, they emerged as a significant issue of concern for both staff (major coordinators) and students in their qualitative responses to the review surveys.

The most commonly identified theme within the BSc major coordinator responses (Major Coordinator survey conducted to inform this Review) related to broadening units (identified by two thirds of respondents). In general, coordinators recognised the value of broad knowledge development and acknowledged the benefits for some majors in attracting students from outside their discipline. Additional benefits were identified in terms of collaboration with other faculties and in exploring new ways of teaching large classes.

But a number of significant problems were also raised, most notably that the requirement for completion of broadening units forced exclusion of other units. This was seen by some coordinators as being detrimental to the learning profile. One particular example is the necessary limitation of units in mathematics within Engineering Science and Physics majors (also discussed in section 11.3 above in relation to ‘Loss of Discipline Content’). The view that there were simply too many broadening units was also expressed, along with the associated concern that students expect that these units will be ‘easy’. It was suggested that students tend to choose particular broadening units to minimise workload rather than for specific academic or general interest reasons. Finally, the restriction that broadening units must all be taken outside of the BSc was identified as a limitation given the very broad range of discipline areas within Science.

The most common theme among the student responses (Student Survey conducted to inform this Review) also related to broadening units, although interestingly these responses were both positive and negative. In response to the question ‘What do you like about UWA’s courses?’ (Q1), 22% of all students identified broadening units positively (Figure 65), and this proportion was even higher for BSc students (27%; Figure 66). But then in response to the question ‘What can be improved about UWA’s courses’ (Q2), almost 30% of Science students identified broadening units as problematic (ranked highest among response to this question; Figure 69). This negative response to broadening units by BSc students was around twofold higher than that for students from the other three degrees (15%; Figure 70).

So while many students clearly appreciate the value of broadening units, responses indicated two main areas of concern. One was that the number of broadening units impinged too much on the core degree content and that too much time was spent on extraneous units. The second was the limitations on the source of the broadening units. That is, some students felt they should be permitted to take broadening units from within Science (but in a discipline distant from their major). Others felt that taking units with content more closely related to their major discipline would enhance their degree.

Figures 65 – 70 highlight the differences in student responses among BSc and non-BSc students.


Figure 65: Student responses to survey Question 1 (students from all degrees)

Figure 66: Student responses to survey Question 1 (BSc students only)

Figure 67: Student responses to survey Question 1 (non-BSc degrees)

0%10%20%30%40%50%

% Comments (n=1396)

Comment Themes

Q1: What do you like about UWA's courses? (All degrees)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

% of comments (n=646)

Comment Themes

Q1: What do you like about UWA's courses? (BSc)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

% Comments (n=574)

Comment Themes

Q1: What do you like about UWA's courses? (non-BSc)


Figure 68: Student responses to survey Question 2 (students from all degrees)

Figure 69: Student responses to survey Question 2 (BSc students only)

Figure 70: Student responses to survey Question 2 (non-BSc degrees)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

% Comments (n=1490)

Comment Themes

Q2: What can be improved about UWA's courses? (All degrees)

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%

% of comments (n=692)

Comment Themes

Q.2 What can be improved at UWA's courses? (BSc)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

% Comments (n=606)

Comment Themes

Q2: What can be improved about UWA's courses (non-BSc)


11.8.3 Possible Changes to Broadening Unit Requirements

Major coordinators raised a number of suggestions for change to broadening unit requirements, the most common theme being the need to recognise the diversity of disciplines across the Bachelor of Science. In this context, it is relevant that more than half the undergraduate cohort are enrolled in the BSc, leaving Science students with less choice in broadening disciplines than students in the other three degrees. Thus, the wide diversity of disciplines across Science may require special consideration to enable students to extend knowledge beyond their specific discipline area. For example, a unit such as Global Health is well outside the discipline of say Chemical Engineering, but they co-exist within the BSc degree.

A second recurring theme among major coordinators was to enable the broadening units to complement the major content in order to reduce the impact on cumulative skill set. One coordinator suggested reducing the number of broadening units OR relaxing the rules on where the broadening units can come from. Another suggested replacing 2 broadening units at level 1 with science units to improve identity with the subject and development of necessary skills.

A further proposal was to include a third category containing a choice of units specific to the major and within the BSc degree. It was added that ‘Mathematics should be available as a Category B broadening unit for ALL UWA students’. In this context, it is noteworthy that students from any of the four degrees can choose languages other than English (LOTE) as broadening. There is a strong view among some staff, particularly in Science and Engineering disciplines, that Mathematics should be considered a ‘language’ and thus afforded the same status as LOTE in the definition of broadening units. Finally, an additional suggestion was to provide more communication to the students about the value of broadening units.

11.9 Research and Communication Skills


The explicit requirement of the new courses model to have research skill development embedded within majors is consistent with research being fundamental to the ‘doing’ of Science. Accordingly, the scientific method and research skill (practical) development have always been a prominent feature of Science teaching, and this remains so in the current structure. That said, the combination of declining overall resources and increasing enrolments (in some majors) has presented significant challenges.

Several major coordinators believe that the new courses model has reduced the opportunity for practical skill development. This extends in some cases to reduced interaction with industry and exposure to cutting-edge research in laboratory work. While the loss of discipline content (covered in section 11.3 above) would in itself be expected to reduce practical skill development, this situation may be exacerbated in some disciplines by increased enrolments and associated infrastructure limitations. This is particularly evident in the Biomedical Science disciplines where the introduction of postgraduate medicine and related professions has dramatically increased enrolments in some disciplines, most notably Anatomy & Human Biology (A&HB), Physiology and Pharmacology. This change has presented major logistical and infrastructure challenges, requiring major adaptations in how laboratory classes


are delivered. In the case of Pharmacology, the discipline took the opportunity to make innovative changes to its delivery of laboratory classes and this appears to have been quite successful based on student evaluations. In A&HB and Physiology, however, the enrolment increases have been more dramatic and adaptations remain ongoing. Physics identified the loss of Mathematics content (refer to section 11.4 Developmental progression of Discipline Content above) as being detrimental to the engagement of students with research being conducted within the School. The view from Geology is that the opportunity to provide field work has been significantly curtailed by the new courses model, with simply insufficient time available.


Explicit development of communication skills is also a key platform of the NC2012 model. This requirement is met differently among BSc majors, with 16 opting to embed communication skills across core and complementary units. The remaining 15 majors include a specific communication unit, most often at Level 1 (see Figure 71).

Figure 71: Delivery of Communication Skills within each of the 31 BSc Majors

Major Communication skills (unit or embedded) Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing PUBH2216 Communication and Project Planning in Health

Agricultural Science SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Anatomy and Human Biology Embedded

Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Embedded

Biomedical Science Embedded

Botany SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Chemistry Embedded

Computer Science SCOM1101 Introduction to Scientific Practices

Conservation Biology SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Data Science ENSC1001 Global Challenges in Engineering

Engineering Science Embedded

Environmental Science SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Exercise and Health Embedded

Genetics Embedded

Geography SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Geology SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Marine Science SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Mathematics and Statistics SCOM1101 Introduction to Scientific Practices

Microbiology and Immunology Embedded

Natural Resource Management SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

Neuroscience Embedded

Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Embedded

Pharmacology Embedded


Major Communication skills (unit or embedded)

Physiology Embedded

Population Health PUBH2216 Communication and Project Planning in Health

Psychological Science Embedded

Quantitative Methods STAT3402 Communication and Problem Solving with Statistics

Science Communication Embedded

Sport Science Embedded

Zoology SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication

In the survey of major coordinators, opinions were sought on how effectively communication skills were developed and delivered in each major. Responses varied somewhat, with about half believing this was being achieved well or satisfactorily. Although four coordinators recognised deficiencies, only one felt it was being conducted poorly.

11.10 Indigenous and Cultural Competence All first year undergraduate commencing students are required to complete the online unit Indigenous Studies Essentials, available through the Learning Management System.

One BSc major, Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing (AH&W), has a specific Indigenous focus, and a number of broadening units with Indigenous content are available to BSc students. Although the AH&W major has low enrolments, the broadening units have very strong numbers. Indeed, total enrolments by BSc students in these units have increased from 88 in 2012 to 696 in 2015.

Figure 72: Largest Unit Enrolments in 2015 by BSc Students in Broadening Units with an Indigenous Focus22

Unit 2015 enrolments

INDG1150 Aboriginal Encounters: Strangers in our Backyard 242

INDG1160 Boodjar Moort Katitjin: Introduction to Indigenous Heritage and Knowledge 233

INDG2700 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin 108

The survey of major coordinators asked a very broad question on their perception of the major’s contribution to the development of cultural competence. Most coordinators felt that cultural competence was either well or partially embedded. That said, the nature of some of the responses to this question suggested that it may not have been fully understood.

22



11.11 Service Learning Units

Enrolments in service learning modules have increased from 599 students in 2012 to 1087 in 2014, although half of the student load is attributable to a single unit (Plant & Animal Biology).

Figure 73: Enrolments in Service Learning Units, 2012-2015

Code Unit Name Enrolments

2012 2013 2014 2015

BIOL1131 Plant & Animal Biology 556 652 694 504

BIOL3360 Saving Endangered Species 10 88 138

EDUC1102 Learn Effectively: Imp Learn & Teach

43 152 200 139

INDG2700 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin

108

INDG3800 Indigenous Ways of Knowing 4 7

PUBH2211 Population Health Field Trip 18

PUBH3308 Population Health Practicum 3

SSEH3392 Professional Practice 101

SVLG1002 Service Learning Experience 2

TOTAL 599 814 1,087 919 Source: UWA’s Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

11.12 Student Feedback / Student Experience

11.12.1 SURF Scores for BSc Majors

The UWA student feedback survey system (SURF) provides a useful data set by which to assess student perceptions of teaching. As a means of comparing these student perceptions among the BSc majors, average SURF scores were derived for all Level 3 units in each major for 2014 (the only year for which all Level 3 units are currently available).

Figure 74: Mean SURF Scores for Level 3 Units in each BSc Major

Major Mean SD n

Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing 3.7 0.0 4 Agricultural Science 3.6 0.3 4 Anatomy and Human Biology 3.1 0.2 6 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

3.3 0.3 4

Biomedical Science 3.3 0.2 6 Botany 3.3 0.4 4 Chemistry 3.0 0.6 6 Computer Science 3.1 0.1 4 Conservation Biology 3.3 0.4 4


Major Mean SD n

Data Science 2.7 0.3 4 Engineering Science 3.0 0.5 19 Environmental Science 2.7 0.2 5 Exercise and Health 3.3 0.5 4 Genetics 3.2 0.4 5 Geography 3.2 0.3 4 Geology 2.8 0.3 4 Marine Science 2.8 0.0 4 Mathematics and Statistics 3.1 0.2 6 Microbiology and Immunology 3.4 0.2 4 Natural Resource Management 3.2 0.4 4 Neuroscience 3.6 0.1 4 Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

3.0 0.7 4

Pharmacology 3.5 0.1 4 Physics 3.3 0.4 4 Physiology 2.8 0.7 4 Population Health 3.4 0.5 4 Psychological Science 3.2 0.3 6 Quantitative Methods 3.1 0.3 4 Science Communication 3.4 0.4 5 Sport Science 3.3 0.2 4 Zoology 3.2 0.3 4

Source: https://www.surf.uwa.edu.au

11.12.2 Additional Formal and Informal Student Feedback

The Faculty of Science established the position of Senior Adviser (Student Experience) in mid-2014. Dr Megan Ellyard has served in this role since its inception and received formal feedback through a series of student forums (part of the Faculty of Science UG Majors Review, 2014). Informal feedback has also been received from students on an ongoing basis (e.g. from Peer-Assisted Learning participants). The following summary highlights the key issues identified by students about their experience in the BSc majors.

Desire for digital-first approach: Students frequently express a strong desire for content to be delivered in a ‘digital-first’ manner. Students are very aware that a generational gap exists between the teacher and the learner. During formal feedback discussion forums, students explained that they find it “exhausting” and “frustrating” when they must learn in a format that simply doesn’t come naturally to them, and feel shunned when they do things ‘their way’ like watching lectures online. One student explained: “In this situation, someone is going to be uncomfortable. Whose responsibility is it to be uncomfortable? [The teacher or the learner?]”


Value of current hands-on experiences, and a desire for workplace learning: A ‘digital-first’ approach is frequently misinterpreted by staff to mean “digital-only”. Indeed, students passionately express the value of all hands-on experiences they currently receive, including laboratory work, fieldwork and practicums. Students desire more of these experiences, and particularly in an authentic manner, for example by enhanced industry engagement and work placement opportunities. A current lack of industry engagement contributes to an overall perception that UWA is not interested in students’ career direction following their degree; that UWA is only interested in encouraging students to continue their studies at postgraduate level for selfish reasons. An increased number and breadth of service learning units in the sciences could enhance the student experience in this regard.

Academic interaction: Undergraduate students recognise that they are fortunate to have access to high-profile academic staff at UWA. Students regularly commend academic staff for their passion and enthusiasm. For this reason, students frequently express a desire for increased interaction with academic staff during their undergraduate degree. They feel this is not achieved for majors that attract high student numbers.

Lack of community: There is a feeling of ‘lack of belonging’ due to the broad nature of Level 1 units under the new courses structure, making it difficult for students to establish peer groups which they will maintain throughout their degree.

Broadening units: Students frequently express a desire for broadening units within the sciences, claiming intra-science broadening units would broaden their experience while also being applicable to their intended career. More guidance is required for students when choosing broadening units. Students frequently suggest that the faculty provide a list of ‘recommended broadening units’ for each major that would complement a career in their chosen field. Students who choose broadening units for enjoyment or relevance have a positive experience. However, an equal proportion of students choose broadening units because they suspect they will be easy, and typically have a negative experience. This is common for students aiming for a high WAM in hopes to enter a professional postgraduate course.

Frustration regarding on-campus resources: There is a common difficulty in finding a computer or workspace, especially during peak times of the semester, and especially in the Science Library. This is thought to significantly deter students from coming on to campus.

11.13 Governance and Curriculum Management

The BSc majors are overseen by the University Curriculum Committee which receives curriculum proposals from the Faculty of Science (currently 20 single majors), FMDHS (5 majors) and FECM (5 majors). In addition, the Biomedical Science double major is overseen jointly by Science and FMDHS, and is coordinated at a local level by an informal committee co-chaired by one staff member from each faculty.

Within the Faculty of Science, all curriculum issues were until recently dealt with by the Science Teaching & Learning (T&L) Committee. In mid-2015 the Faculty of Science moved


this responsibility to the newly-formed Science Curriculum Committee. The role of this committee is to provide advice to the Science Executive Committee on all matters relating to curriculum development, leaving the T&L Committee to focus on pedagogy and the student experience. The composition of the Science Curriculum and T&L committees is clearly defined and each includes at least two elected representatives of both undergraduate and postgraduate students.

Within ECM, the T&L Committee is an advisory committee to the Faculty Board. Its role is also to make recommendations to the Faculty Board on all educational issues. Membership is clearly defined and includes an undergraduate student from each of i) Engineering Science and ii) Computer Science or Mathematics and Statistics (in addition to one postgraduate student representative).

A similar governance structure exists in FMDHS, where the Faculty T&L Committee considers all aspects of curriculum development and makes recommendations to the Faculty Board for final approval.


12 Indigenous Education


12.1.1 Indigenous Student Issues

There is a need to reconsider how to best utilise the Assured pathway and ensure stronger transition to professional doctorates. The key area of concern Is Law /Juris Doctor and a new strategic approach to Increasing Indigenous enrolments in Law will need to be developed by the School of Indigenous Studies (SIS) and the Law Faculty with support from UWA.

With promising Indigenous enrolments in the Engineering Science major, UWA needs to capitalise on this with appropriate support and enrichment to ensure transition of students to the Master of Professional Engineering (MPE).

At undergraduate level, the clear priority for UWA and SIS are increasing Indigenous students in the Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Design.

At postgraduate level the priority is increasing the number of Indigenous HDR students.

12.1.2 Indigenous Curriculum Issues

The Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE) online unit provides opportunities for students to take additional Indigenous units and or engage in Indigenous perspectives in their other studies. Further study needs to be undertaken to fully appreciate these relationships between units, and whether in fact ISE does provide pathways for all commencing students to undertake further Indigenous content units.

Not all short-term study abroad International students take ISE, and they can subsequently take Indigenous units without that foundational ISE study. It could be considered as to whether ISE should be made compulsory for all short-term study abroad International students.

There is a growing need to ensure that we complement and build on ISE in undergraduate courses, with comparable ISE programs that are course and level specific for Cycle 2 and 3.

SIS is also keen to develop a Staff version of ISE for Academic staff to assist in the development of Indigenous curriculum and units and enhance academic staff cultural competency.

With the rise of in-service learning units, a number of which may engage with Indigenous communities, the issue of specific cultural competency training needs (building on ISE) could be considered further.

The Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage (IKHH) Major plays a significant role across campus in the provision of Indigenous cultural competency and students are encouraged to think outside traditional paradigms about Indigenous culture, knowledge and their values and belief systems.

The Major also provides students with a Cycle 2 degree pathway opportunity to undertake a Masters of Heritage Studies degree that is also trans-disciplinary with Indigenous studies as a core teaching and research field.


There is a need to continue to develop more Indigenous units across all course to provide greater choice, flexibility and relevant for students. There is a particular need to develop Indigenous units for Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Design students.

‘Flexibility of choice’ was a foundational component in the development of New Courses. However, how this has played out in the implementation of New Courses requires investigation as there is the perception that the pre-requisites required limit student choice. The sharing of units is limited across the Majors and this places considerable demands on the teaching resources and expertise of SIS to deliver the IKHH major, for example.

‘On-Country’ and community-engaged learning plays a Major role in Indigenous knowledge transfer. These teaching and learning methods are expensive and additional teaching resources for innovative training and program design and delivery will need to respond to growing student interests in this area.

12.2 Background

UWA has seen considerable growth in its Indigenous programs since 2012, with major teaching and research initiatives and stronger engagement with Indigenous education by all areas of the university.

The UWA Indigenous Education Statement outlines the University’s key objectives, strategies, and achievements in Indigenous education, with particular emphasis on the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy’s (AEP) goals relating to higher education. UWA takes a whole-of-University approach to ensure Indigenous education is seen as a core activity. Within this approach, the School of Indigenous Studies (SIS) has overall responsibility for Indigenous higher education at UWA and is the primary point of contact for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. The School works in partnerships with Faculties and central services to achieve UWA’s objectives and priorities and with the Centre for Aboriginal Medical and Dental Health (CAMDH), who have responsibility for Indigenous students, curriculum and research in the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences.

SIS provides leadership of Indigenous higher education and Indigenous matters at UWA, which includes the development of programs that ensure Indigenous students have access to, and graduate from the full range of courses and research training opportunities available at the University; and that all students at UWA develop awareness and understanding of Indigenous history, culture and identity.

In the context of this Review, it is now timely to reflect on Indigenous students and Indigenous curriculum initiatives implemented as part of the new courses framework, and ask questions such as: Do new courses work for Indigenous students and have the Indigenous curriculum initiatives been successful?


12.3 Indigenous Initiatives in the New Courses Framework

The new courses framework was informed by the work of the Indigenous Student Support Working Party (ISSWP), which was established in 2010 with the key purpose of assessing and mitigating any adverse impacts the new course structure might have on Indigenous student access, enrolments and success. Specifically the ISSWP was asked to:

Investigate how Indigenous students could best be supported, particularly if their entry to professional courses was postponed until the postgraduate stage; and

Investigate opportunities for articulation from Indigenous programs elsewhere.

The ISSWP also undertook the task of considering how Indigenous curriculum could be embedded within the new courses to enable all UWA students to develop Indigenous cultural literacy and cultural competency. The development of Indigenous curriculum was also seen as promoting a culturally affirming environment for Indigenous students.

12.4 Indigenous Students

The ISSWP developed a number of strategies and recommendations, including appropriate pathways, programs and scholarships to ensure current and continuing Indigenous students were supported through the transition to the new courses and that UWA continued to maintain good access, retention and success for new students commencing in 2012. Some of these initiatives have been more successful than others.

Figure 75: UWA Indigenous Student Enrolments, 2009 – 2015 Year Higher Degree Research Postgraduate Coursework Undergraduate Total 2009 17 14 151 182 2010 14 15 171 200 2011 16 18 185 219 2012 12 14 189 215 2013 11 11 201 223 2014 14 22 216 252 2015 9 36 193 238 Source: UWA EIS; Table fy_enrol_2015

Overall, UWA has maintained its total Indigenous student enrolments, with 252 Indigenous students enrolled in 2014. While the number of students decreased in 2015 to 238 Indigenous students, this can largely be explained by the higher number of Indigenous students completing courses in 2014 as well as the half-year cohort in WA in 2015.

A record total of 38 Indigenous students completed Bachelor or postgraduate degrees in 2014 in law, engineering, medicine, science, commerce, arts, and education, which constitutes an increase of 80% compared to the previous year. This was an unexpected bonus of new courses, together with the enrolment of all new students in 3-year undergraduate programs. Prior to 2012, UWA had a high proportion of Indigenous students enrolled in professional degrees such as Law, and Medicine with much longer completion times (4-6 years minimum).

Since 2012, UWA has continued to maintain positive access, retention and success rates.


Figure 76: UWA Indigenous Students Equity Indicators, 2011-2015 Equity Indicator 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Access rate 1.60% 1.40% 1.55% 1.53% 1.78%

Participation rate 1.15% 1.05% 1.08% 1.16% 1.16%

Retention ratio 0.773 0.705 0.819 0.845 --

Success ratio 0.801 0.843 0.837 0.873 -- Source: UWA Executive Information System (‘DEEWR Student Data Collections as at August 24, 2015’)

12.4.1 Programs, Initiatives and Transition

With professional courses moving to Cycle 2 postgraduate degrees in the new courses 3+2 structure, the School of Indigenous Studies considered this was potentially the major area of negative impact for Indigenous students, and a key driver in the establishment of the ISSWP. Prior to 2012, a key priority of UWA’s Indigenous education programs was Indigenous students’ access to and graduation from elite professional degrees areas of Law, Medicine and Engineering. Through the success of its specialised preparatory, entry and support programs, UWA was nationally recognised as a leading university in Indigenous law and medical graduates23.

The ISSWP recommended a series of initiatives to continue to attract high performing Indigenous students to new courses’ undergraduate degrees and to provide transition pathways into high demand postgraduate professional areas such as Law and Medicine.

(a) Assured Entry Pathways

UWA provides Indigenous students with Assured Entry Pathway (AEP) places to postgraduate professional degrees. This has worked reasonably well for Medicine, with a number of Indigenous students now completing this and entering the MD in 2015. However, only a limited number of Indigenous students have taken up the available AEP places for the Juris Doctor. There is a need to analyse the AEP places and consider how to better use them.

(b) Advanced Diplomas

UWA developed two Advanced Diploma programs intended for mature Indigenous students with relevant education background and substantial work experience to enable them to qualify for entry to the Juris Doctor and the Doctor of Medicine, without completion of a full bachelor degree qualification. The courses were designed to accelerate the extended study commitment required for Law (3+3) and Medicine (3+4). Neither course has attracted

23 In 2009, SIS and the Faculty of Law won the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) Teaching Excellence Awards: Neville Bonner Award for Indigenous Education for the Aboriginal Pre-Law and Law Student Support Programs at UWA; The Centre for Aboriginal Medical and Dental Health (CAMDH) was awarded the 2009 LIMElight award for leading innovation in curriculum development and implementation of a comprehensive Indigenous health curriculum across the University's medical course; and the Medical Journal of Australia named the UWA Medical School as one of the Top 3 Australian Universities for Indigenous medical education


reasonable enrolments and cannot be considered successful in achieving the objectives they were designed for.

The Advanced Diploma in Indigenous Legal Studies (ADILS), developed by SIS and the Faculty of Law and offered since 2013, has few enrolments and hence has not provided the anticipated pipeline of Indigenous students into the JD. However, a partnership agreement has recently been formalized (September 2015) between the School and the Central Institute of Technology, which aims to establish an effective transition pathway from vocational education to University degree courses, particularly in Law. The ADILS is relatively low cost to deliver as it is based on use of existing units in the Bachelor of Arts. The effectiveness of this transition pathway will be assessed over the next two years.

The Centre for Aboriginal Medical and Dental Health developed the Advanced Diploma in Medical and Aboriginal Health Sciences (ADMAHS). Like ADILS, Indigenous student enrolments are extremely low, and this is a higher cost course to teach than ADILS as it does not use existing units that have a broader enrolment base.

(c) Transition to Cycle 2 Professional Postgraduate degrees

The new courses had differing impacts in the identified priority areas of Law, Medicine and Engineering. Indigenous Student enrolments in the Doctor of Medicine - professional doctorate are steady and increasing, with intakes of six Indigenous students in 2014, and nine Indigenous students in 2015. Students come from Assured Entry Pathways, as other new courses’ graduates and as previous UWA graduates.

Indigenous enrolments in the Master of Professional Engineering (MPE), while relatively low are expected to increase, with 15 Indigenous students enrolled in the Engineering Science major in the Bachelor of Science in 2015. Hopefully, most of these students will transition to the MPE.

Indigenous enrolments in the Juris Doctor are the most concerning, with only 3 Indigenous student enrolled in the JD in 2015. In analysis of this, a key issue is competition provided by LLB programs at other universities, with ability to enrol in Law at undergraduate level and complete in a shorter time frame. As an example, an Indigenous student who recently completed the Aboriginal Orientation Course at UWA (one year enabling program) subsequently enrolled in law at Curtin, in preference over the UWA model and extended study period.

(d) Study Abroad Opportunities

With the introduction of new courses, greater emphasis was placed on providing opportunities to students to study abroad and engage with other cultural groups. Indigenous students’ participation in long-term student international exchange has been steady since about 2009 with 3– 4 students studying at UWA partner universities around the world each year.

A key development since 2012 has been the development by SIS and the International Centre of short-term mobility programs for groups of Indigenous students, with more than 30 Indigenous students undertaking these programs in 2014-2015.


In 2014, SIS was successful in winning two Australian Government’s Study Overseas Short-term Mobility Program grants. The Indigenous Knowledge Partnership projects enabled 10 Indigenous students to undertake a study tour and collaborative workshop with the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian in Washington DC, USA; and 12 Indigenous students to undertake a study program with Indigenous communities in Chile hosted by the University of Valparaiso.

SIS has also been successful with 2015 and 2016 Federal Government Short term mobility funding in the New Colombo Plan, involving Indigenous studies in Bali, Indonesia where UWA Indigenous students study community-based teaching programs in a range of Balinese agrarian and urban communities. There is a particular focus on attaining global Indigenous competency skills, as well as the study of sustainable Indigenous cultural management practices.

Under The Matariki Network, SIS will participate in an Indigenous study abroad program in 2016, where 5 UWA Indigenous students and 2 SIS staff will undertake collaborative Indigenous studies at the University of Otago in New Zealand. Future annual programs will be held at UWA (2016), Dartmouth College (2017) and Queens University in 2018.

12.5 Indigenous Curriculum

When UWA moved to new courses 2012, the development of Indigenous cultural competency among its students and graduates was integral to the planning and implementation of the new course structure. While UWA had implemented mandatory Indigenous curriculum in key professional courses, such as Medicine and Education, it offered relatively few Indigenous studies units more broadly across its courses and did not offer any Indigenous Studies majors.

The ISSWP considered that new courses 2012 offered significant opportunities for the University to expand its Indigenous curriculum to meet the national goals of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy and UWA’s key objective to ensure that all students develop an awareness and understanding of Indigenous history, culture and identity. This objective is reflected in UWA’s Educational Principles for student learning, which includes the commitment ‘to respect Indigenous Knowledge, values and culture’.

The ISSWP in its final report made a number of recommendations for how this might be achieved, including a mandatory University-wide unit support for Category A broadening units and the development of two new Indigenous majors in the Bachelor of Arts and the Bachelor of Science by SIS and CAMDH.

Subsequently, relevant recommendations went to Academic Council (October 2010), which resolved:

“ to approve the recommendations from the Board of Coursework Studies that the Indigenous Student Support Working Party report be implemented in stages including the following elements:

(i) From 2012, all incoming new students be required to complete within the first academic year following entry an introductory online module, a modified version of


the proposed Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE), the module to be a not-for-credit course requirement of all undergraduate degree courses.

(ii) The School of Indigenous Studies work with all faculties, through the IBOS, to develop Indigenous specific and Indigenous embedded units for offering in all undergraduate courses.

(iii) UWA establish, in consultation with the School of Indigenous Studies, a system of induction and training to assist staff in teaching Indigenous students, developing Indigenous-focused curriculum materials or researching Indigenous communities.

(iv) As a general target, the University aim by 2016 to ensure that at least 50% of students have undertaken Indigenous specific or Indigenous embedded units in their undergraduate courses and that strategies for achieving this target be developed and progress towards it reported annually to Academic Council.

(v) An Indigenous specific unit or course be defined as one that has Indigenous content and perspectives as its primary focus: an Indigenous embedded unit or course be defined as one in which Indigenous content and perspectives are demonstrably embedded within the content of a unit or course that addresses a broader field of study, such content to account for a minimum of approximately 20% of the unit content, and to include an assessable component.

(vi) Notwithstanding the University’s ambitious targets, completion of Indigenous specific and/or Indigenous embedded units not be a compulsory requirement for degree completion at this time.” (Ref F27866; Resolved – 117)”

12.5.1 Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE)

Following Academic Council Recommendation (i) above, Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE) was introduced in 2012 as an on-line, not for credit unit that was mandatory for all new undergraduate students at UWA. ISE was developed by SIS which now delivers and maintains the unit. ISE was designed to complement UWA’s two other mandatory online units that all new students must complete – the Academic Conduct Essentials (ACE) and Communication and Research Skills (CARS). The School considered this mode of delivery as an effective and sustainable means of ensuring that all new undergraduate students have a basic foundation to assist them in building cultural literacy and cultural competency.

In 2012, 5,386 first year undergraduate students completed ISE (INDIG1000), including students at UWA’s international campuses such as Hong Kong and Singapore. A further 4,951 undergraduate students completed the module in 2013, and 4,589 students in 2014.

From its inception, SIS has received additional requests for access to ISE. This includes a request in 2013 for 957 study abroad students to have access to the module, as well as 326 student enrolled in the Master of Education course and 34 students enrolled in the Master of Pharmacy. In 2014, an additional 1,107 students requested extraordinary access to ISE.


The student feedback on the ISE module is positive, with 88% of respondents in 2014 agreeing that ISE explains the basic principles and protocols of working with Indigenous peoples and communities, and 93% of respondents agreeing that ISE provides a helpful introduction to Noongar peoples (Source: ISE LMS embedded Evaluation Data).

ISE was a unique development in the sector in the delivery of a minimum base of Indigenous cultural competency to all new undergraduate students. The School has provided access to ISE for a number of universities interested in developing similar courses, including La Trobe University, University of South Australia and University of the Sunshine Coast. La Trobe University subsequently developed and launched its own compulsory online unit, Wominjeka La Trobe in February 2015.

12.5.2 Majors in Indigenous Studies and Broadening Units

New courses enabled the development of UWA’s first ever Indigenous studies majors: the SIS major in Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage (IKHH) in the Bachelor of Arts; and the major in Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing (AHW) in the Bachelor of Science, taught by CAMDH.

(a) Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage (IKHH)

The major developed by SIS consists of eight Indigenous specific units following a 2+3+3 developmental structure, acknowledging the fact that Indigenous knowledge is an interdisciplinary field and a 2+3+3 model allows students to undertake an extra unit at second year, increasing their breadth of knowledge of the field. Third year then becomes more specialized with three units involving substantial research components.

The IKHH major program underwent its first review in late 2013 with improvements made to ‘on-country’ unit delivery, intensive teaching delivery in levels 2 to 3, the inclusion of built environment and design studies units, as well as the increase in sharing of units and teaching expertise across campus with other school and faculties.

The most significant change involved the reclassification of all Indigenous major units as Broadening Category A and B units, which were made available to all UWA undergraduate students in 2014. This had a dramatic impact on student enrolments and has substantially increased the number of students from all degrees enrolling in an indigenous studies unit, a key UWA objective in increasing cultural competency.

Figure 77: Total Unit Enrolments in Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage Major, 2012-2105

Units Student enrolments

2012 2013 2014 2015

Level 1 120 196 709 991

Level 2 24 63 97 241

Level 3 N/A 13 49 33

Total 144 272 855 1,265 Source: UWA EIS


The unit enrolments indicate that there is positive student interest in Indigenous units. Despite the substantial increase in enrolments, teaching quality has been maintained and SIS has some of the highest SURF scores across the UWA campus, especially regarding question 6 – overall this unit was a good educational experience.

(b) Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing (AHW)

The Centre for Aboriginal Medical and Dental Health offers the AHW major within the Bachelor of Science. The AHW major uses four units from the IKHH major within its program structure, including the two Level 1 IKHH units.

An area that has been identified as a teaching issue for SIS is the new courses’ requirement that at least half of the units in a major should be unique to that major. In the development of new courses, the IKHH major shared four of its units with the Major in Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing. This restricts SIS from ‘sharing’ other Indigenous content units within the structure of its major.

12.5.3 Masters of Heritage Studies Program

To complement UWA’s Indigenous Knowledge, History and Heritage undergraduate major program, and help structure an option for a 3+2 Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 degree arrangement in Indigenous studies, 2015 saw the successful commencement of the first postgraduate degree program of its kind in Australia. This unique program, developed with the UWA Faculties of Arts; Law; and Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts offers specialization in Indigenous and International Heritage Studies with the culmination of a Graduate Certificate, Graduate Diploma and Master Degree over the two-year study program. This academic program has contributed to a further 14 Indigenous specific and embedded units offered.

12.5.4 Student Access to and Engagement in Indigenous Units

New Courses and the inclusion of Indigenous content units across the five undergraduate degrees has succeeded to varying degrees in that there is greater access to Indigenous content units and increasing numbers of students are enrolling in Indigenous units. This is largely through broadening units in the IKHH major. In 2015, for example, student enrolments in units within the major were 575 for the Bachelor of Science; 396 for the Bachelor of Arts; 153 for the Bachelor of Commerce; and 31 for the Bachelor of Design.

As of 2015, there are 22 undergraduate units and 17 postgraduate units that include Indigenous content (see Table below). However, it should be noted that not all units included in this list have been fully analysed to ensure they meet the guidelines specified by Academic Council (Resolution 117 (v) – primary content vs embedded). Note also that the list does not include the significant Indigenous health curriculum developed by the Centre for Aboriginal Medical and Dental Health and integrated into the MD and other health postgraduate courses.


Figure 78: 2015 Units with Indigenous Content Unit Code Unit Name Faculty Undergraduate Units INDG1150 Aboriginal Encounters: Strangers in our Backyard School of Indigenous Studies INDG1160 Boodjar Moort Katitjin: Introduction to Indigenous

Heritage & Knowledge School of Indigenous Studies

INDG2300 Indigenous Knowledge: Mind, Body and Spirit School of Indigenous Studies INDG2500 Looking North: The Wild West School of Indigenous Studies INDG2600 Indigenous Representation School of Indigenous Studies INDG2700 Knowing Country: The Dreaming and Darwin School of Indigenous Studies INDG3300 Indigenous Research School of Indigenous Studies INDG3400 Indigenous People and Global Issues School of Indigenous Studies INDG3800 Indigenous Ways of Knowing School of Indigenous Studies HIST3014 Intimate Strangers: Journeys in Indigenous and Non-

Indigenous Australian History Arts & SIS

HIST1002 An Age of Violence: the Making of the Modern World, 1789–2010

Arts

HIST2015 Australian Public History: the Uses of the Past Arts ANTH2902 Aboriginal Art Arts ANTH3602 The Social Worlds of the Asia Pacific Arts VISA2051 Curatorial Practices Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts & SIS AHEA1101 Aboriginal Health Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences AHEA2201 Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences AHEA2202 Aboriginal Health Context and Application Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences AHEA3200 Aboriginal Health Community Organisation Project Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences AHEA3300 Aboriginal Health Research Project Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences AHEA3301 Aboriginal Social and Emotional Wellbeing Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences LAWS2225 Indigenous People and the Law Law SCIE1103 Science, Society and Communication Science ENSC2601 A Critical Theory of Technological Development Science Source: CAIDi

12.5.5 Targets for Student Engagement with Indigenous Content Units

With reference to the targets set by the Academic Council Recommendation 117 (iv) of ensuring that by 2016 at least 50% of students has undertaken Indigenous specific or Indigenous embedded units in their undergraduate courses, the following statistical tables outline the number and growth of undergraduate new courses students taking Indigenous content units over the 2012-15 period.

Figure 79: Student Uptake of Indigenous Content Units at UWA, 2012-15

Year Number Students % Total Students Total Students 2012 611 10.99% 5,562 2013 809 8.13% 9,954 2014 1,264 9.19% 13,750 2015 1,502 10.31% 14,569

Source: Custom analysis of EIS student load tables, UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

Figure 80: Graduate Uptake of Indigenous Content Units at UWA, 2014

Year Number Graduates % Total Graduates Total Graduates 2014 320 15.8% 2024 2015 1,502 10.31% 14,569

Source: Custom analysis of EIS student load tables, UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance


While the total number of students studying Indigenous units falls well short of the Academic Council’s 2016 target of 50%, there has been significant growth in enrolments, particularly in broadening units offered by SIS which continue to increase exponentially. This indicates strong and growing student interest, but clearly there are still not many Indigenous units available and pre-requisite requirements for level 2 and 3 units and other course restrictions may be further barriers.

Worth noting is that the Indigenous units as well as the two Indigenous majors are in the Bachelor of Arts and the Bachelor of Science. There are no course-specific Indigenous undergraduate units in the Bachelor of Commerce and the Bachelor of Design, where students appear to have lower overall enrolments in Indigenous units.


13 Conclusion

In concluding this comprehensive self-assessment, within the context of the new courses framework, the structure and performance of the four three-year undergraduate Bachelor degrees offered at UWA identified the following major themes:

Theme 1: Internationally Recognised and Valued Course Structure

Theme 2: Clarity of Courses and Length of Pathways

Theme 3: Flexibility

Theme 4: Broadening

Theme 5: Balancing High and Low Enrolment Majors and Efficiencies

Theme 6: Developmental Progression

Theme 7: Communication and Research Skills

Theme 8: Degree-Specific Strengths and Weaknesses

Theme 9: Peripheral Features of New Courses

Theme 10: Administrative Efficiency and Effectiveness

These themes are explored throughout the report and summarized within the executive summary, indicating strengths and possible areas for development.

As part of its commitment to a high quality student learning experience, the University is committed to proactively addressing the issues identified in this report and the consequent outcomes from the Review Panel, scheduled to meet from 18-20 November 2015.

Proposed Review of Courses TRIM FILE REFERENCE: F71207

DOCUMENT STATUS

Draft Ready for Review Final

DOCUMENT MODIFICATION HISTORY

Version Number

Primary Author(s) (name and position)

Description of Version

Date Completed

Provided To

0.1 Sue Smurthwaite, Director, Academic Policy Services

Initial proposal 19th February 2015

Grady Venville, Dean of Coursework Studies, Kabilan Krishnasamy, Academic Secretary, Jan Cardy, Manager, Curriculum Management


Amended proposals

26th February – 9th March 2015

Grady Venville, Dean of Coursework Studies, Kabilan Krishnasamy, Academic Secretary, Jan Cardy, Manager, Curriculum Management


Amended proposal

12th March 2015 Grady Venville, Dean of Coursework Studies, Kabilan Krishnasamy, Academic Secretary, Jan Cardy, Manager, Curriculum Management, Jon Stubbs, Director, Student Services


Final proposal 17th March 2015 Grady Venville, Dean of Coursework Studies, Alec Cameron, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education).


Proposal 27 March 2015 Paul Johnson, Vice-Chancellor, Dawn Freshwater, Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Cara MacNish, Chair of the Academic Board

DOCUMENT APPROVAL AND DISSEMINATION

Approved By Title Date

Professor Alec Cameron Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education) 18th March 2015

For Information and Noting Date

Education Committee clarification added at footnote 1 25th May 2015

Academic Council 3rd June 2015

Curriculum Committee 10 June 2015

Associate Deans Network 19th June 2015

1

A1A1

Background In 2012, the University of Western Australia implemented a new course structure for all undergraduate and postgraduate courses (NC2012). In 2014 the majority of the first cohort of students to experience the new courses completed their Cycle 1 degree and it is timely to conduct a comprehensive review of the undergraduate component. Purpose The University is committed to the systematic review and evaluation of its activities and a review framework for courses is an integral part of its strategic planning and quality assurance.

The purpose of the review is to evaluate the success of NC2012 and provide feedback to the University Executive, Academic Board and ultimately the Senate, and to inform future policy and practice with regard to the University’s curriculum framework. Context With the implementation of its new courses in 2012, the University held in abeyance its cyclical review of courses (occurring every seven years), in anticipation of graduating the first cohort of Cycle 1 students in 2014. Review of courses by way of professional accreditation has however continued as normal practice.

It is proposed that, commencing in 2015, the University conducts a comprehensive review of its new courses over a three year period from 2015-2017 with a view to reintroducing a cyclical review framework. The Audit Team will consider and formulate appropriate policy, procedures and timelines for future reviews, for example, undergraduate (Cycle 1) courses might be reviewed on a five to seven year cycle, whereas postgraduate coursework courses (Cycle 2) might be reviewed annually / biennially by faculties.

It is further suggested that the University review both transition plans for pre-2012 students and courses being taught out to ensure appropriate educational opportunities for all UWA students. Review Framework

2015 2016 2017 Cycle 1 Courses (AQF Level 7): • Bachelor of Arts • Bachelor of Science • Bachelor of Design • Bachelor of Commerce

Cycle 1 Courses (AQF Levels 5 - 8): • Bachelor of Philosophy (AQF 8) • End-on Honours (AQF 8) • Graduate entry diplomas (AQF 5) • Advanced diplomas (AQF 6) • Undergraduate transition plans

and courses being taught out.1

Cycle 2 Courses (AQF Level 8 - 9) • Postgraduate coursework

courses (approx. 200), including professional practice doctorates (eg MD, JD)

• Transition to postgraduate courses (including assured entry pathways)

2022 Annually/Biennially

Review Cycle 1 Courses Review Cycle 2 Coursework Courses Aim Determine the degree to which the original objectives of UWA’s new courses have been achieved or subsequently varied, (within the context of Education for Tomorrow’s World: Courses of Action (September 2008)), and in the light of changes in the education sector since that time. In particular the visionary objectives of NC2012: • “To meet the future education needs of students, and therefore the needs of the wider community at

the highest possible standard; • To position the University well for the future by reinforcing its international reputation for a

commitment to excellence; • To achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and related administrative arrangements,

for the benefit of staff and students”2

1 Including the Diploma in Modern Languages – transition plan to offer Diploma extended to 2016 pending review – Education Committee R8/15 2 Each objective is elaborated in the Education for Tomorrow’s World document pp 3-4

2

A2A2

Scope With a focus on the 2015 review, the following context and components are suggested:

Context Components • Relevant UWA Rules and Policies • Educational principles and learning outcomes • Quality assurance processes, including the

student ‘life-cycle’ approach informed by historic, current and predictive data

• Perceptions of peers - nationally and internationally

• Graduate destinations • TEQSA/Higher Education Standards

Framework requirements

• Structure of the major (2+2+4 / 2+3+3) • Complementary units • Broadening units • Electives • Study Abroad • Service Learning • Embedded communication / CARS3 • Embedded research / CARS • Embedded Indigenous studies / ISE4 • Academic Conduct Essentials (ACE)5

Process - 2015 It is proposed that the review be undertaken as a two stage approach: Stage One: A review Audit Team is established to prepare a submission, as would be the case with a Faculty, School or Division review. In 2015, the Audit Team would review the four Cycle 1 degree courses, request and review data, undertake appropriate stakeholder input and prepare documentation for consideration by a Review Panel. In addition, the Audit Team would consider and propose appropriate policy, procedure and timelines for cyclical reviews of courses beyond the 2015-2017 review. The Audit Team would comprise internal-to-UWA representation with expertise in the four degrees.

Membership – Audit-Team6 Professor Grady Venville, Dean of Coursework Studies - Convener Professor Alan Dench, Dean, Graduate Research and Postdoctoral Training Professor Brendan Waddell, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Science Professor Mark Israel, Deputy Chair, Academic Board Mr Jon Stubbs, Director, Student Services Dr Kabilan Krishnasamy, Academic Secretary, Academic Policy Services Emeritus Professor Izan H.Y Izan Professor Elizabeth Geelhoed, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences Dr Kate Hislop, Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts Dr Nicholas Letch, UWA Business School Mr Grant Revell, School of Indigenous Studies Mr Tom Beyer, Guild Education Council President Ms Kathrin Stroud, Academic Policy Services – Executive Officer Stage Two: A Review Panel is established to undertake a three day review, with membership that can provide impartiality/objectivity, expertise in the area concerned, ability to comment from a national and international perspective, awareness of policy and policy-making, awareness of UWA Futures and Leadership in Education.

Proposed Membership – Review Panel Dean of Coursework Studies – Convener External Consultant with relevant expertise Nominee of the Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor Nominee of the Chair of the Academic Board Academic Secretary Guild President Co-options – as required Executive Officer The Executive Officer to the Audit Team and Review Panel will be supported by an APS course review team, established to provide support, guidance and expertise in the area of curriculum management.

3 CARS – Communication and Research Skills online unit - http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/learning/resources/cars 4 ISE Indigenous Studies Essentials online unit - http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/learning/resources/ise 5 ACE – Academic Conduct Essentials online module - http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/learning/resources/ace 6 Membership finalised in May 2015

3

A3A3

http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/learning/resources/cars

http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/learning/resources/ise

http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/learning/resources/ace

Resources – 2015 Process Item Approximate

Cost The Audit Team will be drawn from within the University and Guild.

Within existing resources

The Review Panel will be drawn, in the majority, from within the University. There will be costs associated with the External Consultant – honoraria, travel and accommodation. Approximately:

$ 5,000

An Executive Officer will need to be appointed / seconded for nine months as an additional resource, to support both the Audit Team and the Review Panel. 0.4 FTE at Level 8; or 0.4 FTE at Level 9

$37,000, or $42,500

Infrastructure – office, computer, consumables, etc. for Executive Officer.

$ 5,000

Academic Policy Services will provide guidance to the Executive Officer, with the formulation of an APS Course Review Team, to manage, guide and support the Executive Officer. The team will comprise – Director, APS, Academic Secretary, Manager – Curriculum Management and Senior Project Officer (Technical).

Within existing resources

There will be costs associated with the three day review, including a pre-review dinner for the panel, meeting room, refreshments, etc during the three day review. An approximate cost is provided.

$ 2,500

Approximate Total

$55,000

Funds for 2015 have been allocated from the Education Committee’s annual budget. It is anticipated that approximately $55,000 will be required in 2016 and 2017 to undertake the three year review cycle.

Preparation and First Steps 1. Confirm available resources 2. Appoint an Executive Officer 3. Finalise Terms of Reference and membership for the Audit Team 4. The first meeting of the Audit Team would identify:

• Document preparation requirements; • Parameters for the submission and establish who would write what components; • A list of data requirements – both existing data and customised data; • Relevant stakeholders for interviews/invite submissions; • Survey data both existing/pre-existing and new survey(s); • Benchmarking – local, national, international; • Key changes since Education for Tomorrows World – 2008; • Key changes within the sector since 2008.

The Executive Officer, working with the APS Course Review Team, would then set in motion the data requirements, any surveys, consultations or focus group meetings.

4

A4A4

Timing Stage One – 3 months Audit Team and Preparation of Submission; July - September inclusive Dissemination of Submission Early October Stage Two – 6 months Review Panel: Preparation by Panel October Three day review Early November Report preparation, including policy development November Submission of Report to Executive: December Submission of Report to Academic Board/Senate: February/March 2016 2016 Preparation During the nine month period, preparations will also take place for appropriate data collection, surveys etc for the 2016 program of reviews and early consideration of the parameters for that review. In addition, the Audit Team will provide input and guidance to the formulation of a University Policy on Course Reviews, including process and timelines, which will be drafted by the APS Course Review Team and the Executive Officer. The proposed policy will be referred to and approved by Academic Council.

5

A5A5

Professional Accreditation Information provided by Faculties to Academic Policy Services – July 2015

Faculty of Architecture Landscape and Visual Arts

Faculty/School Course(s) Accrediting Body Latest Year of (Re)Accreditation

Period of (Re)Accreditation

Commentary (eg key points and/or web-link)

Faculty, Architecture Landscape and Visual Arts

Bachelor of Design (Architecture and Integrated Design) Bachelor Architecture Program

Architects Registration Board of Western Australia Australian Institute of Architects (AIA) Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA)

2014 Renewal accreditation scheduled for September 2016


Master of Architecture (5 year program)

Architects Registration Board of Western Australia, Australian Institute of Architects (AIA) Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA)

2014 Renewal accreditation scheduled for September 2016

Following completion of the Master of Architecture, graduates must undertake two years of professional work experience under the direction of a registered architect and then pass the Architectural Practice Examination (APE) before being eligible to register as an architect in Australia. This qualification is also widely recognised overseas. For further information please see www.comarchitect.org and www.canberraaccord.org


Bachelor of Architecture (Graduate)

Architects Registration Board of Western Australia, Australian Institute of Architects (AIA) Architects Accreditation Council of

2014 2 years

Professional Accreditation by Faculty – July 2015 Page 1

B1

http://www.comarchitect.org/

http://www.canberraaccord.org/




Australia (AACA) Faculty, Architecture Landscape and Visual Arts

Master of Landscape Architecture & Master of Landscape Architecture Preliminary (Coursework)

Australian Institute of Landscape Architects

2013 5 years

Faculty of Arts




Faculty of Arts Master of Translation Studies

National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters (NAATI)

2015 One year Students will be recommended for Professional Translator accreditation after meeting all criteria including successful completion of the course and a minimum of 70% grade in the General and Specialised translation units." https://www.naati.com.au/accreditation.html


B2

UWA Business School

Faculty/School Course(s) Accrediting Body Latest Year of (Re)Accreditatio

n



Faculty of Business – UWA Business School

All European Quality Improvement System (EQUIS)

October 2014 Five years The UWA Business School is the only business school in Western Australia to hold EQUIS accreditation and one of only seven institutions in Australia to hold both EQUIS and AACSB accreditation. There are currently 155 EQUIS-accredited schools across 40 countries. https://www.efmd.org/accreditation-main/equis/accredited-schools

UWA (incorporating the UWA Business School)

All business related degrees

Advancing Quality Management Education Worldwide

August 2011 Five years The UWA Business School is the only business school in Western Australia to hold AACSB accreditation and one of only seven institutions in Australia to hold both AACSB and EQUIS accreditation. There are 736 business schools in 48 countries and territories that have earned AACSB Accreditation. http://www.aacsb.edu/en/accreditation/accredited-members/


Master of Professional Accounting (MPA); Bachelor of Commerce (BCom)

Institute of Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand (CAANZ, formally ICAA)

Reaccreditation application for the period of 2016-2020 has been submitted in May 2015.

Five years The MPA and BCom of UWA Business School satisfies the accreditation requirements of the following professional accounting associations: the Australian Society of Certified Practising Accountants (CPA Australia), the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and New Zealand (CANNZ) and the Institute of Public Accountants (IPA). Graduates are eligible to enter the membership programs of these organisations.


B3

https://www.efmd.org/accreditation-main/equis/accredited-schools

https://www.efmd.org/accreditation-main/equis/accredited-schools

http://www.aacsb.edu/en/accreditation/accredited-members/

http://www.aacsb.edu/en/accreditation/accredited-members/


n



Details see: http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses/40610-master-of-professional-accounting---coursework http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/undergraduate/continuing_courses/biz/policiesandguidelines http://www.charteredaccountants.com.au/



CPA Australia (CPA) Reaccreditation application for the period of 2016-2020 has been submitted in May 2015.

Five years The MPA and BCom of UWA Business School satisfies the accreditation requirements of the following professional accounting associations: the Australian Society of Certified Practising Accountants (CPA Australia), the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and New Zealand (CANNZ) and the Institute of Public Accountants (IPA). Graduates are eligible to enter the membership programs of these organisations. Details see: http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses/40610-master-of-professional-accounting---coursework http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/undergraduate/continuing_courses/biz/policiesandguidelines


B4

http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses/40610-master-of-professional-accounting---coursework



http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/undergraduate/continuing_courses/biz/policiesandguidelines



http://www.charteredaccountants.com.au/








n



http://www.cpaaustralia.com.au/ Faculty of Business – UWA Business School


Institute of Public Accountants (IPA)

Reaccreditation application for the period of 2016-2020 has been submitted in May 2015.

Five years The MPA and BCom of UWA Business School satisfies the accreditation requirements of the following professional accounting associations: the Australian Society of Certified Practising Accountants (CPA Australia), the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and New Zealand (CANNZ) and the Institute of Public Accountants (IPA). Graduates are eligible to enter the membership programs of these organisations. Details see: http://www.studyat.uwa.edu.au/courses/40610-master-of-professional-accounting---coursework http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/undergraduate/continuing_courses/biz/policiesandguidelines http://www.publicaccountants.org.au/


B5

http://www.cpaaustralia.com.au/







http://www.publicaccountants.org.au/

Faculty of Education


Period of (Re)Accreditatio

n



Graduate Diploma in Education, code 31400

Teacher Registration Board Western Australia (TRBWA)

Approximately 2007

Expires in 2017 The Graduates are eligible to register with TRBWA and this entitles them to be legally employed as a teacher in a Western Australian school. http://www.trb.wa.gov.au/Pages/accredited-programmes.aspx


Master of Teaching, code 31520: Early Childhood Primary Secondary

Teacher Registration Board Western Australia (TRBWA)

2015 Five years The Graduates are eligible to register with TRBWA and this entitles them to be legally employed as a teacher in a Western Australian school. http://www.trb.wa.gov.au/Pages/accredited-programmes.aspx


Master of Teaching. Code 3152: Early Childhood

Australian Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority (ACECQA)

2015 Five years Has met the requirement to be added to the list of approved early childhood teacher qualifications. http://www.acecqa.gov.au/Qualifications.aspx


B6

http://www.trb.wa.gov.au/Pages/accredited-programmes.aspx




http://www.acecqa.gov.au/Qualifications.aspx

http://www.acecqa.gov.au/Qualifications.aspx

Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics



n



Master of Professional Engineering (61550, 62550) Chemical Engineering Civil Engineering Electrical & Electronic Engineering Environmental Engineering Mechanical Engineering Mining Engineering

Engineers Australia (EA) (Professional Engineer Level)

2012 An application for full accreditation has been lodged with Engineers Australia (EA). An accreditation and general review visit is scheduled for 5-7 August 2015. Accreditation status advice expected in October 2015.

The Master of Professional Engineering (MPE) in 61550, 62550 has been provisionally accredited at the level of Professional Engineer by Engineers Australia (EA). As is standard practice for new courses, accreditation is provisional until graduation of the first cohort of students from the MPE in 2015. https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/about-us/accreditation-management-system-professional-engineers


B7

https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/about-us/accreditation-management-system-professional-engineers





n



Master of Professional Engineering (61550, 62550) Software Engineering

Engineers Australia/ Australian Computer Society Joint Board in Software Engineering (Professional Level)

2012 An application for full accreditation has been lodged with Engineers Australia (EA). An accreditation and general review visit is scheduled for 5-7 August 2015. Accreditation status advice expected in October 2015.

The Master of Professional Engineering (MPE) in 61550, 62550 has been provisionally accredited at the level of Professional Engineer by the EA/ACS Joint Board in Software Engineering. As is standard practice for new courses, accreditation is provisional until graduation of the first cohort of students from the MPE in 2015. https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/about-us/accreditation-management-system-professional-engineers


Master of Information Technology (62520)

Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level)

2016 (course commenced 2015)

The Master of Information Technology (MIT) in 62520 has been conditionally provisionally accredited at the Professional Level by the Australian Computer Society (ACS). As is standard practice for new courses, accreditation is provisional until the graduation of the first cohort of students from the MIT in 2016. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


B8




https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification




n



Bachelor of Science (by way of degree-specific major in Computer Science)


2015 The Bachelor of Science (by way of degree-specific major in Computer Science) is conditionally accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Science (by way of degree-specific major in Data Science)


2015 The Bachelor of Science (by way of degree-specific major in Data Science) is conditionally accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours) (by way of degree-specific major in Computer Science and Honours in Computer Science and Software Engineering)


2015 The Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours) (by way of degree-specific major in Computer Science and Honours in Computer Science and Software Engineering) is conditionally accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


B9









n



Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours) (by way of degree-specific major in Data Science and Honours in Computer Science and Software Engineering)


2015 The Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours) (by way of degree-specific major in Computer Science and Honours in Computer Science and Software Engineering) is conditionally accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Engineering

Engineers Australia (EA) (Professional Engineer Level)

2011 This course is being taught out, reaccreditation will not be sought.

The Bachelor of Engineering is accredited by Engineers Australia (EA) (Professional Engineer Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. This accredited degree status is internationally recognised by countries signatory to the Washington Accord. https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/about-us/accreditation-management-system-professional-engineers


Bachelor of Engineering (Chemical and Process Engineering)

Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE)

2011 This course is being taught out, reaccreditation will not be sought

The Bachelor of Engineering (Chemical and Process Engineering) is accredited by the Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. http://www.icheme.org/membership.aspx http://www.icheme.org/accreditation

Faculty of Bachelor of Australian Computer 2011 This course is The Bachelor of Engineering (Software


B10






http://www.icheme.org/membership.aspx

http://www.icheme.org/accreditation



n


Engineering, Computing and Mathematics

Engineering (Software Engineering)

Society (ACS) (Professional Level)

being taught out, reaccreditation will not be sought

Engineering) is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Computer & Mathematical Sciences – Major in Computer Science



The Bachelor of Computer and Mathematical Sciences with a major in Computer Science is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Computer & Mathematical Sciences (Honours) – Major in Computer Science



The Bachelor of Computer and Mathematical Sciences (Honours) with a major in Computer Science is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Computer Science



The Bachelor of Computer Science is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-


B11










n


certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Computer Science (Honours)



The Bachelor of Computer Science (Honours) is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Bachelor of Science & Bachelor of Science (Honours) – Major in Computer Science 50110 and BP004



The Bachelor of Science with a major in Computer Science is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Graduate Diploma in Computer Science



The Graduate Diploma in Computer Science is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Master of Computer Science


2011 This course is being taught out, reaccreditation will not be

The Master of Computer Science is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership.


B12










n


sought https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


Master of Information Technology (61520) Note: Course code 61520 has been rescinded but some students eligible to graduate have not yet graduated



The Master of Information Technology is accredited by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) (Professional Level) and graduates are eligible for direct membership. https://www.acs.org.au/sfia-certification/acs-certification


B13





Faculty of Law




Faculty of Law LLB (Bachelor of Laws) Legal Practice Board of Western Australia

2015 Ongoing (subject to continued compliance with the prescribed areas of knowledge described in the Uniform Admission Rules 2008 Schedule 1 published by the Law Admissions Consultative Committee)

The LLB is recognised by the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia as fulfilling the academic requirements for admission to legal practice (being coursework covering all the prescribed areas of knowledge described in the Uniform Admission Rules 2008 Schedule 1 published by the Law Admissions Consultative Committee). The graduate must also satisfactorily complete a recognised Professional Legal Training course offered by one of the accredited Professional Legal Training providers in Australia before admission to practice

Faculty of Law JD (Juris Doctor) Legal Practice Board of Western Australia

2015 Ongoing (subject to continued compliance with the prescribed areas of knowledge described in the Uniform Admission Rules 2008 Schedule 1 published by the Law Admissions Consultative

The JD is recognised by the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia as fulfilling the academic requirements for admission to legal practice (being coursework covering all the prescribed areas of knowledge described in the Uniform Admission Rules 2008 Schedule 1 published by the Law Admissions Consultative Committee). The graduate must also satisfactorily complete a recognised Professional Legal Training course offered by one of the accredited Professional Legal Training providers in Australia before admission to


B14




Committee) practice Faculty of Law None specified

The CPD courses offered must satisfy the requirements of the Legal Profession Rules 2009 governing the nominated competency area requirements.

Legal Practice Board of Western Australia

2015 5 years The University of Western Australia (on application by and through the Law Faculty) is a QA Provider of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for the legal profession.

Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences





Bachelor of Dental Science

Australian Dental Council

July 2010 6 years (31/12/2016)

As per the AHEGS statement http://www.ahpra.gov.au/Education/Approved-Programs-of-Study.asp


Doctor of Dental Medicine


September 2012 6 years As per the AHEGS statement


Master of Dental Science - Coursework


As per the AHEGS statement

Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and

Doctor of Clinical Dentistry


February 2011 5 years (31/12/2015)



B15

http://www.ahpra.gov.au/Education/Approved-Programs-of-Study.asp

http://www.ahpra.gov.au/Education/Approved-Programs-of-Study.asp




Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences

Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery

Australian Medical Council

November 2013 4 years (31/12/2017)



Doctor of Medicine 90850 Professional Practice Doctorate (not 90920 - Higher Doctorate)

Australian Medical Council

November 2013 4 years (31/12/2018)



Bachelor of Podiatric Medicine

Australian and New Zealand Podiatry Accreditation Council

August 2011 5 years (31/7/2016)



Bachelor of Podiatric Medicine (Honours)




Doctor of Podiatric Medicine


July 2013 5 years (14/6/18)


Bachelor of Social Work

Australian Association of Social Workers



Bachelor of Social Work (Honours)

Australian Association of Social Workers


Faculty of Medicine,

Master of Social Work Australian Association of Social Workers



B16




Dentistry and Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences

Master of Pharmacy Australian Pharmacy Council

July 2010 6 years As per the AHEGS statement


Master of Nursing Science - Coursework

Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia

October 2014 5 years (October 2019)



B17

Faculty of Science


Period of (Re)Accreditat

ion


Faculty of Science - School of Psychology

Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science (including Honours), Bachelor of Philosophy (hons) with majors in Psychological Science and Psychology in Society

Australian Psychological Accreditation Council (APAC)

December 2012 Five years https://www.psychologycouncil.org.au/standards-and-guidelines/


Graduate Diploma in Science(Psychology)




Graduate Diploma in Clinical Psychology




Graduate Diploma in Clinical Neuropsychology




Master of Clinical Psychology




Master of Clinical Neuropsychology




Master of Industrial and Organisational Psychology




PhD and Master of Clinical Psychology




B18



ion



PhD and Master of Clinical Neuropsychology




PhD and Master of Industrial and organisational Psychology



Faculty of Science - School of Chemistry and Biochemistry

Bachelor of Science (BP004), Bachelor of Science (Hons) (BH004) with major in Chemistry or Environmental Chemistry

Royal Australian Chemical Institute

July 2015 Five years The RACI is the peak body for chemistry in Australia and audits all Chemistry departments for their suitability for accreditation. The RACI aims to assist educational institutions to identify and meet the needs of students and educators for chemistry related education including career advice to students. RACI accreditation will be regarded by students and employers as the gold standard for chemistry degree courses. RACI will be actively engaged with schools in raising awareness of chemistry.

Faculty of Science - School of Chemistry and Biochemistry

Bachelor of Science (50110), Bachelor of Science (Hons) (5011H) with major in Chemistry or Green Chemistry

Royal Australian Chemical Institute

July 2015 Five years As above.

Faculty of Science - School of Sport Science, Exercise and Health

Bachelor of Science (Major in Sport Science AND Exercise & Health)

Exercise & Sports Science Australia (ESSA)

2014 2 years Graduates entitled to Exercise Science accreditation. Course reaccreditation will occur in 2016. UWA SSEH is one of ~30 academic units in Australia with this accreditation.


B19



ion



Graduate Diploma in Exercise Rehabilitation


2014 2 years Graduates entitled to Exercise Physiology accreditation. Course reaccreditation will occur in 2016. UWA SSEH is one of ~25 academic units in Australia with courses leading to this accreditation.


Master of Clinical Exercise Physiology


2016 5 years Graduates entitled to Exercise Physiology accreditation. Course has been approved by the UWA Curriculum Committee for introduction in 2016. Application for accreditation will also occur in 2016. UWA SSEH is one of ~25 academic units in Australia with courses leading to this accreditation.

Faculty of Science - School of Earth and Environment

Bachelor of Arts (Hons) Urban and Regional Planning

Planning Institute of Australia

2011 2011-2015 The School of Earth and Environment’s undergraduate degree in urban and regional planning commenced in 2007 and was initially offered as a straight 4 year BSc. This programme effectively stopped taking enrolments in 2011 as a result of New Courses 2012. Students from the ‘old’ BSc degree will by and large have completed their degree by now. The BA (Hons) in Urban and Regional Planning commenced in 2012. This programme is based on the “3 plus 1 model” whereby students in the 3 year BA Human Geography and Planning are able to undertake a fourth year and graduate with a PIA recognised qualification. Both the BSc and BA programmes are accredited until the end of 2015.


B20



ion



Master of Urban and Regional Planning


2011 2011-2015 The Masters in Urban and Regional planning was accredited at the same time as the BSc and BA programmes. This programme offers students a coursework and research project pathway and a course-work only option. Accreditation expires at the end of 2015. Reaccreditation of the BA and Masters programmes will be sought for the next 4-5 years.


Bachelor of Science (Urban and Regional Planning)


2011 2011-2015 One of the pre-2012 four year degrees.


Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Science (Hons) - Major in Geology

Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM)

2013 5 years http://www.ausimm.com.au/content/docs/education/ausimm_course_recognition_program_01052014.pdf

Faculty of Science - School of Physics

Bachelor of Science, Commerce, Arts or Design with a major in Physics

Australian Institute of Physics

2014 5 years http://www.aip.org.au/info/


Bachelor of Philosophy with a major in Physics

Australian Institute of Physics

2014 5 years http://www.aip.org.au/info/


Master of Medical Physics

Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine (ACPSEM)

May 2013 5 years (May 2018)

The UWA School of Physics is the only university in Western Australia to hold ACPSEM accreditation and one of only six institutions in Australia to hold the ACPSEM accreditation.


B21

http://www.ausimm.com.au/content/docs/education/ausimm_course_recognition_program_01052014.pdf





ion


https://www.acpsem.org.au/


Master of Physics (Medical Physics)

Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine (ACPSEM)

December 2014 4 years (May 2018)

The UWA School of Physics is the only university in Western Australia to hold ACPSEM accreditation and one of only six institutions in Australia to hold the ACPSEM accreditation. https://www.acpsem.org.au/

Faculty of Science - School of Anatomy, Physiology and Human Biology

Master of Clinical Audiology

Audiology Australia 2010 5 years (request in progress for deferral of reaccreditation to 2016)

http://www.audiology.asn.au/index.cfm/consumers/learning-about-audiologists/qualifications/

Faculty of Science - School of Anatomy, Physiology and Human Biology

Graduate Certificate in Adult Sleep Science

Board of Registered Polysomnographic Technologists (BRPT)

2010 ? Following up with BRPT

The US-based Board of Registered Polysomnographic Technologists (BRPT) has recognized University of Western Australia’s Graduate Certificate in Adult Sleep Science as an alternate educational pathway to establishing eligibility to sit for the RPSGT exam. Specifically, the course has been designated by the BRPT as an alternate educational pathway for purposes of establishing Pathway #1 or Pathway #4 eligibility to sit for the RPSGT exam. It is listed on http://www.brpt.org/default.asp?contentID=34#Pathway4 as a BRPT designated alternate educational program.


B22






http://www.brpt.org/default.asp?contentID=34%23Pathway4

http://www.brpt.org/default.asp?contentID=34%23Pathway4



ion


Please note that the Graduate Certificate in Adult Sleep Science is only one component in establishing eligibility to sit for the RPSGT exam and does not, in and of itself, make a candidate eligible to test. A full description of RPSGT exam eligibility requirements can be found at www.brpt.org.


B23

http://www.brpt.org/

APPENDIX: Course Experience Questionnaire % Agreement with Items by State and Institution, 2012- 2014

C1

Report 15_12 An analysis of SURF survey results 2010-2014. Institutional Research Unit, The University of Western Australia, March, 2015. 1

UNIT EVALUATIONS AT UWA

AN ANALYSIS OF SURF SURVEY RESULTS, 2010-2014

1. Introduction and summary of results UWA students evaluate their units via the Students’ Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF) survey. SURF commenced in 2004 and since 2007 has been administered entirely online. SURF has 6 items:

Q1. It was clear what I was expected to learn in this unit. Q2. The assessment requirements were clearly stated. Q3. The assessment tasks were closely linked to the unit objectives. Q4. The unit was well organised. Q5. The learning resources (handouts, text, web resources, etc) were adequate for my study in the unit. Q6. Overall, this unit was a good educational experience.

In a typical year students submit over fifty thousand evaluations of approximately fifteen hundred units. The response rate has steadily declined in recent years, from 48% in 2010 to 35% in 2014. This report presents an analysis of SURF survey results for the five years 2010-2014. The key findings were:

At University level, the upward trend in SURF scores seen in recent years continued in 2014 with item scores being the highest since 2005. In 2014, the percentage of units excellent on SURF Q6 was an all-time high (29%), up from 26% in 2013. The percentage of units unsatisfactory on Q6 was the lowest since 2006 (9%), down from 10% in 2013. At faculty level, the highest SURF scores in 2014 were in INDIG, EDUC and ARTS and the lowest scores in ECM. ARTS and MDHS were the biggest improvers in 2014. Among the 31 schools with at least 6 units, there were 6 schools in which over 40% of units were excellent on SURF Q6 (Indigenous Studies, Education, Humanities, Plant Biology, Animal Biology and Population Health). The 5 schools with at least 15% of units unsatisfactory on SURF Q6 were Earth & Environment, Dentistry, Electrical, Electronic & Computer Engineering, Computer Science & Software Engineering, and Pathology & Laboratory Medicine. As found in previous years, at all levels small units were more frequently rated excellent on SURF Q6 than large units.

2. Results

SURF responses are summarised in terms of SURF scores, calculated by quantifying the students’ responses Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree and Strongly Agree as 1, 2, 3 and 4 and averaging. The average SURF score across all units evaluated at UWA is about 3.1. Units well above average (score more than 3.4) are regarded as excellent and units well below average (score less than 2.8) are regarded as unsatisfactory. 2.1 SURF scores for the University and faculties University and faculty scores on each SURF item during the period 2010-2014 are shown in the charts below. The same data are in tables in the Appendix. At University level, the upward trend in SURF scores seen in recent years continued in 2014. Scores on all six items were the highest since 2005. In 2014, as in previous years, students rated assessment (Q2, Q3) and the overall educational experience (Q6) slightly higher than the clarity of what they were expected to learn (Q1), organisation (Q4) and resources (Q5). The highest SURF scores were achieved by INDIG, EDUC and ARTS, and the lowest scores by ECM. Across all items, ARTS and MDHS were the biggest improvers in 2014.

D1


2.1(a) UNIVERSITY: SURF scores for the University (all faculties combined), 2010-2014

2.1(b) FACULTIES: SURF scores by faculty, 2010-2014 Q1. It was clear what I was expected to learn in this unit.

D2


Q2. The assessment requirements were clearly stated.

Q3. The assessment tasks were closely linked to the unit objectives.

D3


Q4. The unit was well organised.

Q5. The learning resources (handouts, text, web resources, etc) were adequate for my study in the unit.

D4


Q6. Overall, this unit was a good educational experience.

2.1(c) UNIT LEVEL: SURF scores by unit level, 2010-2014

D5


D6


2.2 Excellent units Across the University, the average SURF score is about 3.1. A unit scoring more than 3.4 on a SURF item can be regarded as excellent on that item. Typically, for a score to be in this range there needs to be more Strong Agreement than Agreement. SURF Q6 (Overall, this unit was a good educational experience) is the most important SURF item and is reported in the annual Performance Indicators Report. The distribution of SURF scores for Q6 in 2014 is shown below. The excellent units are highlighted in green. In 2014, out of the total of 1390 units with at least 6 evaluations, there were 402 excellent units (28.9%), the highest percentage recorded in the 11 years of the SURF survey.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4

Num

ber o

f uni

ts

SURF score

Distribution of SURF scores on Item 6, 2014 "Overall, this unit was a good educational experience"

Total number of units with at least 6 evaluations = 1390

D7


2.2(a) Excellent units by faculty The tables below show a breakdown by faculty of units that were excellent on Q6 during 2010-2014.

Number of units excellent on SURF Q6, 2010-2014

Faculty 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5-year average ALVA 28 27 23 25 30 27 ARTS 92 73 79 86 109 88 BIZ 44 56 40 38 54 46 ECM 21 25 27 32 30 27 EDUC 25 30 27 25 30 27 INDIG* 5 8 5 11 7 LAW 12 18 12 19 26 17 MDHS 23 39 42 41 46 38 SCI 53 83 61 72 66 67 UWA 298 356 319 343 402 344

Number of units evaluated, 2010-2014

Faculty 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ALVA 77 79 72 71 83 ARTS 267 251 240 253 271 BIZ 212 224 204 207 216 ECM 218 207 207 195 191 EDUC 47 60 64 56 57 INDIG* 7 15 9 17 LAW 61 62 54 71 84 MDHS 178 210 185 175 160 SCI 316 342 283 275 311 UWA 1376 1442 1324 1312 1390

Percentage of units excellent on SURF Q6, 2010-2014

Faculty 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5-year average ALVA 36% 34% 32% 35% 36% 35% ARTS 34% 29% 33% 34% 40% 34% BIZ 21% 25% 20% 18% 25% 22% ECM 10% 12% 13% 16% 16% 13% EDUC 53% 50% 42% 45% 53% 48% INDIG* 71% 53% 56% 65% 60% LAW 20% 29% 22% 27% 31% 26% MDHS 13% 19% 23% 23% 29% 21% SCI 17% 24% 22% 26% 21% 22% UWA 21.7% 24.7% 24.1% 26.1% 28.9% 25.1%

* There are no INDIG units in 2010 because all had fewer than 6 SURF responses The above table shows that faculties differ considerably in the percentage of their units that students rate as excellent on SURF Q6. The percentages for individual faculties fluctuate from year to year but the overall trend for the University over the last 5 years is very positive with the percentage of units that are excellent on SURF Q6 increasing by more than one percent per annum. The percentage of excellent units on each SURF item in 2014 is shown below. For the University as a whole, the dimensions on which units were most likely to be excellent are Q2 (assessment requirements were clear), Q3 (assessment tasks were closely linked to unit objectives) and Q6 (unit was a good educational experience). There were considerable differences between faculties. For each of the 6 SURF items, INDIG had the highest percentage of units that were excellent (on average 60%). For each of the 6 SURF items, ECM had the lowest percentage of units that were excellent (on average 14%).

D8


Number and percentage of excellent units, by SURF item and faculty, 2014

Number of excellent units Total units

evaluated

Percentage of excellent units Faculty Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 ALVA 18 23 26 21 18 30 83 22% 28% 31% 25% 22% 36% ARTS 78 96 121 89 91 109 271 29% 35% 45% 33% 34% 40% BIZ 37 56 53 50 36 54 216 17% 26% 25% 23% 17% 25% ECM 23 26 33 27 22 30 191 12% 14% 17% 14% 12% 16% EDUC 22 23 28 26 25 30 57 39% 40% 49% 46% 44% 53% INDIG 8 10 10 10 12 11 17 47% 59% 59% 59% 71% 65% LAW 17 16 20 19 12 26 84 20% 19% 24% 23% 14% 31% MDHS 35 45 42 39 40 46 160 22% 28% 26% 24% 25% 29% SCI 49 65 89 58 53 66 311 16% 21% 29% 19% 17% 21% UWA 287 360 422 339 309 402 1390 21% 26% 30% 24% 22% 29%


2.2(b) Excellent units by school The table below shows the breakdown by school of the percentage of units excellent on SURF Q6 in 2014. Number and percentage of units excellent on SURF Q6, by school, 2014

Number of units % Excellent Faculty School Total Excellent

ALVA Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts 83 30 36% ARTS Faculty of Arts Office 13 2 15% ARTS Humanities 114 58 51% ARTS Music 26 9 35% ARTS Social Sciences 118 40 34% BIZ UWA Business School 216 54 25% ECM Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering 38 5 13% ECM Computer Science and Software Engineering 19 3 16% ECM Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering 23 5 22% ECM Faculty of Engineering, Computing & Mathematics Office 45 9 20% ECM Mathematics and Statistics 20 2 10% ECM Mechanical Engineering 46 6 13% EDUC Graduate School of Education 57 30 53% INDIG Indigenous Studies 17 11 65% LAW Law 84 26 31% MDHS Dentistry 23 4 17% MDHS Faculty of Science Office 38 5 13% MDHS Medicine and Pharmacology 21 7 33% MDHS Pathology and Laboratory Medicine 27 8 30% MDHS Population Health 45 19 42% MDHS Primary, Aboriginal and Rural Health 1 0 0% MDHS Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 1 1 100% MDHS Surgery 4 2 50% SCI Agricultural and Resource Economics 16 0 0% SCI Anatomy and Human Biology 42 4 10% SCI Animal Biology 25 11 44% SCI Centre for Excellence in Natural Resource Management 2 1 50% SCI Centre for Forensic Science 11 4 36% SCI Chemistry and Biochemistry 52 2 4% SCI Faculty of Science Office 7 0 0% SCI Physics 16 2 13% SCI Plant Biology 12 6 50% SCI Psychology 36 11 31% SCI School of Earth and Environment 57 12 21% SCI Sport Science, Exercise and Health 35 13 37% UWA 1390 402 28.9%

D9


2.2(c) Excellent units by unit size and unit level

The table below shows that, at all levels, small units were more frequently rated excellent on SURF Q6 than large units.

Number and percentage of units excellent on Q6, by unit size and unit level, 2014

Number of units % Excellent Level* Unit size** Total Excellent

1 Small (<30) 29 11 38% Medium (30-200) 95 34 36% Large (>200) 81 11 14% 1 Total 205 56 27% 2 Small (<30) 46 26 57% Medium (30-200) 157 38 24% Large (>200) 47 2 4% 2 Total 250 66 26% 3 Small (<30) 78 36 46% Medium (30-200) 232 56 24% Large (>200) 40 4 10% 3 Total 350 96 27% 4+ Small (<30) 265 114 43% Medium (30-200) 291 68 23% Large (>200) 29 2 7% 4+ Total 585 184 31% Total 1390 402 28.9%

*Unit level defined by the first digit of the unit code **Number of enrolments 2.2(d) Excellent units by campus Comparing campuses in 2014, units taught at Crawley and Western Australian rural centres were more frequently rated excellent on SURF Q6 than units taught offshore. Number and percentage of units excellent on SURF Q6, by campus, 2014

Number of units

Campus Total Excellent % Excellent Crawley 1338 394 29.4% Offshore 40 5 12.5% Rural 12 3 25.0% Total 1390 402 28.9%

D10


2.3 Unsatisfactory units Across the University, the average SURF score is about 3.1. A unit scoring less than 2.8 on a SURF item can be regarded as unsatisfactory on that item. This corresponds to 30% or more disagreement on the item. As noted above, SURF Q6 (Overall, this unit was a good educational experience) is the most important SURF item. The distribution of SURF scores for Q6 in 2014 is shown below. The unsatisfactory units, with scores less than 2.8, are highlighted. In 2014, out of the total of 1390 units with at least 6 evaluations, there were 124 unsatisfactory units (8.9%), the lowest percentage recorded since 2006.

2.3(a) Unsatisfactory units by faculty The tables below show a breakdown by faculty of units that were unsatisfactory on Q6 during 2010-2014.

Number of units unsatisfactory on SURF Q6, 2010-2014

Faculty 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5-year average ALVA 5 7 2 3 7 5 ARTS 8 12 12 14 18 13 BIZ 25 34 21 23 24 25 ECM 44 45 41 30 21 36 EDUC 7 3 3 4 3 4 INDIG* 0 0 0 0 0 LAW 4 4 5 9 11 7 MDHS 26 38 23 26 14 25 SCI 25 19 28 23 26 24 UWA 144 162 135 132 124 139

Number of units evaluated, 2010-2014

Faculty 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ALVA 77 79 72 71 83 ARTS 267 251 240 253 271 BIZ 212 224 204 207 216 ECM 218 207 207 195 191 EDUC 47 60 64 56 57 INDIG* 7 15 9 17 LAW 61 62 54 71 84 MDHS 178 210 185 175 160 SCI 316 342 283 275 311 UWA 1376 1442 1324 1312 1390

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4

Num

ber o

f uni

ts

SURF score

Distribution of SURF scores on Item 6, 2014 "Overall, this unit was a good educational experience"

Total number of units with at least 6 evaluations = 1390

D11


Percentage of units unsatisfactory on SURF Q6, 2010-2014

Faculty 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5-year average ALVA 6% 9% 3% 4% 8% 6% ARTS 3% 5% 5% 6% 7% 5% BIZ 12% 15% 10% 11% 11% 12% ECM 20% 22% 20% 15% 11% 18% EDUC 15% 5% 5% 7% 5% 7% INDIG* 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% LAW 7% 6% 9% 13% 13% 10% MDHS 15% 18% 12% 15% 9% 14% SCI 8% 6% 10% 8% 8% 8% UWA 10.5% 11.2% 10.2% 10.1% 8.9% 10.2%

* There are no INDIG units in 2010 because all had fewer than 6 SURF responses The above table shows that faculties differ considerably in the percentage of their units that students rate as unsatisfactory on SURF Q6. The percentages for individual faculties fluctuate from year to year but the overall trend for the University over the last few years is clearly downwards. The percentage of unsatisfactory units on each SURF item in 2014 is shown below. For the University as a whole, the dimensions on which units were most likely to be unsatisfactory were Q4 (unit was well organised), Q5 (learning resources were adequate) and Q1 (it was clear what I was expected to learn). There were considerable differences between faculties, the largest differences being on Q5 (INDIG 0% versus ECM 26%) and Q4 (EDUC 9% versus ECM 23% and LAW 23%). The faculties with the highest percentage of units that were unsatisfactory on SURF Q6 (unit was a good educational experience) in 2014 were LAW (13%), BIZ (11%) and ECM (11%). INDIG and EDUC had the lowest percentage of units that were unsatisfactory on Q6.

Number and percentage of unsatisfactory units, by SURF item and faculty, 2014

Number of units Unsatisfactory Total units

evaluated

Percentage of units Unsatisfactory Faculty Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 ALVA 8 11 3 15 17 7 83 10% 13% 4% 18% 20% 8% ARTS 20 17 5 26 17 18 271 7% 6% 2% 10% 6% 7% BIZ 28 21 11 34 27 24 216 13% 10% 5% 16% 13% 11% ECM 25 19 9 44 49 21 191 13% 10% 5% 23% 26% 11% EDUC 3 3 3 5 5 3 57 5% 5% 5% 9% 9% 5% INDIG 1 0 0 2 0 0 17 6% 0% 0% 12% 0% 0% LAW 13 8 6 19 18 11 84 15% 10% 7% 23% 21% 13% MDHS 20 16 12 31 21 14 160 13% 10% 8% 19% 13% 9% SCI 31 29 13 48 30 26 311 10% 9% 4% 15% 10% 8% UWA 149 124 62 224 184 124 1390 11% 9% 4% 16% 13% 9%


D12


2.3(b) Unsatisfactory units by school A breakdown by school of the percentage of units unsatisfactory on SURF Q6 in 2014 is shown below. Number and percentage of units unsatisfactory on SURF Q6, by school, 2014

Number of units % Unsatisfactory Faculty School Total Unsatisfactory

ALVA Architecture, Landscape and Visual Arts 83 7 8% ARTS Faculty of Arts Office 13 1 8% ARTS Humanities 114 7 6% ARTS Music 26 2 8% ARTS Social Sciences 118 8 7% BIZ UWA Business School 216 24 11% ECM Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering 38 5 13% ECM Computer Science and Software Engineering 19 3 16% ECM Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering 23 4 17% ECM Faculty of Engineering, Computing & Mathematics Office 45 3 7% ECM Mathematics and Statistics 20 1 5% ECM Mechanical Engineering 46 5 11% EDUC Graduate School of Education 57 3 5% INDIG Indigenous Studies 17 0 0% LAW Law 84 11 13% MDHS Dentistry 23 4 17% MDHS Faculty of Science Office 38 2 5% MDHS Medicine and Pharmacology 21 2 10% MDHS Pathology and Laboratory Medicine 27 4 15% MDHS Population Health 45 2 4% MDHS Primary, Aboriginal and Rural Health 1 0 0% MDHS Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 1 0 0% MDHS Surgery 4 0 0% SCI Agricultural and Resource Economics 16 1 6% SCI Anatomy and Human Biology 42 4 10% SCI Animal Biology 25 1 4% SCI Centre for Excellence in Natural Resource Management 2 0 0% SCI Centre for Forensic Science 11 0 0% SCI Chemistry and Biochemistry 52 2 4% SCI Faculty of Science Office 7 1 14% SCI Physics 16 2 13% SCI Plant Biology 12 0 0% SCI Psychology 36 2 6% SCI School of Earth and Environment 57 11 19% SCI Sport Science, Exercise and Health 35 2 6% UWA 1390 124 8.9%

D13


2.3(c) Unsatisfactory units by unit size and unit level The table below shows that broadly in 2014, with the exception of Level 2 units, the larger the unit, the more likely it was to be unsatisfactory on SURF Q6: Number and percentage of units unsatisfactory on Q6, by unit size and level, 2014

Number of units % Unsatisfactory Level* Unit size** Total Unsatisfactory

1 Small (<30) 29 0 0% Medium (30-200) 95 3 3% Large (>200) 81 7 9% 1 Total 205 10 5% 2 Small (<30) 46 5 11% Medium (30-200) 157 11 7% Large (>200) 47 5 11% 2 Total 250 21 8% 3 Small (<30) 78 2 3% Medium (30-200) 232 32 14% Large (>200) 40 10 25% 3 Total 350 44 13% 4+ Small (<30) 265 22 8% Medium (30-200) 291 24 8% Large (>200) 29 3 10% 4+ Total 585 49 8% Total 1390 124 8.9%

*Unit level defined by the first digit of the unit code **Number of enrolments 2.3(d) Unsatisfactory units by campus Comparing campuses in 2014, units taught at Crawley were more likely to be unsatisfactory on SURF Q6 than units taught at Western Australian rural centres and offshore. Number and percentage of units unsatisfactory on SURF Q6, by campus, 2014

Number of units

Campus Total Unsatisfactory % Unsatisfactory Crawley 1338 122 9.1% Offshore 40 2 5.0% Rural 12 0 0.0% Total 1390 124 8.9%

3. SURF comments Since August, 2014 students have been able to elaborate on their SURF ratings with free text comments. In Semester 2, 2014 one in four unit evaluations included comments. Generally the comments were specific and very constructive. A key word check suggested that positive words far outnumbered negative words. Student comments can be read by the unit coordinator, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education), the Dean of Coursework Studies, the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education Innovation), Deans, Associate Deans (Teaching & Learning) and Heads of School.

4. Other SURF data The SURF website https://www.surf.uwa.edu.au/AdminLogin.aspx has a range of reports and tools for further exploration of students’ unit evaluations. Tables on the website showing aggregated results for the University, faculties, schools and fields of education are updated on 1 January and 1 July. The charts showing yearly results, as above, are updated on 1 January.

D14


The SURF website also has league tables that can be accessed by the Vice-Chancellor, the Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education), the Dean of Coursework Studies, the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education Innovation), Deans, Associate Deans (Teaching & Learning) and Heads of School. The league tables enable quick identification of units that are performing best and worst in a particular faculty or school. Clicking on a unit code in a league table produces a historical report on the unit, showing trends in the surf scores for the unit, the school, the faculty and the University since 2006, the percentile rank of the unit within the faculty and the name of the unit coordinator in each year. In August, 2014, internal access to recent SURF data was significantly increased. UWA staff and students are now able to view the SURF scores for any unit for the previous two years, along with any comments about the unit that have been added by the unit coordinator, at https://www.surf.uwa.edu.au/UnitSurfStatistics.aspx

APPENDIX

Average SURF scores, 2010-2014 (same data as in the charts on pages 2-5)

Q1. It was clear what I was expected to learn in this unit.

Faculty 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ALVA 3.08 3.13 3.07 3.09 3.08 ARTS 3.15 3.14 3.12 3.16 3.22 BIZ 3.05 3.07 3.08 3.09 3.12 ECM 2.95 2.99 2.97 3.02 3.08 EDUC 3.15 3.13 3.19 3.26 3.30 INDIG 3.75 3.47 3.41 3.26 3.30 LAW 3.11 3.17 3.13 3.11 3.08 MDHS 2.96 2.96 3.05 3.04 3.09 SCI 3.05 3.10 3.08 3.10 3.12 University 3.04 3.07 3.07 3.09 3.13

Q2. The assessment requirements were clearly stated.


Q3. The assessment tasks were closely linked to the unit objectives.


D15


Q4. The unit was well organised.


Q5. The learning resources (handouts, text, web resources, etc) were adequate for my study in the unit.


Q6. Overall, this unit was a good educational experience.


D16

Review of Courses – Student Survey Analysis Page 1 of 25

1 Student Survey for Review of Courses – Detailed Analysis

In order to ascertain students’ perceptions of UWA’s Cycle 1 courses, an online survey was conducted during August and September 2015. This section of the report provides an analysis of the findings from the survey. The first section below briefly outlines the survey procedure. The following sections consider the survey findings from the demographic questions (Part A), the quantitative questions (Part B), and the qualitative questions (Part C). Commendations and recommendations are provided.

1.1 Overview of Survey Procedure

The survey was initially drafted by the Review Panel’s Chair and Executive Officer in consultation with the Audit Team and the Institutional Research Unit (IRU) by focusing on the scope of the Review as outlined in the Terms of Reference. Questions were designed to ascertain students’ views on particular aspects of UWA’s Cycle 1 degrees, including the overall course structure, the four degrees, the degree-specific major, second major, broadening units, communication skills, research skills, study abroad, indigenous content, and service learning. The initial survey draft was provided to the Audit Team for feedback and extensively revised to remove repetition and redundancy and to ensure questions addressed perceived issues about the Cycle 1 courses under consideration.

The online survey was developed in Qualtrix and administered by UWA’s Institutional Research Unit (IRU). The final online survey consisted of 10 demographic questions (Part A); 61 forced response questions (Part B); and three open-ended questions (Part C). The forced response questions enabled students to respond on a four point Likert scale of strongly agree, agree, disagree and strongly disagree. There were between three and 11 individual questions about each aspect of the Cycle 1 degrees, and responses were analysed by IRU. Students’ responses to the survey are provided overall and by various demographic groups, including degree type, year first enrolled at UWA, international/domestic, school type and school location. Findings are presented in terms of percentage agreement (agree + strongly agree) with the statements in the questionnaire.

The open-ended questions were included in the survey to provide students with an opportunity to ‘have a voice’ by communicating with the Review Panel in their own words. The questions were:

1. What do you like about UWA’s courses? 2. What can be improved about UWA’s courses? 3. If you would like to elaborate on any of your answers in this questionnaire, please do

so here? The written responses from the open-ended questions were analysed by the Chair of the Audit Team. Initial themes were highlighted and then the comments relating to each theme were counted. Comments from individual students sometimes related to more than one theme and, in these situations, were counted two or more times as appropriate. Presentations of the findings were made to the Audit Team, UWA’s student consultative group and Faculty Deans as a form of member checking.

E1


Approximately 13,000 students currently enrolled and recently graduated from Cycle 1 were contacted by email and asked to respond to the survey. Other forms of communication also were used to promote the survey, including various forms of official social media. The UWA Student Guild also promoted the survey through their official communication channels.

Responses were received from 2828 students, a response rate of 22%. Statistically, this sample size is well over that needed for a confidence level of 95% for the population, but less than that needed for a 99% confidence level. A 95% confidence level is generally accepted for educational and other social science research1 (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2000). The total number of responses varied for each question as students were asked not to respond to questions that were not relevant to them and there was natural attrition.

1.2 Findings from Demographic Questions (Part A)

Table A shows that the percentages of survey participants from each of the undergraduate degrees generally reflected the percentages of undergraduate students currently enrolled in these degrees. Bachelor of Commerce students were under-represented by about 7% and Bachelor of Science students over-represented by about 7%. Bachelor of Philosophy students also were over-represented for their small cohort of a total of approximately 120 students. While the findings from the Bachelor of Philosophy students are included in this analysis because these students are part of the Cycle 1 degrees, data from these students also will be used to inform the review of the Bachelor of Philosophy scheduled for 2016. Students in the Engineering Science major of the Bachelor of Science are the largest cohort in the undergraduate degrees. While they also were the largest group of students to respond to the survey, they were slightly under-represented by about 2%. Due to the large size of the Engineering Science major cohort, and indicators that they were responding in different ways to other students, they were disaggregated from the other Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Philosophy students in the findings presented in all of the overview tables that follow.

1 Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in Education (5th edition). Routledge Falmer: London.

E2


Table A: A comparison of the number and percentage of survey participants’ nominated Cycle 1 course and the percentage load in each course

Course type (subset)

Number of survey participants (subset)

Percentage of total survey participants (subset)

Percentage of total Cycle 1 load at March 2015 (subset)

BA 505 19% 19% BCom 449 17% 24% BDes 82 3% 4% BSc 1599 59% 52% (BSc EngSc) (308) (11.4%) (14%) BPhil 77 3% 1% (BPhil EngSc) (13) (0.5%) (NA) Total 2712 100% 100%

The students’ background data shows that a reasonable spread of students from a range of different demographic groups participated in the survey, including the year they completed their secondary schooling, the first year enrolled at UWA, assured entry pathway students, international and domestic students, students from government, independent and Catholic secondary schools, and students from city, regional and rural backgrounds. These data do not indicate any gross-over or under-representation of the demographic groups. A large proportion (36%) of respondents were from the highest ATAR range of 96-99.95, indicating UWA’s highest academic performing students may have been over-represented in the participants in this survey, given that the mean ATAR for entry to UWA in 2015 was 91.7.

1.3 Findings from Forced Response Questions (Part B)

1.3.1 Course Structure

Eleven forced response questions in the survey focused on the overall UWA course structure (refer to Table B). The findings showed that 87% of participants valued UWA’s internationally recognised course structure; 80% would recommend UWA’s courses to another student; and 78% agreed or strongly agreed that UWA’s course structure provides them with an excellent education. On all three of these questions, students in the Bachelor of Design and the Engineering Science major in the Bachelor of Science had lower proportions of students with this positive point of view. The more recently the participants enrolled at UWA, the greater the percentage of positive responses. For example: 92% of students who enrolled at UWA in 2015 valued UWA’s internationally recognised course structure; 89% would recommend UWA’s courses to another student; and 88% agreed or strongly agreed UWA’s course structure provides them with an excellent education compared with 84%, 72% and 70% for these questions respectively for students who first enrolled in 2012. A larger proportion of international students also provided a positive response to these three questions compared with domestic students.

Two of the 11 questions (questions 3 and 4) related to students’ understanding the course structure. 68% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the course structure is easy to understand and 66% found it easy to plan their personal course structure. The converse of these responses, i.e. that 32% and 34% did not agree that the course structure is easy to understand or plan, indicates there is room for improvement in communicating UWA’s course structure to students. There is more discussion of this point below.

E3


Flexibility

On the flexibility of UWA’s course structure, 77% of students agreed or strongly agreed that UWA’s course structure provides them with the educational flexibility they need with the strongest agreement from students in the Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Science (both 79%) (refer to Table B). Fewer students agreed with this question about flexibility in the Bachelor of Design (57%) where the majority of students are required to take two majors for accreditation purposes, and in the Engineering Science major (73%), where students have four compulsory complementary units, also for accreditation purposes, that limit flexibility with second majors. Participants included many comments on flexibility in the written response section of the survey that indicate that while many valued the flexibility already available in UWA’s courses and could articulate the advantages it brought to them, they had suggestions on how greater flexibility could be included (more information is provided below).

Career/Professional Pathways

Just under two thirds of the participants agreed that UWA’s course structure prepares them well for a career (63%) (question 7), perhaps not a surprising finding given that the survey was about Cycle 1 degrees which are generally not focused on professional qualifications or careers. Bachelor of Arts students were least likely to agree to this question (64%) and there was a strong trend showing that the closer participants were to finishing their degree, the more likely they were to disagree with this statement (52%) compared with students in their first year of studies (77%). Analysis of students’ comments on this topic are included in section 5.4.

Seventy per cent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they would prefer a more obvious pathway, and 61% a quicker pathway, to a professional qualification (Q8 and Q9). These responses were strongest for students in the Engineering Science major (75% & 72%) and Bachelor of Science (75% & 64%) and were stronger for international students (76% & 73%) than domestic students (69% & 60%). Bachelor of Philosophy students were notably less likely to agree with these questions (33% & 36%) as were Bachelor of Arts students (65% & 51%).

Collectively these data strongly suggest that many students currently enrolled at UWA would prefer a greater focus on professional pathways through UWA’s courses with opportunities to complete their degrees in a shorter time frame.

E4


Table B: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Course Structure

Course

Year first enrolled at UWA

Intl/Dom School Type School

Location

Course Structure BA B

Com

BDes

BSc

BSc-

Eng Sc

BPhil

BPhil-Eng Sc

All 2012

2013

2014

2015 All Intl Do

m All Govt

Indp

Cath All Cit

y Reg

l Rural All

1. I value UWA's internationally recognised course structure 89 91 82 87 80 92 36 87 84 85 88 92 87 91 87 87 85 86 88 87 85 90 88 87 2. The course structure at UWA provides me with an excellent education 80 86 64 77 70 80 64 78 70 74 80 88 78 86 77 78 76 78 75 77 76 79 76 77 3. UWA's course structure is easy to understand 68 72 65 67 64 85 73 68 67 65 69 72 68 77 67 68 68 66 69 67 68 67 64 67 4. It was easy for me to plan my personal course structure 65 69 67 65 66 75 73 66 67 67 68 64 66 71 66 66 66 64 69 66 67 64 60 66 5. UWA's course structure provides me with the educational flexibility I need 76 79 57 79 73 77 64 77 71 78 77 84 77 82 76 77 77 76 77 76 76 76 79 76 6. I would prefer a more flexible course structure 51 58 67 51 58 44 45 53 56 50 55 52 53 71 51 53 51 52 48 51 50 54 47 51 7. UWA's course structure will prepare me well for a career 64 74 59 59 60 73 70 63 52 56 66 77 63 72 61 63 64 60 63 62 60 64 63 62 8. I would prefer a more obvious pathway to a professional qualification 65 66 68 75 75 33 45 70 74 73 69 66 70 76 69 70 69 73 65 69 70 70 66 69 9. I would prefer a quicker pathway to a professional qualification 51 60 62 64 72 36 73 61 65 58 59 66 61 73 60 61 60 61 58 60 58 65 60 60 10. UWA's course structure enables me to engage in campus culture (i.e extra curricular activities) 69 64 51 67 65 77 64 67 63 63 67 74 67 63 67 67 67 68 66 67 65 69 77 67 11. I would recommend UWA's courses to another student 84 88 60 79 71 95 73 80 72 77 84 89 80 82 80 80 78 81 81 80 79 83 82 80

E5


1.3.2 Degree

Seven questions were asked about the five undergraduate degrees on offer at UWA, and findings are presented in Table C.

85% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their degree enabled them to meet their educational goals, with students in the Bachelor of Philosophy most likely to agree (92%) and respondents in the Bachelor of Design least likely to agree with this item (76%). A large majority of respondents (81%) agreed or strongly agreed that they would recommend their degree to another student. Responses to this question were highest in the Bachelor of Philosophy (93%) and lowest in the Bachelor of Design (65%) and Engineering Science major (68%).

Almost half the respondents (45%) said they would prefer a different type of degree to be available at UWA. Agreement with this question was highest for students who first enrolled at UWA in 2012 (52%) and lowest for students who first enrolled at UWA in 2015 (39%). The reduction in the proportion of students who said they would prefer a different type of degree over the three years since the introduction of UWA’s New Courses may reflect an improvement in students’ understanding of the advantages of the course structure. Agreement with this question also was higher for international students (59%) than domestic students (43%). It is not clear from this part of the survey what other types of degree students would like to be available in Cycle 1 at UWA, but qualitative comments described in more detail later indicate the response to this question may reflect some students’ view that that they would prefer professional degrees to be available.

Large proportions of students agreed or strongly agreed that their degree enables them to develop both depth and breadth of disciplinary knowledge (83%), learn skills that can be transferred to other study or work (82%), and that the range of majors available in their degree met their educational interests (79%).

E6


Table C: Student Survey Responses to Questions about UWA’s Degrees

Course Intl/Dom School Type School Location

B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc

A ll 2012 2013 2014 2015 A ll Int l D o m A ll Go vt Indp C ath A ll C ity R egl R ural A ll

1. The degree I selected at UWA enables me to meet my educational goals 84 90 76 85 82 92 91 85 79 83 89 91 85 88 85 85 85 84 88 85 85 87 83 852. I would prefer a different type of degree to be available at UWA 43 45 48 45 48 31 36 45 52 47 44 39 45 59 43 45 44 44 40 43 44 41 42 433. My UWA degree enables me to develop both depth and breadth of disciplinary knowledge 84 85 75 84 75 86 82 83 77 79 85 93 83 88 82 83 80 82 84 82 81 85 84 824. My UWA degree enables me to learn skills that I can transfer to other study or work 82 82 81 82 78 95 80 82 76 79 82 90 82 82 82 82 80 82 82 82 80 85 84 825. The range of majors available meets my educational interests 74 77 69 81 80 86 82 79 77 77 79 85 79 76 80 79 80 79 81 80 79 82 82 806. I would prefer different types of majors to be available 65 63 53 58 55 55 60 60 60 60 61 58 60 69 58 60 59 60 55 58 59 58 50 587. I would recommend my degree to another student 83 87 65 81 68 93 73 81 72 79 82 89 81 81 81 81 79 82 82 81 80 83 81 81

Degree (BA, Bcom, BDes, BSc, BPhil)


E7


1.3.3 Degree-Specific Major

Responses to the seven questions about participants’ degree-specific major were, on the whole, very positive (refer to Table D). For example, high percentages of participants strongly agreed or agreed their major is distinctive (80%); increases in depth of knowledge as they progress through the major (86%); is coherent (79%); and, provides engaging content (82%). Participants also agreed they learnt a lot in their major (84%) and would recommend their major to another student (79%).

A smaller percentage of participants agreed that their major provides cutting edge knowledge (62%). Across all items, students in the Bachelor of Design and Engineering Science major provided less favourable responses with only 66% in both cohorts agreeing they would recommend their major to another student. Most notably, only 45% of Engineering Science students agreed that their major provides cutting-edge content. Conversely, 90% of BPhil students agreed or strongly agreed that they learnt a lot in their major. It is important to note that BPhil students do a major from one of the other degrees, but their study is augmented with research training and a research project. These findings may indicate that the inclusion of more research in the undergraduate majors will improve students’ perceptions about the cutting-edge nature of the content being taught. This is a challenge for courses that are professionally accredited, including those in engineering and design, where much of the content of the course is predetermined by professional requirements.

E8


Table D: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Students’ Degree-Specific Major


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. My degree specific major is distinctive 81 80 86 83 73 72 55 80 74 79 83 85 80 81 80 80 79 81 80 80 80 83 79 802. The units in my degree specific major increase in depth of knowledge as I progress through the program of study 84 86 85 88 81 82 91 86 78 84 88 92 86 86 86 86 87 85 86 86 85 87 88 86

3. The units in my degree specific major collectively provide a coherent program of study

75 86 69 80 70 75 73 79 73 75 80 87 79 82 78 79 77 78 79 78 77 80 83 78

4. The units in my degree specific major provide engaging content

88 80 80 85 66 84 64 82 80 79 83 86 82 86 82 82 83 81 82 82 82 83 77 825. The units in my degree specific major provide cutting edge content 63 60 61 69 45 48 45 62 60 60 61 71 62 74 61 62 65 59 61 61 59 64 63 616. I have learned a lot in my degree specific major 83 84 68 87 74 90 73 84 79 83 85 87 84 82 84 84 85 84 85 84 84 86 83 84

7. I would recommend my degree specific major to another student

82 83 66 81 66 85 64 79 70 78 81 87 79 80 79 79 78 80 80 79 78 83 81 79


Degree Specific Major

E9


1.3.4 Second Major

Similar to the degree-specific major, participants responded very positively to the eight questions about their second major (refer to Table E). They agreed or strongly agreed that they valued having the option to do a second major (96%); that their second major is distinctive (81%); increases in depth of knowledge as they progress (88%); is coherent (84%); and engaging (84%). 68% of respondents said they learned a lot in their second major and 83% would recommend their second major to another student. Only 70% of respondents said their second major provided cutting-edge content, however, this compared favourably with the 62% positive response for the degree-specific major.

E10


Table E: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Students’ Second Major


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. I value having the option to do a second major 97 98 89 97 92 100 100 96 94 97 96 97 96 92 97 96 95 98 97 97 96 98 96 972. My second major is distinctive 87 82 62 79 82 70 73 81 74 82 80 87 81 81 81 81 81 81 80 81 81 81 83 813. The units in my second major increase in depth of knowledge as I progress through the program of study 89 88 80 88 85 87 91 88 83 88 87 92 88 87 88 88 88 89 86 88 88 86 83 884. The units in my second major collectively provide a coherent program of study 85 87 67 84 83 77 91 84 79 82 85 90 84 85 84 84 85 84 81 84 84 83 82 845. The units in my second major provide engaging content 85 84 68 85 77 81 91 84 82 82 84 87 84 85 84 84 84 84 83 84 84 83 79 846. The units in my second major provide cutting edge content 70 69 64 72 64 59 73 70 63 68 70 78 70 76 69 70 72 67 68 69 68 71 70 697. I have learned a lot in my second major 87 89 72 86 82 79 73 86 85 87 85 86 86 86 85 86 85 86 86 86 86 84 83 868. I would recommend my second major to another student 86 86 66 83 80 75 64 83 79 82 84 88 83 85 83 83 83 82 84 83 83 83 79 83


Second Major

E11


1.3.5 Broadening Units

Two thirds of students valued doing broadening units (66%), and agreed that broadening units enhanced their educational experience (69%) (refer to Table F). In particular, international students (83%) valued broadening units and felt broadening units had enhanced their education (88%), compared with domestic students (64% & 66%).

Notwithstanding this positive feedback, well over a third of students felt doing broadening units negatively affected their overall weighted average mark (42%), particularly students in the Bachelor of Design (54%) and the Engineering Science major (48%). A large proportion of students (82%) agreed or strongly agreed that they would prefer to be able to choose broadening units outside their major discipline, but within their degree. Students in the Bachelor of Commerce were the least likely to agree with this item (78%), and students in the Engineering Science major most likely to agree (86%).

Many participants wrote comments on broadening units in the open-ended section of the survey and more information is provided in the next section.

1.3.6 Category A Broadening Units

Category A Broadening Units were slightly less valued by participants than broadening units (62%), and about half (49%) felt there was not sufficient Category A Broadening Units from which to select something interesting (refer to Table G). More than half the survey participants (53%) agreed they would prefer not to have to do a Category A Broadening Unit. Almost half the international student participants (49%) and one third of the domestic participants (34%) agreed that international students don’t need to do a Category A Broadening Unit. As all international students travel internationally by coming to Australia to study, it could be argued that the very nature of being an international student fulfils the global and multicultural requirements of a Category A Broadening Unit.

E12


Table F: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Students’ Broadening Units

Table G: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Category A Broadening Units


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. I value doing broadening units 73 75 59 63 52 75 73 66 64 63 66 72 66 83 64 66 60 64 66 63 64 63 58 632. Doing broadening units enhanced my educational experience 73 76 62 68 57 77 64 69 64 65 72 77 69 88 66 69 66 66 68 66 65 68 67 663. Doing broadening units negatively affected by overall weighted average mark 41 41 54 41 48 33 22 42 44 43 39 40 42 47 41 42 42 40 42 41 42 41 37 414. I would prefer to be able to choose broadening units outside my major discipline area but within my degree 83 78 82 83 86 79 82 82 81 81 81 85 82 80 82 82 82 83 82 83 83 82 85 83


Broadening Units


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-Eng Sc


1. I value doing a Category A broadening unit 71 68 63 59 49 72 64 62 62 61 59 66 62 76 60 62 60 59 61 60 60 60 57 602. There are sufficient Category A broadening units for me to select a unit I was interested in 51 61 56 47 43 74 64 51 49 51 48 54 51 61 49 51 50 49 48 49 50 48 45 493. I would prefer not to have to do a Category A broadening unit 45 50 51 56 64 38 55 53 54 53 54 53 53 53 54 53 53 56 50 54 53 55 57 544. International students don't need to do a Category A broadening unit 33 37 34 35 44 39 60 36 35 36 36 38 36 49 34 36 38 33 33 34 34 37 32 34


Category A Broadening Units

E13



The majority of students who responded to the survey value communication skills being taught in their major (79%), in particular international students (83%) and students enrolled in the Bachelor of Design (90%) and Bachelor of Commerce (82%) (refer to Table H). More than two thirds of students agreed or strongly agreed that they could identify when communication skills were being taught in their major (74%); however, only about half (52%) the respondents agreed that the quality of communication skills training in their major is excellent.

Very few students (26%) agreed that their communication skills were enhanced by undertaking the CARS non-credit module.


Like communication skills, a large majority of students who responded to the survey valued research skills being taught in their major (88%) and could identify when research skills were being taught (83%) (refer to Table I). A smaller majority of students thought the research training in their major was of excellent quality (64%) and thought the research training would enable them to work at the frontier of their discipline (64%). The students enrolled in the Bachelor of Design were comparatively negative about the research training in their majors, with only 36% agreeing that research training in this degree is excellent. The Bachelor of Philosophy students, including those enrolled in the Engineering Science major, very much valued research training in their degree (97% & 100%).

E14


Table H: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Communication Skills

Table I: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Research Skills


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. I value communication skills being taught in my major 71 82 90 80 80 72 73 79 80 78 78 80 79 83 78 79 79 78 79 78 77 81 81 782. I can identify when communication skills are being taught in my major 74 72 74 76 73 72 82 74 76 74 73 74 74 77 74 74 76 71 76 74 72 78 73 743. The communication skills training in my major is excellent qualtiy 51 53 49 53 48 45 45 52 50 51 49 57 52 66 50 52 51 47 53 50 48 53 53 504. My communication skills were enhanced by undertaking the CARS non-credit module 28 29 21 26 26 16 27 26 20 23 30 33 26 48 23 26 24 21 26 24 23 25 22 24


Communication Skills


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. I value research skills being taught in my major 88 84 83 89 85 97 100 88 90 88 85 89 88 86 88 88 89 87 88 88 88 88 85 882. I can identify when research skills are being taught in my major 84 78 72 86 74 92 100 83 84 84 81 82 83 80 83 83 85 81 85 83 83 83 84 833. The research skills training in my major is excellent quality 65 62 36 68 52 71 64 64 63 64 62 67 64 72 63 64 63 59 69 63 63 62 66 634. The research skills being taught in my major enable me to work at the frontier of my discipline 64 61 52 66 58 67 70 64 62 62 63 69 64 74 62 64 61 59 69 62 62 62 63 62


Research Skills

E15


1.3.9 Study Abroad

Students who participated in study abroad valued this opportunity (67%) and would recommend it to another student (80%), but many agreed it is difficult to fit into their degree structure (64%) (refer to Table J). Moreover, about half of those who had participated in study abroad said it lengthened their degree (53%). It is not clear whether they thought this was a problem or not.

A considerable proportion of the students who did not, or thought they will not, participate said they would like to do study abroad (79%) and about two thirds of these students thought that they had not had an opportunity to do study abroad (65%). The majority thought that there is not enough flexibility in their course (62%), and the majority also agreed or strongly agreed that study abroad is too expensive (83%).

1.3.10 Indigenous Content

About half the respondents (54%) agreed or strongly agreed that the online, not for credit module Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE) enhanced their understanding of Indigenous people (refer to Table J). This percentage was greater for international students (75%) than domestic students (51%) and greater for students who attended high school in the city (51%) than those who attended high school in rural areas (46%). 60% of respondents agreed that they were able to select units that improved their knowledge of Indigenous Australian people (greater for international students at 74% than domestic students at 60%), and about half the respondents (47%) felt there should be more Indigenous content in UWA’s degrees.

E16


Table J: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Study Abroad and Indigenous Content


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. I did/will participate in Study Abroada). I value Study Abroad as part of my degree 71 70 78 59 63 98 100 67 59 61 68 80 67 82 64 67 63 65 65 64 65 64 60 64 b). I would recommend Study Abroad to another student 79 82 83 76 83 100 100 80 79 77 79 88 80 87 79 80 78 78 81 79 79 78 82 79 c). Study Abroad is difficult to fit into my degree structure 53 67 61 69 71 49 73 64 58 63 69 65 64 60 65 64 64 66 65 65 66 65 62 65 d). Study Abroad lengthens my degree 47 59 46 57 66 18 9 53 48 51 56 57 53 59 52 53 48 54 55 52 52 55 46 522. I did/will not participate in Study Abroada). I would like to do Study Abroad 74 82 82 79 79 93 83 79 78 81 78 80 79 79 79 79 77 79 82 79 80 77 78 79 b). I have not had an opportunity to participate in Study Abroad 63 67 64 66 66 27 25 65 60 66 64 69 65 69 65 65 63 65 66 65 65 65 62 65

c). There is not enough flexibility in my course to do Study Abroad

56 61 56 63 71 33 50 62 65 67 61 55 62 72 60 62 56 60 65 60 61 59 54 60 d). Study Abroad is too expensive 85 79 88 83 81 75 75 83 79 83 83 85 83 80 83 83 83 81 85 83 83 84 79 83

Study Abroad



B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. The online not for credit module, Indigenous Studies Essentials (ISE), enhanced my understanding of Indigenous people 57 51 54 54 49 49 64 54 47 51 55 62 54 75 51 54 54 48 53 51 51 51 46 512. I was able to select units that improved my knowledge of Indigenous Australian people 69 56 43 62 57 65 70 61 54 62 64 65 61 74 60 61 58 58 63 60 60 59 56 603. There should be more Indigenous content in UWA's degrees 63 39 37 45 37 49 20 47 52 48 43 44 47 54 46 47 50 41 49 46 47 45 37 46

Indigenous Content


E17


1.3.11 Academic Conduct Essentials (ACE)

The online not-for-credit, compulsory module called Academic Conduct Essentials (ACE) was viewed as enhancing understanding of academic integrity by 63% of respondents, with a greater proportion of international students agreeing to this question (79%) than domestic students (61%) (refer to Table K). More international students (80%) compared with domestic students (65%) felt the module made them more aware of plagiarism. Almost half the respondents (46%) felt that there should be more information and training in their degree about academic integrity.

1.3.12 Service Learning

A high proportion of students who had participated in service learning valued that experience (93%) and said they would recommend a service learning unit to another UWA student (89%) (refer to Table L). Students who attended high school in city areas (95%) were more likely to value service learning than those from rural schools (86%). Just under two thirds of respondents agreed that there are sufficient opportunities to participate in service learning (63%). However, a high percentage of students (85%) agreed there should be more opportunities for service learning in UWA’s undergraduate courses.

E18


Table K: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Academic Conduct Essentials (ACE)

Table L: Student Survey Responses to Questions about Service Learning


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. The online not for credit compulsory module in Academic Conduct Essentials (ACE) enhanced my understanding of academic integrity 60 65 54 66 61 47 82 63 64 61 63 67 63 79 61 63 64 58 64 61 60 64 61 612. Completion of ACE has made me more aware of plagiarism 60 69 58 70 66 50 73 67 64 66 67 70 67 80 65 67 67 62 66 65 64 68 65 653. There should be more information and training in my degree about academic integrity 42 52 44 45 49 36 36 46 48 44 48 45 46 68 43 46 44 42 43 43 43 44 41 43

Year first enrolled at UWAAcademic Conduct Essentials

(ACE)


B A B C o m

B D es B Sc

B Sc-Eng Sc

B P hil

B P hil-

Eng Sc


1. I value being able to do service learning 96 83 100 94 94 100 100 93 91 93 95 95 93 91 93 93 91 91 97 93 95 90 86 932. There are sufficient opportunities for me to participate in service learning 70 78 100 54 76 67 100 63 47 70 61 62 63 83 59 63 63 61 56 60 65 50 43 59

3. There should be more opportunities for service learning in UWAs undergraduate courses

87 78 100 87 81 67 100 85 87 89 88 76 85 87 85 85 86 81 89 85 84 87 86 854. I would recommend a service learning unit to another UWA student 91 82 100 89 87 100 100 89 93 86 92 90 89 91 89 89 94 82 92 88 88 90 92 89


Service Learning

E19


1.4 Findings from the Open-Ended Questions (Part C)

1.4.1 What do you like about UWA’s Courses?

The first open-ended question of the survey asked students: What do you like about UWA’s courses? The findings from the thematic analysis of the responses are presented in Figure A. The responses indicated that flexibility is by far the most liked aspect of UWA’s courses followed by broadening and elective units.

Figure A: Themes in Students’ Responses to the Question: What do you like about UWA’s Courses?

Examples of students’ responses on flexibility indicate they like to be able to change majors and take units and degree specific and second majors from very different disciplines:

I absolutely love the flexibility of the degree structure which allows you to choose a major in Commerce and a second major from a completely different faculty like Science or Arts.

The flexibility and range of topics that can be studied simultaneously Flexibility for indecisive people I like the flexibility that UWA has to offer The flexibility to take anything you want and tailor it to your degree Really diverse and flexible The courses are very flexible. That is you are able to do two majors in almost any

different combination I like the flexibility to change your major and not have to choose what you want to

study in your fist year

E20


Examples of students’ responses on broadening and elective units show how much they enjoy selecting units of their choice from a broad range of disciplines and topics:

For example I love my major in Anatomy and Human Biology and very much enjoy my second major in Biochemistry, however, I also enjoy Greek mythology and astronomy. Although I would never pursue either of these fields individually the UWA system allowed me to take them as electives and broadening units that were very fun and also interesting

They allow for broad learning through the broadening units I am able to pick some units that I have an interest in outside my major Broad cohesive education We get to choose units outside our degree specific

Even though the survey did not focus on the quality of teaching, a number of students provided positive comments about the quality of teaching at UWA. Examples follow:

Furthermore the courses are taught by world class lecturers who are leaders in their field

…the organisation and people running it know what they’re doing and actually care about the students’ experience

The lecturers and tutors are of superb quality in the psychology discipline Most of my professors are much more helpful to undergraduates than I expected they

would be before my degree Enthusiastic lecturers and tutors The teachers are fantastic The high calibre of teaching staff and depth of knowledge and experience they bring

to teaching [The] teachers think and care about the students. They try to make it easier for us to

participate and engage in the study

1.4.2 What can be improved about UWA’s courses?

The second open-ended question of the survey asked students: What can be improved about UWA’s courses? The findings from the thematic analysis of the responses are presented in Figure B. It is interesting to observe that while flexibility was the aspect of UWA’s courses most liked by students, flexibility also was seen most frequently as the aspect of UWA’s courses that could be improved.

E21


Figure B: Themes in Students’ Responses to the Question: What can be improved about UWA’s Courses?

The students’ responses to this question indicate that they would like to see more flexibility with regard to complementary units, summer and winter courses, and more flexibility within specific majors, amongst other things:

More complementary units that are related to your degree specific major More summer and winter courses Degree flexibility particularly with the music majors- these are very strict… More majors being offered and greater specialisation of units More language such as Arabic or Spanish Enhanced flexibility to change majors/degrees I hear that the old course structure is more flexible, and you can get a lot more

majors. I would prefer that on my academic transcript My degree specific major requires me to complete 10 compulsory units of the course

of a three year degree, which is ridiculous More arts electives Greater range of core units available in summer school More diversity

Students’ responses to this question indicated their emotions and passions with regard to broadening units:

Whilst I found that some of the broadening units were helpful to me in an everyday sense, these were not helpful in my degree at all. … significantly altered by GPA

No broadening units Broadening units should be able to be taken in chosen degree but outside major I don’t think that broadening units should be compulsory but optional

E22


The extent to which broadening units affect your WAM should be more closely examined. I do not think that they should be as highly weighted as core units

I think broadening units are unnecessary and I would far rather be given the opportunity to decide myself what would enhance my degree as an adult.

Sometimes doing electives and broadening units are a big waste of time.

In comparison to the first qualitative question, responses to the second question indicated many students’ negative perceptions of the quality of teaching at UWA:

The quality of lecturers in some units should be improved… Teachers should be hired as lecturers, not professors. Researchers tend not to have

teaching skills and this could affect students’ learning abilities Some tutors need to be more engaging The calibre of teaching could be drastically improved… Engineering tutorials can be more engaging and practical. Tutors lack experience

and further knowledge and they only know the theory aspect of what they teach. Teachers seem not to care about the students learning but more about getting their

teaching “over and done with”… Many responses to this question requested that UWA consider making the courses more practical with improved connections to industry:

More actual practical experience so graduates are more employable Being more practical and applicable More labs and practical understanding Particularly engineering, make it more hands on and discipline focused earlier on… Compulsory internships Provide more industry related content Would like to be taught how to use specific programs vital to getting a job More workplace experience There is not enough collaboration with the community and workplace Greater industry involvement is a must!!! Course needs more work experience and opportunities to get into the workforce

A number of student responses to this question showed some frustration with the elongated degree structure and their desire for shorter pathways to professional qualifications:

I do engineering and UWA’s engineering course… is not compatible with engineering courses in a lot of other universities overseas

…instead of handballing us towards postgrad Engineering should be 4 year course, not 5. There is no difference between the BE

units and MPE. I would prefer medicine to be brought back to an undergraduate degree The course is intentionally and unnecessarily extended to fill 3 years (Architecture). I wish there was an option to complete the degree faster by doing summer school or

something. I feel I have to pay 3 years of tuition before I even have the opportunity to find out

what planners do.

E23


For subjects like engineering, more direct pathway to qualification – not much is done in the first 3 years.

Clearer pathways to future possible careers

Many student responses indicated that clearer communication of course pathways prior to enrolment at UWA and improved course advice while they are studying would be much appreciated:

They need to provide more information about courses both before commencement and during the actual course

More advice and knowledge on career paths In addition, there should be a great deal more information… More direction throughout my undergrad, it felt like being thrown into the deep end

and having no idea what units to select or which direction they would take me… A better understanding of the post grad options for your degree More structure and guidance as to what units should be studied Explaining prerequisite units… Information about courses and clearer pathways

1.4.3 Student Elaborations

The third and final qualitative question in the survey asked students: If you would like to elaborate on any of your answers in this questionnaire, please do so here? The thematic analysis of responses to this question is shown in Figure C.

Figure C: Themes in students’ responses to the question: What can be improved about UWA’s courses?

E24


The themes that resulted from the analysis of students’ responses to this final question resonated with the previous two questions. There were many comments about the quality of teaching, mostly the perceived poor quality of teaching, general comments about the course structure, broadening units and the flexibility and choices available to students. A number of students commented specifically about their particular major or course.

1.5 Conclusion

The student survey provided rich information about currently enrolled and recently graduated students’ perceptions of UWA’s Cycle 1 courses. Students at UWA value the internationally recognised course structure and perceive this course structure as providing them with an excellent education, including both breadth and depth of knowledge and transferrable skills. Many students at UWA, however, would prefer clearer and shorter pathways to professional qualifications.

Students very much value the flexibility of UWA’s Cycle 1 degrees but had suggestions for enhancing this flexibility, for example, with regard to redefining broadening units and providing more summer school units. Students suggested that UWA’s courses need to be more clearly communicated to prospective students and were of the view that better course advice was needed for enrolled students.

The survey indicated that student perceptions of their degree-specific majors and second majors were very positive and that they viewed them as distinctive, developmental, coherent and engaging. Improvements of the majors should focus on highlighting cutting-edge content, more practical activities and better links with industry. Students value the teaching of both communication and research skills in their major, but expressed the view that the quality of teaching these skills could be improved.

Students in the Bachelor of Philosophy had the most positive views of their course and students in the Bachelor of Design and Engineering Science major consistently showed less favourable views of their course compared with students in other courses. These less favourable perceptions may in part be attributed to the restrictions on the degree/major as a result of the requirements of professional accreditation.

The inclusion of study abroad, indigenous content and service learning had mixed perceptions from students, and it is evident that delivery of these aspects of the courses is less well developed and should continue to be supported and enhanced.

E25

APPENDIX Bachelor of Commerce - Second Major Completions, 2014

BCom Completion-Second Major in Business 2014

Degree Major Second Major in Business

Count Average WAM

MJD-ACCTG MJS-BSLAW 26 70.9

MJS-ECNSM 5 68.3

MJS-FINCE 85 70.3

MJS-HRSMT 1 82.2

MJS-MGMNT 4 71.3

MJS-MRKTG 2 70.9 MJD-ACCTG Total 123 70.4 MJD-BSLAW MJS-ACCTG 4 69.7

MJS-ECNSM 4 75.2

MJS-FINCE 2 71.1

MJS-HRSMT 2 75.7

MJS-MGMNT 3 71.2 MJD-BSLAW Total 15 72.5 MJD-ECNSM MJS-ACCTG 2 72.5

MJS-BSLAW 5 75.0

MJS-FINCE 12 70.1

MJS-MGMNT 1 64.2

MJS-MRKTG 1 77.8 MJD-ECNSM Total 21 71.5 MJD-FINCE MJS-ACCTG 8 68.9

MJS-BSLAW 6 73.4

MJS-ECNSM 26 70.6

MJS-MGMNT 3 73.2

MJS-MRKTG 3 64.8

MJD-FINCE Total 46 70.5 MJD-HRSMT MJS-ACCTG 1 75.2

MJS-BSLAW 1 66.8

MJS-MGMNT 7 66.3

MJS-MRKTG 1 63.5 MJD-HRSMT Total 10 66.9 MJD-MGMNT MJS-ACCTG 1 64.2

MJS-BSLAW 2 72.8

MJS-FINCE 1 64.8

MJS-HRSMT 4 66.8

MJS-MRKTG 4 69.9 MJD-MGMNT Total 12 68.4

F1

MJD-MRKTG MJS-BSLAW 1 62.3

MJS-ECNSM 3 63.5

MJS-FINCE 1 58.9

MJS-HRSMT 4 69.3

MJS-MGMNT 15 68.2 MJD-MRKTG Total 24 67.2 Grand Total 251 70.1

BCom Completion-Second Major in Arts 2014

Degree Major Second Major in Arts

Count Average WAM

MJD-ACCTG MJS-ANTSC 1 69.3

MJS-ITLNI 1 81.0

MJS-JPNSI 1 64.9 MJD-ACCTG Total 3 71.7 MJD-BSLAW MJS-KOREB 1 61.9

MJS-LWSOC 1 63.3

MJS-POLSC 1 80.0

MJS-WKERL 1 64.6 MJD-BSLAW Total 4 67.4 MJD-ECNSM MJS-CHNSB 1 75.3

MJS-CMMST 4 73.7

MJS-JPNSI 1 67.5

MJS-LWSOC 3 65.2

MJS-POLSC 3 79.2 MJD-ECNSM Total 12 72.6 MJD-FINCE MJS-FRNHB 1 59.7

MJS-HISTY 1 68.8

MJD-FINCE Total 2 64.3 MJD-HRSMT MJS-MUSST 1 73.9

MJS-POLSC 1 62.0

MJS-WKERL 2 69.6 MJD-HRSMT Total 4 68.8 MJD-MGMNT MJS-CMMST 2 70.8

MJS-JPNSI 1 76.1 MJD-MGMNT Total 3 72.6 MJD-MRKTG MJS-CMMST 5 73.6

MJS-JPNSI 1 68.5 MJD-MRKTG Total 6 72.8 Grand Total 34 71.0

F2

BCom Completion-Second Major in Science 2014

Degree Major Second Major in Science

Count Average WAM

MJD-ACCTG MJS-PSYSC 1 70.9

MJS-PSYSO 1 66.5

MJS-SPTSC 1 73.7 MJD-ACCTG Total 3 70.4 MJD-BSLAW MJS-PSYSO 1 83.6 MJD-BSLAW Total 1 83.6 MJD-ECNSM MJS-BCHMB 1 78.9

MJS-ENGSC 4 70.7

MJS-NRMGT 3 67.2 MJD-ECNSM Total 8 70.4 MJD-FINCE MJS-ANHBY 1 62.0

MJS-CMPSC 2 76.3

MJS-ENGSC 19 75.3

MJS-PHYGY 1 82.8 MJD-FINCE Total 23 75.1 MJD-HRSMT MJS-PSYSO 2 73.4 MJD-HRSMT Total 2 73.4 MJD-MGMNT MJS-ENGSC 6 73.8

MJS-PSYSO 2 67.5

MJS-SPTSC 1 75.7

MJS-ZOOLY 1 54.3 MJD-MGMNT Total 10 70.8 Grand Total 47 73.2

BCom Course Completion with Second Major Unknown

Degree Major with Second Major Unknown

Count Average WAM

MJD-ACCTG 14 66.2 MJD-BSLAW 3 75.2 MJD-ECNDM 7 75.2 MJD-ECNSM 3 68.6 MJD-FINCE 9 66.9 MJD-HRSMT 3 71.7 MJD-MGMNT 3 69.6 MJD-MRKTG 5 65.7 Grand Total 47 68.9

F3

APPENDIX Bachelor of Commerce - Reasons Contributing to Discontinuation, 2012 – 2015

Commencement Year

Discontinuation Year and Reasons 2012 2013 2014 2015 % of Reason 2012 89 100.0%

Change of Course 39

43.8%

Course transfer within UWA 16

18.0%

Dissatisfaction with course 2

2.2%

Employment-work commitments 2

2.2%

Enrolment Lapsed 5

5.6%

Medical reasons 2

2.2%

Move to other tertiary institution 4

4.5%

Never enrolled in course 9

10.1%

Offer declined 1

1.1%

Personal reasons 3

3.4%

Unspecified reason 6

6.7%

2013 92 47 100.0% Change of Course 7 5.0%

Course transfer within UWA 36 14

36.0%

Employment-work commitments 1

0.7%

Enrolment Lapsed 40

28.8%

Move to other tertiary institution 11 10

15.1%

Never enrolled in course 4

2.9%

Other reason 1

0.7%

Overseas/interstate move 2 2

2.9%

Personal reasons 1 5

4.3%

Unsatisfactory academic course progression 1

0.7%

Unspecified reason 1 3

2.9%

2014 51 111 92 100.0% Change of Course 1 1 16 7.1%

Course transfer within UWA 18 44 17 31.1%

Dissatisfaction with course 2 1 3 2.4%

Employment-work commitments 1 3 1.6%

Enrolment Lapsed 20 37 1 22.8%

Financial difficulty 1 2 1.2%

Move to other tertiary institution 2 11 23 14.2%

Never enrolled in course

11 4.3%

Other reason 2 3 2.0%

Overseas/interstate move 2 2 1 2.0%

Personal reasons 2 4 9 5.9%

Student deceased

1 0.4%

Study workload

1 0.4%

Unsatisfactory academic course progression 3 5

3.1%

Unspecified reason 1 2 1 1.6%

G1

Discontinuation Year and Reasons 2012 2013 2014 2015 % of Reason 2015 20 44 56 55 100.0%

Change of Course 1 0.6%

Course transfer within UWA 8 18 31 15 41.1%

Dissatisfaction with course

1 3 2.3%

Employment-work commitments 2 1 1 2.3%

Enrolment Lapsed 11 18 9 21.7%

Move to other tertiary institution 1 4 7 11 13.1%

Never enrolled in course

1 9 5.7%

Other reason

3 1.7%

Overseas/interstate move

1 2 1.7%

Personal reasons 2 3 8 7.4%

Study workload

1 0.6%

Unspecified reason

2 1 1.7%

Grand Total 252 202 148 55

G2

APPENDIX Bachelor of Commerce - Changes and Rationale for Changes to Majors

Accounting major Level Accounting major

Prerequisites Changes

Level 1 Complete all of

Core: ACCT1101 Financial Accounting FINA1221 Introduction to Finance

Level 2 Complete at least all core units

Core: ACCT2201 Corporate Accounting ACCT2112 Management Accounting Options: ACCT2331 Taxation

ACCT1101 ACCT1101 ACCT1101

Level 3 Complete any 4 units (or any 3 unit if 3 Level 2 units completed), including at least 1 of ACCT3321 or ACCT3323

Options: ACCT3202 Advanced Corporate Accounting ACCT3203 Contemporary Managerial Accounting ACCT3206 Performance Measurement & Evaluation ACCT3302 Financial Statement Analysis ACCT3321 Financial Accounting: Theory & Practice ACCT3322 Auditing ACCT3323 Strategic Management Accounting

ACCT2112 ACCT2112 ACCT2201 ACCT2201 ACCT2201 ACCT2201 ACCT3203

New prerequisite of ACCT2112

Rationale for changes: To comply with the NC2012 level progression structure, it was decided to change the prerequisite for ACCT3323 to a level 2 unit rather than have it as a level 3 unit. Making this change also enables students to take any of the three elective units required at Level 3. The previous prerequisite was relevant when the School offered a major in Managerial Accounting major, but this is no longer the case. Economics (single) major Level Economics (single) major



Core: ECON1101Microeconomics: Prices and Markets ECON1102 Macroeconomics: Money and Finance

Level 2 Complete 2 core units and two options

Core: ECON2233 Microeconomics: Policy and Applications ECON2234 Macroeconomics: Policy and Applications Options: ECON2271 Business Econometrics ECON2245 Business Economics ECON2105 Rise of the Global Economy ECON2106 Asia in the World Economy

ECON1101 ECON1102 STAT1520 ECON1101 ECON1101 ECON1101

ECON2106 moved to level 2 option from level 3 with a new prerequisite

H1

Complete any 3 units including at least 1 of ECON3235 International Trade, ECON3236 International Finance or ECON3395 Economic Policy

Options: ECON3302 Applied Microeconomics ECON3303 Applied Macroeconomics ECON3272 Intermediate Mathematics for

Economists ECON3371 Econometrics ECON3372 Advanced Mathematics for

Economists ECON3235 International Trade ECON3395 Economic Policy ECON3210 Monetary Economics ECON3310 History of Economic Ideas ECON3301 Game Theory and Strategic Thinking ECON3220 Development Economics ECON3350 Money Banking & Financial Markets ECON3236 International Finance ECON3204 Finance and Economics for Minerals and Energy ECON3205 Health Economics

ECON2233 ECON2234 ECON2271 ECON2271 & Co-requisite ECON3272 ECON3272 ECON2234 ECON2233 ECON2234 or any level 2 finance unit ECON2233 ECON2233 ECON2234 ECON2234 or any level 2 finance unit ECON2234 or any level 2 finance unit Any level 2 finance or economics unit ECON2233

New unit

Rationale for changes: The structure of both the single and double Economics majors have been amended to assist with the limited Level 2 options and to make way for a wider array of options at Level 3. The unit ECON3203 Asia in the World Economy will be offered as a new Level 2 unit and will be offered in semester 2. This will open up more options in global economics units as ECON2105 Rise of the Global Economy will remain in semester 1. A new Level 3 unit ECON3205 Health Economics will be offered to introduce the student to the methods of health economics and demonstrate how these methods can be applied to analyse issues in health policy and management. Topics covered include the institutions of the Australian system of health care and health statistics, evaluation techniques, production of health, demand for health care and technology, moral hazard and adverse selection in health insurance markets, health labour markets, including physician-patient interactions, managed care, regulation and payment systems for providers, comparative health systems, the pharmaceutical industry, health policy and social insurance.

Economics (double) major Level Economics (double) major

Prerequisites/Co-

requisites Changes


Core: ECON1101 Microeconomics: Prices and Markets ECON1102 Macroeconomics: Money and

Finance

Level 2 Complete 2 core units and 3 options

Core: ECON2233 Microeconomics: Policy and Applications ECON2234 Macroeconomics: Policy and

Applications ECON2271 Business Econometrics

ECON1101 ECON1102

H2

Options: ECON2105 Rise of the Global Economy ECON2245 Business Economics ECON2106 Asia in the World Economy

ECON1101 ECON1101 ECON1101

Moved from core to option Moved from core to option ECON2106 moved to level 2 option from level 3

Level 3 Complete 3 core units and complete any 4 options including at least 1 of ECON3235 International Trade, ECON3236 International Finance or ECON3395 Economic Policy

Core: ECON3302 Applied Microeconomics ECON3303 Applied Macroeconomics ECON3272 Intermediate Mathematics for

Economists Options: ECON3371 Econometrics ECON3372 Advanced Mathematics for

Economists ECON3235 International Trade ECON3395 Economic Policy ECON3210 Monetary Economics ECON3310 History of Economic Ideas ECON3301 Game Theory and Strategic

Thinking ECON3220 Development Economics ECON3236 International Finance ECON3350 Money Banking & Financial Markets ECON3204 Finance and Economics for

Minerals and Energy ECON3205 Health Economics

ECON2233 ECON2234 ECON2271 ECON2271 ECON3272 ECON2234 ECON2234 ECON2234 or any level 2 finance unit ECON2233 ECON2233 ECON2234 ECON2234 or any level 2 finance unit ECON2234 or any level 2 finance unit Any level 2 finance or economics unit ECON2233

Remove ECON3272 as co-requisite New unit

Rationale for changes: The structure of both the single and double Economics majors have been amended to assist with the limited Level 2 options and to make way for a wider array of options at Level 3. The unit ECON3203 Asia in the World Economy will be offered as a new Level 2 unit and will be offered in semester 2. This will open up more options in global economics units as ECON2105 Rise of the Global Economy will remain in semester 1. A new Level 3 unit ECON3205 Health Economics will be offered to introduce the student to the methods of health economics and demonstrate how these methods can be applied to analyse issues in health policy and management. Topics covered include the institutions of the Australian system of health care and health statistics, evaluation techniques, production of health, demand for health care and technology, moral hazard and adverse selection in health insurance markets, health labour markets, including physician-patient interactions, managed care, regulation and payment systems for providers, comparative health systems, the pharmaceutical industry, health policy and social insurance. Finance major Level Finance major Prerequisites/Co-requisites

Changes (Nil)


Core: ACCT1101 Financial Accounting FINA1221 Introduction to Finance

H3

Level 2 One core unit and two options

Core: FINA2222 Corporate Financial Policy Options: FINA2209 Financial Planning FINA2204 Derivative Products and Markets FINA2205 Quantitative Methods for Finance FINA2207 Business Analysis and Valuation

FINA1221 FINA1221 STAT1520 or equivalent & FINA1221 STAT1520 or equivalent & FINA1221 FINA1221

Level 3 One core unit and two options

Core: FINA3324 Investment Analysis Options: FINA3326 Applied Financial Management FINA3306 Derivative Strategies and Pricing FINA3307 Trading in Securities Markets FINA3304 Banking: Theory & Practice ECON3236 International Finance

Any Level 2 finance unit FINA2222 FINA2204 & FINA2205 FINA3324 FINA2222 ECON2234 or any level 2 finance unit

Rationale for changes: N/A. No changes to the major

Human Resource Management major Level Human Resource Management major



Core: MGMT1135 Organisational Behaviour MGMT1136 Management & Organisations


Core: HRMT2237 Human Resource Management EMPL2202 Australian Employment Relations

MGMT1135 EMPL1101 or EMPL1206 or MGMT1135 or MGMT1136

Replaced EMPL2201


Core: HRMT3344 Staffing Organisations HRMT3345 Managing Jobs Performance and Well-being EMPL3241 International Employment Relations EMPL3270 Negotiation: Theory and Practice

HRMT2237 HRMT2237 EMPL2202 any two Level 2 units in the Human Resource Management major, Management major or Work and Employment Relations major

Moved from option to core unit. Removed EMPL2201as a prerequisite as it is no longer offered in the major. Unit is new to the major

Rationale for changes: EMPL2202 was added to this major and EMPL2201 was removed in order to make it consistent with the Work and Employment Relations major in the Bachelor of Arts, similar to the model for the Masters’ degree in HR

H4

and ER. The unit EMPL3301 Globalisation and Work was removed from the major and replaced with EMPL3270 Negotiation: Theory and Practice as this unit is more attractive with students and receives a higher level of student feedback. Management major Level Management major

Prerequisites/co-requisites Changes


Core: MGMT1135 Organisational Behaviour MGMT1136 Management & Organisations

Level 2 Any two of

Options: HRMT2237 Human Resource Management MGMT2311 Organisational Learning & innovation INMT2232 Project Management MGMT2341 International Management ABUS2290 Cultural Foundations of Asian Business

MGMT1135 MGMT1135 or MGMT1136 MGMT1135 or MGMT1136 MGMT1135 or MGMT1136 MGMT1135 or MGMT1136

Level 3 Complete any 4 units including at least 1 of MGMT3347 Strategic Management, MGMT3335 Enterprise Systems, or MGMT3304 Applied International Business Strategy

Options: MGMT3335 Enterprise Systems INMT3231 Decision-making MGMT3347 Strategic Management INMT3234 Information Systems Management MGMT3304 Applied International Business Strategy EMPL3270 Negotiation Theory & Practice MGMT3346 Managing Organisational Change MGMT3302 Leadership and Performance MGMT3342 Entrepreneurship ABUS3204 Models of Asian Business MGMT3308 Supply Chain Management

INMT2232 INMT2232 HRMT2237 & any Level 2 management unit INMT2232 ABUS2290 or MGMT2341 HRMT2237 or EMPL2202 HRMT2237 or MGMT2311 HRMT2237 or MGMT2311 One Level 2 marketing or management unit ABUS2290 Any level 2 unit from the management major

Any two level 2 units in the Management major MGMT2341 and one level 2 unit in the Management major Any two units in the HRM, Management or WER major Any two level 2 units in the Management major MGMT1135 and any two level 2 units in the Management, HRM or Marketing majors Any two units in the Marketing or Management majors ABUS2290 or INMT2341 Any two level 2 units in the

H5

Management major

Rationale for changes: The majority of prerequisites at level 3 have been changed from a unit content specific prerequisite to more general level 2 prerequisites across the majors that the units are offered in. Originally, the prerequisites were allocated to encourage students to go into the various ‘streams’ offered in the major, however, this has been changed to open up the units to more students.

Marketing major Level Marketing major Prerequisites/co-requisites Changes

Level 1 Complete all units

Core: MKTG1203 Marketing Management MKTG1204 Consumer Behaviour

Level 2 1 core unit and 1 option

Core: MKTG2305 Marketing Research Options: MKTG2238 Advertising and Promotion MKTG2301 Small Business Management

MKTG1203 MKTG1203 MKTG1203

Level 3 1 core unit and any 3 options

Core: MKTG3306 Strategic Marketing Options: MKTG3310 International Marketing MKTG3311 Services Marketing MGMT3342 Entrepreneurship MKTG3303 New Product Development and Commercialisation MKTG3301 Marketing Applications MKTG3307 Contemporary Marketing Issues

MKTG2305 MKTG2305 MKTG1204 and any Level 2 marketing unit One Level 2 marketing or management unit MKTG2301 Any level 2 marketing unit Any level 2 marketing unit

Any two Level 2 Marketing units Any two Level 2 Marketing units Any two Level 2 units in the Management major or Marketing major Any two Level 2 Marketing units Any two Level 2 Marketing units Any two Level 2 Marketing units

Rationale for changes: The majority of prerequisites at level 3 have been changed from a unit content specific prerequisite to more general level 2 prerequisites across the major to open up the units to more students.

H6

I1

I2

I3

I4

I5

I6

I7

I8

I9

I10

I11

I12

I13

I14

I15

I16

I17

I18

I19

I20

Appendix: Second-major choices (% from each degree) for students taking each BSc major1

Science Arts Commerce Design No 2nd-major n Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing 100 0 0 0 0 1

Agricultural Science 24 0 28 0 48 29 Anatomy and Human Biology 41 12 2 0.4 45 244

Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 63 3 3 0 32 38

Botany 58 0 0 0 42 12 Chemistry 36 9 8 0 48 80 Computer Science 38 14 9 0 40 96 Conservation Biology 71 3 6 0 20 31

Data Science 29 0 29 0 43 7 Engineering Science 13 6 28 1 52 1063

Environmental Science 55 12 5 1 27 85

Exercise and Health 45 2 2 0 50 42 Genetics 66 12 2 0 20 56 Geography 8 50 8 0 33 12 Geology 45 10 13 0 32 91 Marine Science 71 10 0 0 19 48 Mathematics and Statistics 50 12 15 0 24 34

Microbiology and Immunology 51 5 5 0 40 43

Natural Resource Management 25 17 8 0 50 12

Neuroscience 49 13 9 1 28 86 Pathology and Laboratory Medicine 34 6 4 0 56 91

Pharmacology 45 13 8 0 35 118 Physics 68 7 2 0 23 57 Physiology 45 6 8 0 40 153 Population Health 35 26 9 4 26 23 Psychological Science 5 79 3 0 12 209

Quantitative Methods 0 0 33 0 67 3

Sport Science 80 2 3 0 14 154 Zoology 71 4 1 0 24 89 Source: UWA Office of Strategy, Planning and Performance

1 Excluding Biomedical Science double major

J1

Appendix: Bachelor of Science - Distribution and Choice for Core and Complementary Units in each of the 31 BSc Majors

Major Core Structure (L1+L2+L3) Choice in Core Complementary units

(L1+L2+L3) Choice in complementary

Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 None Agricultural Science 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 None

Anatomy and Human Biology 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: None Level 2: 2 of 4 Level 3: 4 of 6

1* + 0 + 0 None

Applied Computing (now Data Science) 2 + 2 + 4 None 3 + 1 + 0 None

Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 0 + 0 None

Biomedical Science (double major) 2 + 4 + 8

Level 1: 1 of 2 Level 2: none

Level 3: Dependent on specialisation

2 + 2 + 0 None

Botany 2 + 3 +3 None 2 + 1 + 1 None

Chemistry 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: 1 of 2 Level 2: 2 of 3 Level 3: 4 of 6

2 + 0 + 0 None

Computer Science 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 1 + 0 None

Conservation Biology 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 Level 1: None Level 2: 2 of 3

Engineering Science 2 + 2 + 4;

(2 + 3 + 3 for Software Engineering)

None 3 + 1 + 0 Choice dependent on specialisation

Environmental Science 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 Level 1: None Level 2: 2 of 4

Exercise and Health 2 + 3 + 3 Levels 1&2: None Level 3: 3 of 4 3* + 0 + 0 None

Genetics 2 + 2 + 4 Levels 1&2: None Level 3: 4 of 5 2* + 0 + 0 None

Geography 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 None

K1

Major Core Structure (L1+L2+L3) Choice in Core Complementary units

(L1+L2+L3) Choice in complementary

Geology 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 None Marine Science 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 None

Mathematics and Statistics 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: None Level 2: 2 of 3 Level 3: 4 of 6

1 + 0 + 0 None

Microbiology and Immunology 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: 2 of 4 Levels 2&3: None 1 + 0 + 0 None

Natural Resource Management 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 None

Neuroscience 2 + 2 + 4 None 3 + 2 + 0 Level 1: 3 of 5 Level 2: None

Pathology and Laboratory Medicine 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 Level 1: None Level 2: 2 of 3

Pharmacology 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: 2 of 3 Levels 2&3: None None None

Physics 2 + 2 + 4 Levels 1&2: None Level 3: 4 of 5 2 + 2 + 0 None

Physiology 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: 2 of 4 Levels 2&3: None 2* + 0 + 0 None

Population Health 2 + 2 + 4 None 0 + 2 + 0 None

Psychological Science 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: None Level 2: 2 of 5 Level 3: 4 of 6

1* + 0 + 0 None

Quantitative Methods 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1: 2 of 6 Levels 2&3: None None None

Science Communication 2 + 2 + 4 Level 1&2: None Level 3: 4 of 5 None None

Sport Science 2 + 3 + 3 None 4* + 0 + 0 None Zoology 2 + 2 + 4 None 2 + 2 + 0 None

* Complementary unit requirement dependent on WACE background in either Mathematics or Chemistry

Source: Data obtained directly from CAIDi

K2

Appendix: Bachelor of Science - Domestic/International Enrolments and Load for BSc Students by First Major, 2013-2015

L1

2015 REVIEW OF COURSES - Governance · 2016-03-11 · Review of Courses – Submission to the Review Panel Page 1 of 164 . File Ref F71207 . 2015 REVIEW OF COURSES . Three Year Undergraduate

Documents