uwa- business school academic actvity model · similarly assigned to the teaching intensive band...

UW&

Bufor

WAA

usinerAca

Acad

essSadem

dem

Schomic

1

micA

oolEPer

ctiv

Experform

ityM

ectatman

Mod

tionnce

August

del

ns

t2016

2

ContentsIntroduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3

(A) UWA Academic Activity Model ................................................................................................... 3

Figure 1: UWA Academic Activity Model (AAM) Framework ............................................................. 4

AAM Bands – Predicted Bands ............................................................................................................ 5

Table 1: UWABS Band Allocation – Based on 5 Year Window Research Publication Points .............. 5

AAM Bands – Adjusted Band and Unrestricted Research Points ....................................................... 6

Table 2 Example of AAM ..................................................................................................................... 8

(B) Faculty Status (AACSB Standard 15) ........................................................................................... 9

Figure 2: AACSB Faculty Qualifications Expectation ......................................................................... 10

(C) UWA Business School Expectations ‐ Research ........................................................................ 11

Table 3: ERA 2015 – Go8 (FOE 1402; 1502; 1502; 1503; 1505) ........................................................ 11

Research Publication Points .............................................................................................................. 12

Bonus RPPs ‐ Outstanding Publications ............................................................................................ 12

(D) UWA Business School Expectations ‐ Teaching ........................................................................ 13

Figure 3: Distribution of SURF Scores on Item Q6 ............................................................................ 13

Table 5: SURF (Q6) By Unit Enrolments, Business School, 2014 & 2015 .......................................... 14

Table 6: Performance Ratings on SURF ............................................................................................. 14

Table 7: Education Expectations ....................................................................................................... 16

Table 7: Education Expectations (Continued) ................................................................................... 17

APPENDIX A – Definition of a Teaching Block / Point ........................................................................... 18

Table 8: Undergraduate Unit Enrolment and Load Allowance ......................................................... 18

Table 9: Undergraduate Unit Enrolment and Administrative Support Allowance ........................... 18

Table 10: Summary of Teaching Allowances for Undergraduate Units ............................................ 18

APPENDIX B – Broad Expectations of Academics Level A to E .............................................................. 20

Teaching and Research: Level A ........................................................................................................ 21

Teaching and Research: Level B ........................................................................................................ 22

Teaching and Research: Level C ........................................................................................................ 23

Teaching and Research: Level D ........................................................................................................ 24

Teaching and Research: Level E ........................................................................................................ 25

3

Introduction

This document has three purposes, to describe:

(a) The University’s new ‘Academic Activity Model’ (AAM) workload model;

(b) Categories for faculty status consistent with the Association to Advanced Collegiate

Schools of Business (AACSB). Categories described take into consideration:

Initial preparation (academic credentials) and initial experience

Sustained academic and professional engagement to maintain and augment

academic qualifications

Qualified status based on initial preparation and sustained engagement.

Categories include:

Scholarly Academic

Practice Academic

Scholarly Practitioner

Instructional Practitioner

“Other” (which should be no more than 10% of the School’s academic

faculty)

(c) The Business School’s revised expectations for academic performance.

(A) UWAAcademicActivityModel

The Business School has typically operated on a 40:40:20 model whereby 40% of time (or

two days per week) is allocated to teaching and HDR supervision; 40% to research and 20%

to service.

From 2017 the University will be moving towards a new workload model (known as the

Academic Activity Model or AAM). Under this new model time will be converted into points,

with each full‐time academic faculty member attracting 100 points. In the new AAM 10

points (or 10% of time) will be allocated to self‐directed service time. Research time (and

therefore teaching time) will vary according to research outputs / research productivity and

Higher Degree by Research (HDR) supervision. The School will continue to apply existing

definitions of a teaching block (see Appendix A), with one block equating to 10 points.

Figure 1 sets out the broad framework for this new AAM.

4

Figure1:UWAAcademicActivityModel(AAM)Framework

100 Points = 1 FTE

Academic Activity Allocation

Teaching

Research

Material External Engagement

Self‐Directed Service

Assigned Roles

Off Load Activities

High Teaching

Balanced Teaching

Balanced Research

High Research

Research Intensive

Teaching Intensive

90% or more of total T&R time on teaching

80% of total T&R time on teaching

60% of total T&R time on teaching

60% of total T&R time on research

80% of total T&R time on research

90% or more of total T&R time on research

Specific assigned roles (and points) allocated by Heads and/or Dean/Deputy Dean

10 points

Academic FTE who are paid by external agencies

Eg. Approved off‐load consulting (not included in the 100 points allocation)

Unit teaching

Co‐ordinating

Supervision (excluding HDR)

Development

HDR supervision

Balanced T&R 50% of total T&R time on teaching & 50% time on research

AAM Teaching and Research Bands

5

AAMBands–PredictedBandsEach academic faculty member will be assigned to a teaching and research band. As a

research led Business School it is anticipated that the majority of faculty will be assigned to

a ‘Balanced Research’ Band (whereby 60% of the points available for teaching and research

will be assigned to research activities, including HDR supervision).

In assigning faculty to bands a two‐step process will be applied. In the first instance faculty

will be assigned a ‘predicted’ band based on their Research Publication Points (RPPs) for the

previous five year window. Faculty engaged on a tenure track and who are on probation will

be automatically assigned to the Balanced Research Band. Some faculty may be assigned to

a Research Intensive Band on account of their contracts (eg. post‐doctoral fellows) or

similarly assigned to the Teaching Intensive Band (eg. faculty who have been specifically

engaged as teaching only faculty).

Table 1 sets out the RPP criteria the Business School will apply when determining the

predicted band for individual faculty members.

Table1:UWABSBandAllocation–Basedon5YearWindowResearchPublicationPoints1

High

Teaching Balanced Teaching

Balanced Research(a)

High Research(b)

T=80%; R=20%

T=60% T=40% T=20%

R=40% R=60% R=80%

Level E 4.0<Rpp<6.5 6.5≤Rpp<9.0 ≥9.0

Level D ≤ 4.0 4.0<Rpp<6.0 6.0≤Rpp<8.5 ≥8.5

Level C ≤ 3.0 3.0<Rpp<5.5 5.5≤Rpp<8.0 ≥8.0

Level A and B ≤ 3.0 3.0<Rpp<5 5.0≤Rpp<7.5 ≥7.5

Notes:

(a) Faculty will be automatically allocated into the Balanced Research Band (Teaching 40%; Research 60%)

where they meet one of the following: on probation; meet the RPP expectation.

(b) The RPP points for the High Research Band are necessary but not sufficient. Approval for the High

Research Band rests with the Dean and will be based on a case demonstrating the exceptional

contribution being made to scholarship in research. Exemplar criteria include % of publications which are

A or A* (with minimum threshold of 70%); ARC grants; prizes; substantial impact; percentage of articles in

top 10% by citations etc. Faculty will also be expected to meeting the University’s high standard with

respect to teaching and service. High Research Band submissions should be submitted to the Dean

through the appropriate Head of Discipline.

(c) Three bands have deliberately not been detailed in the table above. These include: Teaching Intensive

Band, Research Intensive Band and the Balanced Teaching & Research (T&R) Band. The Teaching Intensive

Band will apply to faculty specifically appointed on a teaching only contract and the same applies to the

Research Intensive Band (eg. post‐doctoral fellows). The Balanced T&R band may be used for any band

adjustment that Heads of Discipline may apply. (This is discussed in more detail below).

1 Research Publication Points are described in Section C below.

6

HeadofDisciplineDiscretion Whilst the AAM may appear prescriptive, particularly with regard to determining the

predicted band, Heads of Discipline (HoD) will be able to exercise discretion and make a

case for allocating and individual faculty member to an alternative band (to be known as the

adjusted band).2 For example, winning a large research grant may provide the basis for

reassigning a faculty member from a ‘Balanced Teaching Band’ (whereby 60% of teaching

and research points are assigned to teaching) to a ‘Balanced Teaching & Research Band’

(such that 50% of available Teaching and Research Points are allocated to teaching).

Similarly, the case for a band adjustment may be made where a faculty member is fractional

and/or has had periods of approved leave (eg. parental leave, leave without pay).3

The only band that a HoD will not have complete allocative discretion over is the High

Research Band. To be allocated into this band the HoD will need to make a case (with

supporting evidence) to the Dean. To be eligible for a High Research Band allocation faculty

will need to demonstrate the exceptional contribution that they are making to scholarship

in research and also demonstrate that they are achieving the University’s high standards

with respect to teaching and service. Exemplar research criteria may include % of

publications which are A or A* (with minimum threshold of 70%); ARC grants; prizes;

substantial impact; percentage of articles in top 10% by citations etc.

AAMBands–AdjustedBandandUnrestrictedResearchPointsIn the new AAM Higher Degree by Research (HDR) supervision is no longer accounted for as

a teaching activity and is provided for within research time. To ensure that faculty with HDR

supervision responsibilities have appropriate time release for their own research activities,

the Business School will take into account time involved in HDR supervision.

Points will be allocated to HDR supervision for a maximum of four full‐time equivalent years

per candidate, as follows:

HDR supervision points For FT Student (1EFTSL) 5 pts* share of supervision For PT Student (0.5 EFTSL) 5 pts* share of supervision/2

Under normal circumstances it is expected that the maximum number of students that a

faculty member will supervise at any one time will be five (5).

2 Note: The Predicted Band assignment will be based on unadjusted RPPs. In other words, in making the initial prediction no adjustment will be made for factors such as fraction of appointment; leave without pay; parental leave etc. These considerations should factor into the band setting and any adjustments that the Head of Discipline may apply. 3 The Business School recognises that a band adjustment and period of sabbatical leave may also be required for faculty who have held leadership and managerial positions for an extended period of time (eg. Head of Discipline, MBA Director) and who are returning to teaching and research roles.

7

Heads of Discipline will have the discretion to allocate staff to an alternative teaching and

research band (adjusted band) to ensure appropriate time release for individual research

activities. The School will refer to this adjusted research time (points) as ‘unrestricted

research’ points.

TeachingCreditsThe new University AAM does not provide for teaching credits or carry‐overs. As the School

transitions to the new model teaching credit carry‐overs into 2017 will be recognise and

honoured. Beyond 2017 teaching credit carry forward may be given only in exceptional

circumstances and on the basis of prior approval from the Dean.

LeaveandFractionalAppointmentsIt is expected that faculty members will take their full quota of annual leave each year

(equal to 150 hours (or 8 points) for each full‐time faculty member).

For 2017 it is deemed that all leave has / will be taken. Going into 2018, any leave balances

of greater than four weeks (8 points) will be added on to the base 100 points.4 For example,

someone with 8 weeks of accumulated annual leave (16 points total) will see their base

points start at 108. Similarly, where a faculty member takes extra leave (eg. takes a full eight

(8) weeks), the difference will be deducted (in this example, the base level will be 92 points).

The same principles will apply for long service leave etc.

Points (and time release for self‐directed service) will also be pro‐rated for faculty who hold

fractional appointments.

Transparency,AppealsandReview

Transparency, equity and flexibility are key operative principles in the new AAM. Flexibility is

provided for through the Heads of Discipline and the discretion they have to make

appropriate band adjustments. Transparency and equity will be provided for through an

open Heads of Discipline peer review of all band adjustments and underpinning cases.

Should a faculty member wish to appeal a HoD decision they should do so in writing to the

Dean. Their appeal will be considered by the HoD panel.

The application of the new AAM will be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that it is

meeting the needs of the Business School (appropriate time for research and HDR

supervision as well as meeting the School’s teaching and development needs).

4 Note – the treatment of unused leave (above four weeks) has yet to be confirmed for 2018.

8

Table2ExampleofAAMNam

e

Status(a)

Level

FTE

Total R

PPs 2011

‐15

AAM Ban

d

Total Points: 100

#

Pts O

ther Assigne

d

Pts S

ervices

T&R Pts

%T %R

Teaching

Pts

Research Pts

2016

HDR pts

Unrestricted Re

s. Pts

(new

rules)

Actual / Adjusted AWMF Band/Comments

JJ TEN C 1 4.25 Predicted Band: Balanced Teaching

100 0 10 90 0.6 0.4 54 36 16 21 Move from Balanced Teaching to Balanced Teaching & Research to accommodate HDR students.

JJ TEN C 1 4.25 Adjusted Band: Balanced Teaching & Research

100 0 10 90 0.5 0.5 45 45 16 29 Reassigned person ‘JJ’ from balanced teaching to balanced research to accommodate HDR supervision and assign 4 blocks teaching (balance of 5 points further off‐setting HDR load)

KK TEN B 1 5.50 Predicted Band: Balanced Research

100 0 10 90 0.4 0.6 36 54 5 49 Anticipate an allocation of three blocks with balance off‐setting HDR load.

LL TENB C 1 4 Predicted Band: Balanced Research

100 0 10 90 0.4 0.6 36 54 0 54 Balanced research because on probation. Anticipate allocating around three blocks during first three years and encouraging supervision load with balance

SS TEN B 1 2.5 Predicted Band: High Teaching

100 0 10 90 0.8 0.2 72 18 0 18 Anticipate allocating seven blocks.

(a) Status: TEN = Tenured; TENB = Tenurable /On Probation;

(b) ‘Base’ points are pro‐rated according to Full‐time equivalent appointment.

(c) 10 points equates to one block or half a day per week.

(d) Appendix A describes the teaching workload model (number of blocks / points assigned to particular units / class sizes etc.).

9

(B) FacultyStatus(AACSBStandard15)

The Business School is AACSB accredited and, as part of this, is required to demonstrate that

it meets a number of AACSB accreditation standards. Standard 15 requires that:

“The School maintains and strategically deploys participating and supporting faculty who collectively and individually demonstrate significant academic and professional engagement that sustains the intellectual capital necessary to support high‐quality outcomes consistent with the School’s mission and strategies.

As indicated above, having taken initial preparation and experience into consideration plus

sustained academic and/or professional engagement to maintain and/or augment academic

qualifications, this sees four categories of faculty: Scholarly Academic (SA); Practice

Academic (PA); Scholarly Practitioner (SP); and Instructional Practitioner (IP).

As a research led Business School it is expected that the majority (at least 70%) of the

School’s academic faculty will be classified as Scholarly Academic. Figure 2 below describes

the classification arrangement. Faculty who hold a doctorate and are research active (have

at least three RPPs) will be classified as Scholarly Academic.

Scholarly Practitioners and Instructional Practitioners are categories of faculty who do not

hold a doctorate. The former (Scholarly Practitioners) do not hold a doctorate but are

research active. The latter (Instructional Practitioners) do not hold a doctorate but sustain

relevance through professional education, practice in their profession (in industry) etc.

A Practice Academic is a non‐traditional academic who holds a doctorate and has significant,

sustained and high level experience and engagement with industry and their profession.

They will help promote the integration of academic scholarship with practice and will be

expected to have deep involvement in teaching, advising students and collaborating in areas

relevant to their expertise.

It is important that the School’s academic, adjunct and sessional faculty meet the criteria

for one of the four classifications of SA, PA, SP and IP. The thresholds are: Scholarly

Academic – 70% of Faculty; Scholarly Academic + Practice Academic = 80% of Faculty;

SA+PA+SP+IP = 90%.

There is a fifth category of ‘Other’. To meet AACSB requirements the share of faculty in this

group should not be more than 10% of the total faculty (and should ideally be zero).

It is the responsibility of individual faculty members to demonstrate which classification / category they align with and to ensure the achievement and maintenance of their Faculty Status.

Figgure2:AACSBFacultyQualifficationsExpectation

10

I

InstructionalPractitioner

(IP)

11

(C) UWABusinessSchoolExpectations‐Research

Table 3 shows the outcomes from the 2015 Excellence for Research in Australia (ERA)

exercise. The Business School’s goal is to have all areas within which it submits achieve a

least a four (above world standard). ERA outcomes are, however, affected by scale and the

size of an institution’s discipline group matters (with larger discipline groups having a larger

volume of papers in top journals).

Table3:ERA2015–Go8(FOE1402;1502;1502;1503;1505)2015 Monash ANU Adelaide Melb UNSW UQ UWA U Syd 1402 Applied Economics

4 3 3 5 5 4 3 4

1501 Accounting, Auditing & Accountability

5 4 not assessed 5 5 4 4 4

1502 Banking, Finance & Investment

4 4 4 5 5 4 3 3

1503 Business & Management

4 5 not assessed 5 5 5 5 4

1505 Marketing 5 not assessed 3 5 4 4 3 4

Whilst the School values a range of academic outputs it is important for ERA and other

rankings that particular weighting and emphasis is given to high quality, peer reviewed,

journal articles. This underpins the School and University’s submissions and performance in

research rankings. The School has, therefore, adopted a parsimonious measure of research

activity based on ‘Research Publication Points’, which captures peer reviewed journal

outputs.5

5 The School acknowledges that the RPP metric does not take into account important research activities such as HDR completions and winning grants. It similarly acknowledges that the quality weights (eg. a reliance on the ABDC journal listing) is simple. The trade‐off is that the approach adopted is transparent, manageable and sends appropriate signals with respect to journal quality. Fundamentally all academic faculty are encouraged to take responsibility for their own research portfolio. This includes knowing and understanding what academic activities are important in their field (eg. demonstrating that an individual can work alone and can also work in teams, reviewing papers, disseminating research; engaging with industry etc). Appendix B provides a more detailed description of the teaching and research exemplar activities associated with different academic levels. For appointment and promotion faculty would be expected to demonstrate a comprehensive portfolio and CV. On the question of rewarding and incentivising HDR completions, the School proposes to relook at how conference and annum funding is distributed to discipline groups, with these two activities featuring as part of the distribution process.

12

ResearchPublicationPoints

Research Publication Points (RPPs) are computed as follows: A* Publication = 2 points; A

publication = 1 point; B publication = 0.5 points; C publication = 0.25 points.

The total RPPs for each individual academic faculty member are computed with reference to

the 2013 Australian Business Dean’s Council (ABDC) list where journals are classified as

being either A*, A, B or C. In cases where a journal is not ranked in the 2013 ABDC list,

reference will be made to the 2010 ERA list. If the journal is not on either list, then a staff

member may submit a case, through their HoD for points based on the journal’s citation

score (probably in Google Scholar, as new journals are unlikely to be found in the WOS or

Scopus). The case will be considered by a School based panel.

For a journal article to count it must fully listed in Socrates as this is where the publication data are drawn from.

The five year RPPs (covering five years up to and including the most recent calendar year)

will be computed at June of each year following Faculty completion and submission

(through Socrates) of the previous year’s publication data.6

BonusRPPs‐OutstandingPublicationsThe Business School recognises that there are criteria other than journal ranking that may

be used in assessing the quality of a paper. Examples might include citations, impact, and

quality of the journal (eg. top 10% of journals in a particular discipline or field).

Papers that have been recognised as outstanding via the ‘Dean’s Best Paper’ Award will

automatically attract a ‘bonus’ of one (1) RPP point.

Individuals may submit a case for any of their papers to be classified as ‘outstanding’. A call

for “Dean’s Best Paper” submissions and other outstanding publication submissions will be

made around September each year (after the publication data verification process has been

finalised by the University (around August)). Submission will be assessed by a School based

panel.7

6 Note, the faculty data submitted to Socrates is subsequently verified at the University level, with the verification process completed around August each year. This may see a minor adjustment in RPPs post verification. 7 Applications, via (and supported by) the Head of Discipline for outstanding status for papers published over the 2011‐2015 period may be made retrospectively. This should be submitted as part of the call for submissions that will be circulated in September 2016.

(D) Within of eachThere a QuestiQ1. It w

Q2. The

Q3. The

Q4. The

Q5. Theunit Q6. Ov

Q6 is coSURF sc Across titem cadisagre

Figure

UWABus

UWA the S teaching pare six quest

ons: was clear what

e assessment

e assessment

e unit was we

e learning reso

erall, this unit

onsidered, bcores for Q6

the Universn be regardement on t

3:Distribut

sinessSc

Student Unitperiod and itions within

t I was expect

requirements

tasks were clo

ell organised

ources (hando

t was a good e

by the Unive6 for the Un

sity the averded as unsahe item.

tionofSUR

choolExp

t Reflectives used to evn the SURF

ted to learn in

s were clearly

osely linked to

outs, text, we

educational ex

ersity, as thniversity as a

rage SURF stisfactory o

RFScoreson

13

pectation

e Feedback valuate tea

n this unit

stated

o the unit obj

eb resources,

xperience

he most impa whole in 2

score is 3.2.on that item

nItemQ6

ns‐Teach

(SURF) survching perfo

jectives

etc.) were ad

portant SUR2015 is show

A unit scorm. This corre

hing

vey is adminormance acr

equate for my

RF item. Thewn in Figure

ring less thaesponds to a

nistered at ross the Un

y study in the

e distributioe 3 below.

an 2.8 on ana 30% or m

the end niversity.

on of

ny SURF ore

14

Table 5 shows the average SURF Score across the Business School disaggregated by unit

enrolment. On average, units with lower enrolments (<100) (typically honour and

postgraduate units) achieve a higher Question 6 SURF score than units with larger

enrolments.

Table5:SURF(Q6)ByUnitEnrolments,BusinessSchool,2014&2015

Enrolments No. of Units by Half Year

Avg Q6 SURF Score

> 500 20 3.13

250 to 500 58 3.07

100 to 249 74 3.07

51‐99 58 3.22

<50 178 3.27

UWABS Total 388 3.20

The following table (Table 6) details the Q6 SURF expectation for teaching in the Business

School. The School recognises that there will be instances where the SURF result does not

meet expected standards (eg. trialling a new teaching innovation). SURF should, therefore,

be used together with other factors like peer reviews and SPOT scores.

Table6:PerformanceRatingsonSURF

Definition Units with 100 or more enrolments

Units with less than 100 enrolments

Below expectation 2.7 and below 3 and below

Meets expectation 2.8 to 3.0 3.1 to 3.3

Exceeds expectation 3.1 to 3.2 3.4 to 3.5

Outstanding 3.3 and above 3.6 and above

Faculty are encouraged to develop and maintain a teaching portfolio and include

comprehensive evidence demonstrating a high degree of reflective self‐evaluation. Faculty

are also expected to regularly close the SURF feedback loop.

RecognitionofOutstandingTeachingThe School values and encourages outstanding teaching and it is recognised through the

School’s teaching awards and nominations for awards. To further encourage and support

outstanding teaching within the School, the Dean will make available ten (10) ‘Outstanding

Teaching Evaluation Awards’ (OTEA) of $500 each to be awarded on an annual basis. Five

awards will be for units with enrolment of <100 and five for unit enrolment of 100+.

15

The criteria for an OTEA will be as follows:

Determined in August of each year based on previous year’s ‘Half Year’ (HY) SURF

Scores

Awarded to top 5 units with enrolments of <100 and enrolments of 100+

Award will be made to the first named Unit Controller in the SURF (recognising that

it may be a team effort)

The required response rate will be 30% or more

There needs to be a minimum of 10 respondents

No single SURF item should be below 2.8 on any dimension

Evidence of closing the loop

Quality of SURF qualitative comments

Quality of inputs, including the unit outline and assessment instruments

16

Table7:EducationExpectations Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations Outstanding

Commitment to quality teaching (SURF Q6 (overall satisfaction) as a parsimonious indicator)

SURF Q6 < 2.8 where N=100+ < 3.1 where N=<100(a) And SURF feedback loop not closed

SURF Q6 2.8 to < 3.1 where N=100+ 3.1 to < 3.4 where N=<100 And SURF feedback loop closed

SURF Q6 3.1 to 3.2 where N=100+ 3.4 to 3.5 where N=<100 And SURF feedback loop closed

SURF Q6 3.3+ where N=100+ 3.6+ where N=<100 Plus SURF feedback loop closed; Excellent peer reviews; received many student nominations for teaching awards

Innovative approaches in teaching

No attempt to introduce any innovation in the past 3 years

At least one minor innovation introduced in the past 3 years

A number of minor innovations introduced in the past 3 years and some evidence of success

At least one major innovation introduced in the past 3 years and some evidence of success

Professional development

Does not participate in any T&L activities

Demonstrated effort to improve teaching through participation in T&L activities

Consistent /sustained effort to improve own and tutors eg. Act as peer reviewer, and peer reviewed

Significant effort to improve own and others such as: lead T&L forum and other T&L activities; multiple peer reviewer

17

Table7:EducationExpectations(Continued)

Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations Outstanding

Unit information and learning materials

Information about the unit, such as list of topics and organization of the unit, and learning outcomes /goals is inadequate. Materials provided that support learning of the unit is inadequate.

Information about the unit, such as list of topics and organization of the unit, and learning outcomes /goals is satisfactory. Materials provided that support learning of the unit is satisfactory.

Information about the unit, such as list of topics and organization of the unit, and learning outcomes /goals is very good. Materials provided that support learning of the unit is very good.

Information about the unit, such as list of topics and organization of the unit, and learning outcomes /goals is excellent. Materials provided that support learning of the unit is excellent.

Assessment and feedback

Poor explanation of the role of formative and summative assessment of learning outcomes and minimal feedback to students.

Satisfactory explanation of the role of formative and summative assessment of learning outcomes and adequate feedback to students.

Very good explanation of the role of formative and summative assessment of learning outcomes and quite detailed feedback to students.

Excellent explanation of the role of formative and summative assessment of learning outcomes and extensive feedback to students.

Mentoring

Does not participate Consistent effort in helping a few junior colleagues

Consistent effort in helping many junior colleagues

Excellent effort in helping many colleagues

Note: (a) N refers to total unit enrolment

18

APPENDIXA–DefinitionofaTeachingBlock/Point

The 40:40:20 model that has been applied within the Business School in recent years

effectively equates one block with 10% of time. In the new University AMM, one block

therefore equates to 10 points.

A. Definitionofateachingblock(10points):Undergraduate

Table8:UndergraduateUnitEnrolmentandLoadAllowanceUnit Enrolment at Census Load

< 45 All lectures and up to two tutorials = 1 block per semester

45 – 150 2 x one hour lectures plus 1 tute = 1 block per semester

151‐350 2 x one hour lectures = 1 block per semester

>350 (with repeats) 4 x one hour lectures = 2 blocks per semester

Tutorials 1 hour tutorial plus 4 repeats = 1 block per semester Note: There may be some units with three hours of lectures per week. These will be restricted to quantitative units.

For large undergraduate units administrative support may be provided to assist with handling student queries and liaising with tutors (particularly around examinations). The administrative allowances are summarised in Table 9. If administrative support is not provided for (eg. via a casual tutor) then this time will accrue to the relevant academic faculty member.

Table9:UndergraduateUnitEnrolmentandAdministrativeSupportAllowanceUnit Enrolment at Census Load

> 500 tutor to assist with an allocated load of 0.6 blocks (6 points) (equivalent to 3 tutes per week for the semester)

251 ‐ 500 tutor to assist with an allocated load of 0.4 blocks (4 points)

151‐250 unit coordinator be given 0.2 block in lieu of admin assistance (2 points)

< 150 No additional assistance

Table10:SummaryofTeachingAllowancesforUndergraduateUnits

Unit Enrolment at Census Blocks Admin Blocks Total Blocks

Total Points (including Admin allowance)

45 1 0 1 10

46‐150 1 0 1 10

150‐250 1 0.2 1.2 12

251‐350 1 0.4 1.4 14

351‐500 2 0.4 2.4 24

> 500 2 0.6 2.6 26

19

B. TeachingBlocksandPostgraduateandHonoursUnits

Most postgraduate coursework and honours units will have three contact hours per week, either run as a 3‐hour seminar or 3‐hour lecture, with each unit having 36 contact hours per semester/trimester.

One by 3‐ hour seminar: 1 block (10 points) per semester/trimester

Repeat seminar (in the same teaching period and same delivery mode): o 0.75 block (7.5 points)

Intensive Teaching: Each unit to be treated in similar manner as per PG unit

Online Teaching: each unit to be treated in similar manner as face to face unit. Class sizes and streaming Under normal circumstances an honours or postgraduate coursework class will not exceed 45

students (at census). Where a class is expected to exceed 45 students at census a second stream will

be offered, with fully online units the preferred vehicle for second stream delivery.8

In situations where a postgraduate or honours class is run with greater than 45 students at census

and offered in one stream, the unit coordinator / lecturer may request administrative support to

value of 0.2 blocks or receive an additional 0.2 (2 points) in lieu of administrative assistance.

C. BlendedLearningandOnlineLearning:DevelopmentTime

Learning design is the key to students’ engagement and the Business School encourages academic faculty to ensure that units are contemporary and use up to date technologies. Discussions to transform a campus based unit into a fully online (digital) or blended (also known as flipped) format should be with your Head of Discipline and the Associate Dean of Education, with approval through the Dean. Strategically the School’s preference is to first invest in the first year units as well as the conversion units in the postgraduate and MBA programs. To encourage and promote unit transformation the School will give up to one unit (block) in time release for unit development time (the actual amount should be agreed on between your head and the Associate Dean). Where a unit is transformed into a blended unit (which will see reduced emphasis on lecture time and increased emphasis on workshops), the time release (load allocation) will be unchanged in the following year. This will be negotiated in subsequent years (with the minimum allocation being at least 75% of a normal allowance). Faculty delivering a fully online units / digital units will receive a one block load allowance.

8 In postgraduate units the average size is around 30 students, with the standard deviation of around 11. Where possible the School will not run a unit with less than 15 students at week 1. The School recognises that some units (such as the conversion and foundation units of accounting, organisational behaviour, economics, marketing) typically see large face to face enrolments, whilst other optional specialist units may have average class sizes around 20‐25. For sessional appointments marking is paid as a separate activity at a rate of 90 minutes per student. For faculty appointments, marketing is included in the block load allocation. Heads of discipline may wish to monitor distribution of individual faculty member postgraduate/honours marking loads across the year and where possible / required re‐distribute some load and/or unit responsibilities within teams to ensure fairness.

20

APPENDIXB–BroadExpectationsofAcademicsLevelAtoE

Teaching and Research (T&R) Academic will contribute to both teaching and research but

the balance of these two activities will vary through the PDA process. All T&R staff should

contribute to the scholarship of teaching and all should contribute to service and leadership

at an appropriate level.

In this section the expectations for Levels A to E are described. Within the Business School

faculty appointments with a research load will be expected to have a PhD and appointments

will normally be at the minimum of a level B.

21

TeachingandResearch:LevelATeaching & Learning Research Service & Leadership • High quality teaching as demonstrated by

University approved data from student surveys, peer‐review processes and student outcomes

• Participation in assurance of learning and

effective assessment and feedback

• Evidence of improvement and innovation in response to student feedback

• Responsibility for preparation and delivery of substantial components of courses/units in collaboration with other colleagues as appropriate

• Satisfactory progress towards completion of PhD

• Development of a publication pipeline • Achievement of refereed journal publications

• Efficient and effective performance in allocated roles

• Significant contributions to the discipline/profession and community engagement

• Participate in external activities relevant to the discipline/profession and community engagement

• Demonstrate high standards of professional behaviour consistent with the University Code of Conduct and Vision, Mission and Values

• A sustained contribution to the development of a collegial and supportive working environment

22

TeachingandResearch:LevelBTeaching & Learning Research Service & Leadership • High quality teaching as demonstrated by

University approved data from student surveys, peer‐review processes and student outcomes

• Contribution to curriculum innovation and content design

• Participation in assurance of learning and

effective assessment and feedback

• Evidence of improvement and innovation in response to student feedback

• Involvement in Honours and/or Graduate level teaching


• Contributions to the effective supervision of honours and Masters level coursework students where appropriate

• An established record of research outputs/creative works in high quality refereed journals/outlets consistent with the discipline

• Evidence of quality and impact of outputs including, where appropriate, journal ranking, citation indices, patents awarded, reputation and standing of publishing house or other outlets, independent reviews from distinguished scholars or critics.

• A co‐ or chief‐ investigator in competitive and industry grant applications or evidence of active participation in research collaborations funded by competitive and industry grants

• Effective supervision of research honours, research masters and HDR supervision

• Efficient and effective performance in allocated roles

• Significant contributions to the discipline/profession and community engagement

• Participate in external activities relevant to the discipline/profession and community engagement



23

TeachingandResearch:LevelCTeaching & Learning Research Service & Leadership • Proven ability to deliver high quality teaching

across a range of modes and levels with evidence of ongoing reflective improvement and successful curriculum innovation

• Significant and strategically relevant contributions, at Faculty and/or School level(s), to curriculum development and pedagogical innovation

• Participation in assurance of learning and effective assessment and feedback

• Involvement in Honours and/or Graduate level teaching



• An established record of research outputs/creative works in high quality refereed journals/outlets consistent with the discipline

• Evidence of high quality and impactful outputs

• Evidence of research leadership • A record of obtaining research income • Evidence of a growing international

profile • Active and effective record of principal

supervision of HDR students

• Efficient and effective performance in an appropriate range of higher level internal duties and responsibilities

• Develop and exercise leadership including, for example, of a research group, a collaborative network, or a School/Faculty‐wide initiative etc.

• Successful mentoring of less experienced staff

• Significant contributions to the discipline/profession and community engagement, including external activities



24

TeachingandResearch:LevelDTeaching & Learning Research Service & Leadership • Proven ability to deliver high quality teaching across a

range of modes and levels with evidence of ongoing reflective improvement and successful curriculum innovation

• Significant and strategically relevant contributions, at Faculty and/or School level(s), to curriculum development and pedagogical innovation

• Leadership of major curriculum initiatives and/or pedagogical developments

• Leadership and participation in assurance of learning

and effective assessment and feedback.

• Involvement in Honours and/or Graduate level

teaching



• Highly productive in research outputs with regular publication in high quality journals

• Evidence of impactful outputs • An established record of substantial income

consistent with a national leader in the field of research

• Evidence of an international profile • Established record as a principal supervisor

of successful HDR completions

• A major contribution to the management and collegiality of the School and the University

• Evidence of leadership in the discipline / profession and in community engagement and external activities.



25

TeachingandResearch:LevelEAt Level E it is expected that individuals will display the highest levels of performance and leadership and will have an international reputation as an

outstanding scholar in at least one of the two core areas of teaching or research.

Teaching and Learning Research Service & Leadership

Applicants should demonstrate an outstanding professional contribution and commitment to high quality teaching at all levels and a leadership role in the maintenance of academic standards and in the development of educational policy and curriculum areas within the discipline. Applicants are expected to have made original, innovative and distinguished contributions to advancement of teaching in the discipline. Exemplar activities include: • An established and ongoing record of peer reviewed

publications in the highest quality educational journals • Evidence of an exceptional and ongoing contribution to a

field of educational practice including: o Citation indices o Major national/international text books o Prizes and awards from prestigious international

educational bodies o Election to learned academies or professional bodies

• Evidence of major national/international impact on curricular design and/or pedagogy

• Substantial impact on scholarship and teaching practice over time

• Contributions to educational policy development at State and/or National levels

Applicants should demonstrate evidence of substantial and significant research and scholarship. This may be demonstrated in a number of ways including: • An established and ongoing record of publication in

high quality peer‐reviewed journals • Evidence of significant citation indices or equivalent

esteem measures as appropriate to the field or discipline

• Invitations to present keynote addresses at international meetings

• Prizes and awards from prestigious international bodies

• Election to learned academies or professional bodies • Evidence of substantial impact • Leadership of major competitive funding initiatives

and/or substantive international consortia • Fostering the research of other groups and

individuals within the School and other relevant disciplines

• Successful supervision of postgraduate students • Experience in development of research policy • Contributions to Government policy at State and

National levels

Applicants should demonstrate a sustained contribution to leadership and governance within the School. Exemplar activities include: • Sustained contribution to the

development of a collegial and supportive work environment

• Sustained contribution to University governance

• Regular contribution to policy development

• Sustained service to the discipline / profession at state, national or international levels

• Sustained commitment to community engagement



uwa- business school academic actvity model · similarly assigned to the teaching intensive band...

Documents