community alumni 2012 review 2012 REVIEW OF UWS … · 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional...
-
Upload
truongdang -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of community alumni 2012 review 2012 REVIEW OF UWS … · 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional...
2012communityreview regional
engagementstaff
alum
nistudents
academics
businesses
strategyfu
rther d
evelopm
ent community
2012 REVIEW OF UWS COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL ENGAGEMENT
PANEL REPORT
5 December 2012
2 22012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Expert Panel (from left to right)
Mr David Borger
Professor Sandra Harding
Professor Sir David Watson
Professor Lawrence Bacow (opposite)
3 32012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
5 December 2012 Professor Janice Reid, AM Vice-Chancellor University of Western Sydney Locked Bag 1797 Penrith NSW 2751 AUSTRALIA Dear Vice-Chancellor
We were privileged to be invited to form the Review Panel and are now delighted to present
our Report.
As you will see this would not have been possible without the immense care and
commitment with which you and your colleagues prepared for and then assisted us in
conducting the Review.
We believe that this exercise represents an example of international collaboration in the
development of higher education services and opportunity at its best. We have each learned
from engaging with UWS in this way and trust that what we have to say will enable the
University to move forward with confidence.
We would like to express our thanks to all who assisted us, but in particular to Janelle
Tisserand and Paul Rowland whose professional input into the design and execution of the
Review, combined with good humour and gentle but firm management of our programme,
was exemplary.
With all good wishes
Yours sincerely
Professor Lawrence Bacow Mr David Borger
Professor Sandra Harding Professor Sir David Watson
4 42012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Executive Summary
This Review of community and regional engagement occurs at a time when the University of
Western Sydney (UWS) is poised to take engagement with its region to the next level of
sophistication and impact.
Vice Chancellor Professor Reid has taken the University in a relatively short time from a
loose federation of campuses (a legacy of the previous colleges of advanced education
structure in Greater Western Sydney (GWS)) to a University with a whole of institution focus.
The dimensions of this leadership as it relates to engagement include both an alignment of
engagement strategy with international philosophy and practice, and creation of an internal
environment within the University where staff identify engagement as part and parcel of the
UWS mission. In its impressive submission to the Review, the University outlined the way
that engagement practice is linked strategically to the UWS Making the Difference: 2010-
2015 strategy, and how the focus of engagement is aligned with regional priorities. The
submission cites some 201 engagement partnerships and projects, with more than 30
highlighted as case studies illustrating both the breadth and embeddedness of this activity
within the region.
During the Review the Panel had the opportunity to meet with a wide range of external
engagement partners, students and alumni as well as University staff involved in leading this
activity and in working on engagement programs and projects. The Panel was impressed
with the passion and commitment with which partners (external and internal) talked about
their projects and activities, in particular the outcomes these produce. The Panel concluded
that the current impressive suite of engagement activities is due in no small part to the
individual efforts of dedicated staff at UWS. The Panel noted in this regard the independent
sector external evaluation of UWS as “a University of the people”1.
In its submission to the Review the University has taken the opportunity to review its current
engagement strategy and practice and has identified opportunities for improving planning,
cohesion and evaluation aspects. Areas of partner relationships are also identified for
improvement, as are opportunities to strengthen the overall framework and fabric for
engaged learning and teaching and research. The Panel supports the areas identified by the
University for improvement in its self-review, and has made recommendations in the report
about how these issues might best be addressed.
1 See Australian Universities Quality Agency (2007), „Report of an audit of University of Western
Sydney – January 2007‟, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/view-all; and Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, pp. 10-11, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf. The latter report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA).
5 52012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
In positioning engagement strategy and practice for the next 20-30 years, the Panel has
identified the University‟s engagement leadership within the region as the dimension with the
most potential to expand and grow. While the UWS mission provides the raison d‟être for
engagement within GWS, the Panel considers that, in order to take this leadership
dimension to the next level, the University would benefit from identifying an overarching
„theme‟ for its engagement with the region. This theme would provide a clear context for
regional partners in understanding the University‟s intention and posture as it relates to
engagement, and at the same time provide a marshalling point for internal planning, priority
setting, evaluation and community of practice. The Panel proposes that a theme along the
lines of „a University for the region‟ would provide a very good philosophical and practical
platform for engagement. In arriving at this conclusion, the Panel notes the particular
character, challenges and potential of the region, and argues that these provide a „natural
laboratory-like‟ setting for similar and (arguably) future peri-urban communities on the fringes
of large cities internationally.
The approach proposed would provide both context and opportunity for UWS in an
engagement sense. However, it also presents challenges. These include defining what
engagement leadership constitutes for UWS, how it would enact this within a whole of region
and sub-regional context, and how the University thinks about the relationship between its
campus footprint and the region‟s urban, social and commercial demographics. There are
also implications for design of the student experience as it relates to community engagement
and service learning, as well as for alumni strategy as both a financial support and bridge
builder for engagement. The Panel notes from the submission to the Review that the
University is increasingly seeking to occupy this leadership space, and there are very good
examples in its involvement in the regional transport alliance lobby, the Gateway concept,
and the proposed Chancellor‟s Circle initiative. The report discusses in detail how these
questions might be addressed and sets out an integrated suite of recommendations in this
regard. The Panel considers that, with the pending retirement of Professor Reid, the
University should seek to ensure that the hallmarks of her leadership, commitment and
vigour continue in order to secure the step change for engagement proposed by the Panel in
this Review.
Following is a summary of the commendations, affirmations and recommendations which are
discussed in further detail in the report within the context of the six Terms of Reference
(TOR). The definitions of „commendation‟, „affirmation‟ and „recommendation‟ used in this
report are adapted from those used by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency
(TEQSA), and are outlined below in Table 1.
6 62012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Table 1: Definitions of „commendation‟, „affirmation‟, and „recommendation‟ used in this report
Source: TEQSA2
2 Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of
Western Sydney – October 2011, pp. 8-9, accessed 1 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/auqa/auqa_cycle_2. Note: this report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA).
Commendation
Achievement of a stated goal – or existence of a plan or activity that appears likely to
lead to the achievement of a stated goal – which is particularly significant.
Affirmation
An area already identified by the University in need of attention which is particularly
significant, whether in respect of approach, deployment or results.
Recommendation
An area in need of attention, whether in respect of approach, deployment or results,
which is particularly significant. It is acknowledged that recommendations in this
Report may have resources implications.
7 72012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Commendations
The Panel commends:
C1. The leadership of community and regional engagement shown by the Vice-Chancellor
Professor Reid over the past ten years and the impact this has had on current strategy
and practice.
C2. The passion and commitment of UWS staff towards achieving the current level of
success with engagement activities, while displaying genuine enthusiasm to further
developing the University‟s engagement strategies.
C3. The breadth and embeddedness (depth) of current UWS engagement activities and
projects with regional partners.
C4. The UWS Operational Framework for Regional and Community Engagement as a
highly fit-for-purpose model for developing reciprocal mutual benefit relationships with
regional partners over time.
C5. The University‟s extensive and valuable work in civic engagement within the region,
including initiatives such as SMExcellence, TVSydney, and the Regional Centre for
Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development in GWS.
C6. The leadership displayed by the Whitlam Institute in promoting research, debate and
enquiry for the benefit of all Australians.
C7. The commitment to improving both the academic and non-academic achievements of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members of the community, including
development of an array of targeted engagement activities that have resulted in
increased participation rates in higher education as well as increased employment at
UWS.
C8. The quality and depth of engagement partnerships which is evident in the indicative
case studies presented by the University in support of the Review.
C9. The extent to which engaged learning and engaged research are manifest in current
UWS engagement projects and activities.
C10. The impressive results being achieved within Greater Western Sydney secondary
schools through the University‟s Schools Engagement Program.
C11. The work being undertaken as part of the University‟s Cube strategy to develop an
e-portfolio for students that allows for University authentication of learning outside of
academic programs.
C12. The excellent foundation of commitment to regional engagement on which the
University can actively differentiate itself in attracting academic and professional staff.
8 82012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Affirmations
The Panel affirms:
A1. That service learning be embedded across the curriculum and linked to the UWS
graduate attributes.
A2. The decision by the University to strengthen its role in the leadership dimension of
regional engagement.
A3. The Chancellor‟s Circle proposal as an effective overarching framework for UWS‟s
taking forward the next iteration of regional leadership in community engagement.
A4. The proposal to acquire an institutional-wide customer relationship management
(CRM) database.
A5. The University‟s proposal for developing a more robust evaluation framework for
engagement which is linked to regional priorities.
A6. The proposal to build experiential learning into all undergraduate courses
(acknowledging the very good practice already in place within some disciplines).
A7. The proposal to identify typologies of engaged learning and employ these systemically
within curriculum design.
A8. The decision to embed engaged research activity within a stronger strategic framework
for engaged research.
A9. Identification of the need for a more precise understanding of how student commitment
and interest in their communities can be translated to engagement activities that are
attractive and which they regard as adding value to their University experience.
A10. Identification of the need to integrate engagement activity more directly within the
recognition and reward framework for University staff.
9 92012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Recommendations
The Panel recommends that:
R1. The University strengthen its planning and cohesion around the alignment of
engagement strategy and practice with regional priorities.
R2. Alumni strategy enables a longitudinal understanding of the impact that service
learning has on careers and alumni roles within their communities.
R3. UWS adopt „a University for the region‟ as the overarching theme for its regional
engagement strategy, focus and activity, becoming the „go to place‟ for information on
Greater Western Sydney, and brokering a forum with the University at its heart.
R4. In its engagement as „a University for the region‟, UWS should see the potential of
Greater Western Sydney as a „natural laboratory‟ in which to develop expertise in
meeting the challenges of peri-urban settings within large cities.
R5. In adopting „a University for the region‟ as the overarching theme for regional
engagement, the University should develop a clearer understanding of its role in
supporting industries in which the region has a comparative advantage through
scientific innovation. Innovation and productivity in these sectors will likely generate
the greatest economic multipliers for the economy of Greater Western Sydney.
R6. Action should be taken to align external media strategy in the context of promoting
UWS as „a University for the region‟.
R7. The University should engage in an institutional dialogue about improving the planning
and focus of engagement in a way that does not reduce the ability of staff to engage in
projects of importance.
R8. As a matter of priority UWS should institute clear and seamless arrangements for
intending engagement partners to make contact with the University and for effective
management of their proposals.
R9. In a stronger regional leadership of engagement context, UWS should review its
current arrangements for Provosts as the face of campus interaction with local
communities.
R10. The overall management of key engagement partnerships be undertaken through
senior contacts at the University Executive or Dean of School level.
R11. The University develop and implement processes for ensuring the sustainability of its
engagement activities.
10 102012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
R12. More concerted attention be given to developing the concepts and frameworks for
engaged teaching within UWS.
R13. The University develop and implement processes to ensure that engagement
permeates programs for Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students. This could
potentially include opportunities for exchange with other Talloires Network members
globally3.
R14. The University develop and implement a life-long learning strategy.
R15. The University take a more strategic approach to alumni in the context of enabling
regional and community engagement.
3 Talloires Network Members, accessed 3 November 2012, from
http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/talloires-network-members/
11 112012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 12
Chapter 1: Overall Findings ............................................................................................................. 13
Chapter 2: Strategic Alignment ....................................................................................................... 17
Chapter 3: Greater Western Sydney .............................................................................................. 23
Chapter 4: Partnerships ................................................................................................................... 33
Chapter 5: Engaged Learning, Teaching and Research............................................................. 37
Chapter 6: Students .......................................................................................................................... 44
Chapter 7: Staff ................................................................................................................................. 51
Afterword ............................................................................................................................................. 54
Acronyms and Abbreviations of Titles ............................................................................................. 55
Appendix A: Review Panel .............................................................................................................. 56
Appendix B: Terms of Reference ................................................................................................... 60
Appendix C: Review Methodology ................................................................................................. 61
Appendix D: Submissions ................................................................................................................ 65
Appendix E: Consultations ............................................................................................................... 69
Appendix F: Program ....................................................................................................................... 74
References .......................................................................................................................................... 78
12 122012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Introduction
The 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement (the Review) is a major
thematic review that arises as part of an institutional review process at the University of
Western Sydney (UWS).
The membership of the Review Panel (the Panel) is set out at Appendix A. The Panel
comprised four members external to the University.
The Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Review are set out at Appendix B, and encompass
three areas related to strategic alignment in relation to community engagement, and three
which are centred on practice and capacity building. The methodology for the Review is set
out at Appendix C. As part of its preparations for this Review, the University conducted a
full-day staff forum (EngageLab 2012) to inform the University‟s submission to the Review.
The Panel notes that this event involved over fifty staff representing all Schools, Research
Institutes, and operational areas across the institution, and included presentations from
external partners. A website for the Review4 was developed by the University, and continues
to serve as a source of information for external and internal stakeholders.
In its deliberations, the Panel took into consideration the background briefing papers
provided by the University, including the University Submission and Book of Supplementary
Materials (both of August 2012), in addition to 98 external and 27 internal submissions to the
Review that were collected on the Panel‟s behalf by the University. Lists of external and
internal submissions to the Review appear at Appendix D. The Panel sought additional
information from the University throughout the review process, and conducted a three-day
visit to the University on 6, 7 and 10 September 2012 (on Parramatta, Campbelltown and
Bankstown campuses respectively), in addition to an off-site Panel meeting on 5 September
2012. Details of consultations are set out at Appendix E, and the program for the on-site
visit appears at Appendix F.
The University has asked the Panel to comment on both current provisioning and future
positioning issues around the six TOR. The Panel introduces its report with summary
comments about both current performance and strategic positioning. The report then
addresses both of these dimensions, in more specific terms, under each of the TOR.
The Panel wishes to note that throughout this report it has used the terms „Indigenous‟, „First
Nation‟, and „Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander‟ interchangeably and as they were
employed by the individuals and groups presenting to us. This has been done with due
respect and on the understanding that such terms are acceptable to these communities.
4 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement website, accessed 2 October 2012,
from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/
13 132012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Chapter 1: Overall Findings
The Panel considers that the current Review of Community and Regional Engagement takes
place at an important time for UWS, in the context of meeting the expectations of the region
within a changing environment for higher education in Australia. Moreover, the Review
occurs at a time when the University has clearly challenged itself about the strategies and
settings necessary to take the next step in its relationship with its community. In this sense
the breadth and sophistication of the current suite of engagement activities in place with
regional partners is a good platform on which to build. The Panel, in its report, has provided
comment on both the current overall settings for engagement and the way in which the
University is positioned for the future, identifying strengths as well as areas for improvement
in respect of both these dimensions.
1.1 Current settings and provisioning
The Panel considers that the starting point for effective regional engagement is clarity about
the philosophy, context and focus of engagement. This is particularly so in the case of UWS
because of the strong regional orientation in its mission, and the financial settings in which
the University operates. As an institution which relies heavily on income from students
without a substantial endowment base, any resources devoted to regional engagement must
bring the highest return to the community and the University. Without this clarity of purpose
there is the very real risk of activity being diffuse and uneven, failing to yield strategic and
enduring benefit at the cost of diverting resources from the key business of research,
learning and teaching.
In this regard the first observation the Panel would want to make is to recognise the
outstanding leadership of the Vice-Chancellor, Professor Janice Reid, in establishing the
current level of focus and united sense of purpose for the University in its relationship with
the region. This has been achieved in a relatively short time in the life of a tertiary institution,
and in an environment where there have been challenges more broadly in establishing a
single institutional focus as UWS has transitioned from the federated organisational model in
place at the turn of the century. The Vice-Chancellor‟s leadership in this area is perhaps best
recognised in the independent external evaluations of UWS as a “university of the people”5.
The Panel‟s second observation recognises the sheer critical mass and breadth of UWS
engagement at the activity level. The University‟s submission outlined more than 30 case
studies to illustrate the way engagement is manifest within various domains. The Panel had
the opportunity to meet with both external and internal (staff) project partners during the
5 See Australian Universities Quality Agency (2007), „Report of an audit of University of Western
Sydney – January 2007‟, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/view-all; and Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, pp. 10-11, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf. The latter report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA).
14 142012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Review, and noted the genuine sense of collegiality and shared value in these relationships.
Furthermore the Panel considers that this has not occurred by accident and is in substantial
part a product of the commitment of the Vice-Chancellor, University management and staff.
The Panel considers that the framework for regional engagement as articulated by UWS in
its submission to the Review is well defined. The relationship between the UWS mission, the
Making the Difference: 2010-2015 strategy, and the Operational Framework for Community
and Regional Engagement is clear and well defined, and the Panel considers this model
establishes the appropriate settings for a focus on regional priorities. In its submission the
University identified some 65% of more than 200 current engagement activities that are
directly related to the five key priority areas for the region identified by the Regional
Organisation of Councils6.
The Panel notes that, notwithstanding the current quantum of engagement projects on the
ground, there is scope to improve aspects of internal planning and evaluation, as well as
some aspects of relationship management. These are not uncommon challenges faced by
universities, and UWS is certainly not alone in its wish to improve these aspects of strategy
and practice. The Panel endorses the proposals made by UWS in its submission in these
areas, and has made recommendations throughout the report on how they might be
approached. There is also a need for better planning and execution in both building the
overall capacity for engagement within the institution (including the sharing of practice), and
recognising and resourcing staff who are engaged in this activity.
At the level of scholarly practice, which is the primary focus of University activity involving
staff and students, the Panel recognises that the framework for engaged learning focuses on
the community as a site and source for learning. The case study examples provided to the
Panel illustrate the effectiveness of this approach in contributing to a „work ready‟ student
experience. The Panel supports the University‟s assessment that there are aspects of
scholarly practice that can be strengthened around a community of practice, especially as it
relates to engaged teaching.
1.2 Future positioning
The Panel considers that the University has developed an excellent platform of engaged
partnerships from which to make a step change in its relationship with the region. In its
submission to the Review, UWS refers to the fact that it has been growing its activity in what
it refers to as the „civic engagement‟ segment of its regional activities. The University cites
SMExcellence, TVSydney, and the United Nations University endorsed Regional Centre of
Expertise (RCE) on Education for Sustainable Development – RCE Greater Western Sydney
as examples of activities where UWS has provided leadership in a facilitation/enabling sense
as the beacon for community activities in particular areas. Moreover, in the concluding
chapter of its submission the University makes reference to areas where this leadership
dimension is becoming more visible, for example in the partnerships which are engaged in
lobbying for improved transport in the region.
6 UWS, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional
Engagement‟, pg.27, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission
15 152012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
It is in this area – the leadership dimension – that the Panel considers the University should
give increased focus to positioning its engagement strategy for the next 20-30 years. The
Panel believes there is considerable potential to take a stronger role standing shoulder to
shoulder with the community and region in leading representational (including lobbying)
activities, strategy development, and applied aspects of addressing regional priorities. The
Panel notes in this regard that 65% of current engagement partnerships are in priority areas
for the region. However it could be argued that this has arisen as much through chance as
design. The Panel asks whether, in a paradigm of UWS as a more prominent regional
leadership partner, this percentage should be higher.
The Panel considers that the UWS mission provides the fundamental raison d‟être for
engagement with the region. However, the Panel considers that the University would be best
placed to take the enhanced leadership dimension forward if it has a compelling „theme‟ for
its regional engagement. To the community this would present a clear rationale and posture
for the University in its regional partnership, and in turn would represent the marshalling
point for internal planning and activity.
The Panel considers that a potential paradigm effectively to shape the University‟s future
engagement rationale is that of „a University for the region‟. In this metaphor, UWS would
take the posture of a University working with the region to shape the way that such a large
peri-urban setting on the fringe of a large city manages the challenges associated with
population growth, increasing multi-culturalism, the retreat of manufacturing industry,
infrastructure pressures, health, education and employment challenges, and the progress of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander persons. In many respects GWS could be seen as a
model for the future peri-urban settings of many large cities around the world, and this
provides a compelling rationale for the region as a „natural laboratory‟ setting, where UWS
would partner in a leadership sense in developing future solutions for such settings. This
dynamic would in turn provide a focal point for University planning for regional engagement,
and evaluation would be undertaken in conjunction with partners in the context of regional
priorities. In the metaphor of „a University for the region‟, the issues on which the University
engages with the community would be enhanced in breadth and texture and take on a
longer term developmental perspective. The Panel has suggested a range of areas in which
this focus might progressively evolve, that go to the heart of what it is to be a peri-urban
region with the challenges described.
An issue allied to that of the University‟s taking a stronger leadership posture under a
compelling „theme‟ for its regional engagements is that of leadership at the local level within
the sub-regional structure and reality of GWS. In this respect the UWS campus network is an
important platform for engagement and is broadly aligned with the sub-regional structure.
The Panel believes there is a strong case to demonstrate that the enactment of this new
leadership paradigm would be most effective if linked to (and in some respects driven from)
the campus framework. The Panel notes that the provost role currently manages the
interface between the University and the local community. During the visit the Panel was
introduced to the provosts of two campuses and was impressed by their local community
knowledge and their commitment to developing campus cohesion. However, the Panel
considers that discharging a stronger community leadership role requires the provosts to
possess and exercise institutional authority as head of campus. In this regard the Panel
notes that such roles are often undertaken at Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC) or Pro Vice-
Chancellor (PVC) level in other Australian Universities. If the provosts are to have a stronger
16 162012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
leadership role as envisaged in this report, the Panel considers that UWS should examine
the option of delegating greater responsibility and accountability to them. This would require
the head of campus positions being recognised as senior executive members of the
University. The Panel recognises that University Executive members are currently centrally
located which may make this option complex, although it does note that there is at least one
Dean located physically on every campus.
The Panel was briefed during the visit on the Chancellor‟s Circle proposal, which the Panel
believes could provide an effective overarching frame for a stronger leadership role in
regional engagement, within „a University for the region‟ paradigm. The Panel‟s proposals for
organising the leadership role at a campus level are considered to align well with the
Chancellor‟s Circle, and would be the means of enacting this leadership dynamic at an
issues level within the sub-regional reality of GWS. The Panel is aware of Professor Reid‟s
pending retirement and considers that a key consideration in appointing a new Vice-
Chancellor would be that he or she should have the ability to lead engagement to this next
level of leadership with the same understanding, commitment and skill with which Professor
Reid has taken it forward.
The Review has identified that external partners – including potential partners – find it
difficult to identify a point of entry to the University. The Panel supports the mooted Gateway
initiative, and believes it will benefit from having senior staff members managing liaison with
the most important engagement partners. In the leadership model proposed, this role might
be included as part of more deliberate campus leadership in local engagement strategy.
The final comment the Panel would make about future positioning is the importance of
alumni to building capacity from both a financial (endowment) point of view, and from the
perspective of developing a network of future community-based „champions‟ of regional
engagement. In this context the Panel considers that embedding service learning across the
curriculum is a key strategic long-term capacity building issue. The University should build
on the very good models that are in place within some UWS disciplines and institutionalise
these as part of the leadership agenda. Also, by educating its alumni to be active, engaged
citizens, the University can leverage its efforts to build social capital for the benefit of GWS.
In the chapters which follow the Panel has elaborated on these conclusions in the context of
the specific Terms of Reference for the Review.
17 172012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Chapter 2: Strategic Alignment
The Panel identified a key consideration in effective community and regional engagement
outcomes as the extent to which strategic, enabling and operational elements are aligned
and work together cohesively. The University has addressed this in the submission to the
Review, and the visit by the Panel was an opportunity to explore and test how well this
works.
2.1 Overall strategic settings
In its submission to the Review, the University discussed at length the matter of alignment
between community and regional engagement, and the UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015:
Making the Difference (MTD)7. The University proposed that, from a strategic point of view,
the MTD strategy provides clear purpose and context for external engagement (the „why‟), in
particular through its reference in the strategy to a focus on “regional, national and
international communities, beginning with the people of Greater Western Sydney”8. The
Panel notes the distinct linkage in the UWS mission to the regional context, and agrees that
this provides a robust raison d‟être for engaged University strategy and practice.
The MTD strategy is the vehicle through which the University gives life to its mission. It
situates the University‟s vision of its engagement with the region, ascribes a set of core
values („what we believe in‟) that inform this, and sets out a suite of actions („what we will
do‟) in three key pillars of activity around: a superior and engaged student learning
experience; focused, relevant, and world class engaged research; and building
organisational capacity. The Panel was informed that in a previous iteration of the MTD
strategy, University Engagement was a fourth pillar but in the current context is integrated
within the current three pillars.
7 UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015: Making the Difference, accessed 2 October 2012, from
http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/7301/Strategy-for-web10.pdf 8 See UWS mission statement, see UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015: Making the Difference,
accessed 2 October 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/7301/Strategy-for-web10.pdf
Term of Reference 1
The UWS engagement strategy aligns with the University’s Making the Difference Strategy and Plan, and with international
directions in strategic community engagement
18 182012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
In its submission the University proposes that the mission and the MTD strategy provide a
segue to the priorities of the region as a focal point for external engagement, citing health,
education, employment, environment and society/culture as broad regional themes, based
on the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) priorities. The
submission outlines some 126 specific engagement partnerships/projects in these five broad
thematic areas (page 27). Table 2.1 of the submission provides evidence of the extent to
which engagement projects are operating under these five broad themes (pages 28-29).
In its submission to the Review the University outlined an interesting history of the way
engagement strategy and practice have developed over the past 14 years since „unification‟
of the previous federated structure for UWS. This narrative brings out important points about
the sub-regional context and imperatives which defined early strategy and practice, as well
as an increasing sophistication and unification of approach which has developed in the last
ten years. Key to achieving this more strategic approach were the initiatives by the Vice-
Chancellor Professor Reid in leading a dialogue within the region and the institution about
the meaning of and parameters for university engagement9; her putting UWS engagement in
an international context and standing through the decision to be party to the Talloires
Declaration (2005)10 (including her serving as Vice-Chair of the Talloires Network Steering
Committee11); her leading role in establishment of the Australian Universities Community
Engagement Alliance (AUCEA – now Engagement Australia12); as well as her initiating a
series of internal reviews since 2005, in addition to the current external Review, to define
institutional approach and practice.
The Panel notes the very intense personal commitment of the Vice-Chancellor to UWS as an
engaged university, and the role her personal energy and dedication have played in UWS‟
current standing and profile within its community. This is manifest in the fact that two reviews
by the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA), in 2006 and 2011, confirmed UWS as
a “university of the people” within its region13.
Commendation 1
The leadership of community and regional engagement shown by
the Vice-Chancellor Professor Reid over the past ten years and the
impact this has had on current strategy and practice.
9 Reid, J., (1999), „UWS and Its Communities: A Time for Change‟, accessed 2 October 2012, from
http://reviews.uws.edu.au/site/assets/media/documents/Panel-Review-docs/3_UWS-and-Its-Communities.pdf 10
The Talloires Declaration on the Civic Roles and Social Responsibilities of Higher Education, 17 September 2005, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/talloires-declaration/ 11
Talloires Network Steering Committee, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/talloires-network-steering-committee/ 12
Engagement Australia home page, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.engagementaustralia.org.au/ 13
See Australian Universities Quality Agency (2007), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – January 2007‟, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/view-all; and Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, pp. 10-11, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf. The latter report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA).
19 192012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
The Panel observed genuine enthusiasm within the University for this Review, and was
impressed by the overall passion and commitment displayed by UWS staff in terms of
furthering the University‟s engagement agenda by building on current achievements. This
was evident during meetings with both academic and professional staff, as well as in the
internal submissions to the Review. The Panel observed employees at all levels that are
highly committed to the University‟s mission and engagement focus, and notes that this was
also reflected in findings of the recent MyVoice survey14.
Commendation 2
The passion and commitment of UWS staff towards achieving the
current level of success with engagement activities, while
displaying genuine enthusiasm to further developing the
University’s engagement strategies.
2.2 Extent of alignment with region and community
The University submission outlines the breadth and depth of engagement activities, and
provides more than 30 case study examples to illustrate this. The Panel was impressed by
the extent to which these are for the most part deeply embedded within the community, and
the dynamism with which this is managed by the University. Examples of this level of
embeddedness (depth) across a wide breadth of activities include the UWS Schools
Engagement Program of outreach to secondary schools in the region, programs designed to
assist GWS school students overcome barriers to education (for example, for Indigenous
and refugee children), programs which provide professional services (for example, in the
areas of law and psychology) to GWS residents who normally could not afford these
services, and projects which address issues of long-term sustainability in agriculture, food
and the environment.
Commendation 3
The breadth and embeddedness (depth) of current UWS engagement
activities and projects with regional partners.
From the point of view of alignment with the UWS mission, the Panel was interested in the
way the University has successfully managed what often began as exploratory projects into
more deeply embedded and robust relationships. In this regard, the UWS Operational
14
Voice Project (2012), UWS MyVoice Staff Engagement Survey: Executive Summary, 4 May 2012, downloaded 24 October 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/people_and_culture/opc/working_at_uws/myvoice_uws_staff_engagement_survey/myvoice_faqs
20 202012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Framework for Community and Regional Engagement (presented on page 31 of the
University‟s submission) appears to be effective, emphasising the value placed on all
engagement activities in building a dynamic sense over time of mutual benefit and
reciprocity with regional partners. The Panel considers that in the context of the regional
partnership orientation of the UWS mission, the operational model is highly fit-for-purpose as
a way of marshalling a plethora of activities under a unifying sense of purpose. The Panel
notes moreover that the model is endorsed by University staff as an approach that is
inclusive, and where staff members are able to situate their contribution within the overall
schema for institutional engagement with the region.
Commendation 4
The UWS Operational Framework for Regional and Community
Engagement as a highly fit-for-purpose model for developing
reciprocal mutual benefit relationships with regional partners over
time.
While the Panel noted that some 65% of engagement projects are directly related to regional
priorities, the Panel was interested in exploring the institutional dynamics around planning
which had delivered this outcome, and indeed in exploring the question of whether the
University had set targets or indicators in respect of strategic priorities for engagement. In
the submission to the Review, reference was made to enabling plans in the portfolio areas of
Engagement, Learning and Teaching (L&T), and Research15. The Panel noted that in broad
terms the L&T and Research Plans encapsulated engaged elements as a matter of principle.
In a similar way, the UWS Engagement Strategy sets out key principles for University activity
in this area. However the Panel was not able to establish that University planning at the
portfolio level (as reflected in these enabling plans) is directed in any deliberate way towards
addressing regional priorities.
Moreover, in discussions conducted during the visit the Panel was not able to identify
strategic level processes for deciding on engagement priorities at an institutional level. This
finding tends to be borne out by the University‟s reference in its submission to the fact that
engagement activities and projects tend to be driven by the commitment and passion of
individual staff members through their community contacts. In this respect, the Panel was left
with the impression that the percentage of engagement activities that are linked to regional
priorities has occurred somewhat by happenstance. The attendant question is whether this
percentage (65%) should and could be much higher with a more deliberate and planned
strategy. In its submission the University appears to recognise the need to improve “the
alignment of institutional and unit-level strategy”, referring in effect to internal alignment of
engagement activities (page 118).
While the Panel supports this finding about internal alignment and discusses it further under
Term of Reference 2, the more compelling issue is the University‟s approach to the
alignment of broader institutional strategy with regional priorities. The Panel notes the
15
See „UWS Engagement Strategy 2010-2013‟, „UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014‟, and „UWS Research Plan 2012-2014‟, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
21 212012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
somewhat serendipitous nature of this. The Panel considers that development of a more
robust approach to institutional planning for regional engagement raises questions such as
the nature of the University‟s external profile at the regional leadership level, institutional
governance frameworks for engagement, institutional priority setting (including key
performance indicators (KPIs)), as well as organisational structure and resourcing questions.
Recommendation 1
The University strengthen its planning and cohesion around the
alignment of engagement strategy and practice with regional
priorities.
A potential issue for the University is that some students interpret the University‟s mission
and the characteristics of the student cohort to mean a „lower value‟ university experience.
More specifically, some students may feel that the University‟s concern for „opportunity‟
implies lower entry requirements. The metaphor of „a University for the region‟ positions this
student experience in a more positive light, where the emphasis is on student outcomes
rather than inputs.
While the preceding discussion about strategic and operational planning addresses the issue
of broad alignment of the settings for UWS engagement, the matter of meeting the needs
and expectations of the region is discussed in greater detail under Term of Reference 2,
below.
2.3 Alignment with international practice
The Panel found a number of interesting areas of parallel with UWS‟s engagement strategy
in its region and international practice, as well as a number of international perspectives that
might inform the future direction of practice. The first relates to the nature of the relationship
between the institution and the region itself.
For example, the Morrill Act (1862) that created the United States (US) Land Grant
institutions16, conceived of these colleges as being for their region. Similarly, UWS‟s mission
aligns closely with the concept of a University focussed on GWS.
Notwithstanding this strong level of alignment at the mission level, the Panel considers that
UWS has scope to strengthen its position and focus within the metaphor of „a University for
the region‟. This is discussed in greater detail under Term of Reference 2, and is related to
the question of „expectations‟ previously alluded to at the conclusion of Section 2.2 of this
report.
16
Also known as the Land-Grant College Act of 1862. Sixty-nine US colleges were created by the Act (including Cornell University and MIT), see http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=33&page=transcript
22 222012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Given that the principle activity of a University revolves around the notion of scholarship, the
Panel also sought to draw conclusions about UWS‟s strategy and practice with respect to
the student experience. An emerging contemporary perspective is that of „scholarship in
action‟ for the benefit of the region/community/nation17. In this regard, the Panel would agree
with the University‟s own assessment that there are parts of the curriculum where the notion
of service learning is highly embedded. However this does not appear to be an area of
strategic intent on the part of the institution. The UWS position is arguably no different than
in a number of institutions where the challenge in this regard is to embed such an approach
in a way that meets the needs of disparate disciplines. Nevertheless the Panel affirms the
UWS position that it should seek to engage with service learning as a key aspect of the
mission and approach it in a more deliberate and planned way for a consistent engaged
student experience. The Panel notes that the UWS graduate attributes already substantially
provide the entrée for a more embedded approach.
Affirmation 1
That service learning be embedded across the curriculum and
linked to the UWS graduate attributes.
A related challenge is to understand the longer term impact of service learning on how
career paths of alumni are influenced by engaged university learning experiences, and more
broadly the impact this is having in communities and beyond. A current longitudinal study,
launched in 2006 by Tufts University in the US, is seeking to understand whether and how
student attitudes change towards civic engagement during their time at university, and the
impact this has on their working and community lives18. With this in mind, though the current
Review does not address alumni strategy per se, the Panel recommends that the University
ensure its alumni relations are structured in a way that enables such a longitudinal
understanding of the impact of exposure to civic engagement concepts and experiences
whilst at UWS. This would necessitate retrospective analysis from 1992.
Recommendation 2
Alumni strategy enables a longitudinal understanding of the
impact that service learning has on careers and alumni roles
within their communities.
17
See Syracuse University vision statement, Scholarship in Action, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.syr.edu/about/vision.html 18
Tufts University, (2006), „Education for Active Citizenship: A longitudinal Study of Civic Outcomes‟ , presentation to the AAC&U Annual General Meeting, January 2006, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://aacu-secure.nisgroup.com/meetings/annualmeeting/AM06/documents/TuftsLongStudyPresentationAACUWebsite.pdf
23 232012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Chapter 3: Greater Western Sydney
In this chapter the Panel focuses on the „what‟ of community engagement, as discussed in
the University‟s submission to the Review. Current areas of emphasis are discussed in terms
of their meeting the needs of GWS, and the Panel raises a number of issues and challenges
for the University in the area of community expectations as they relate to leadership. In
Chapter 1 the Panel endorsed the breadth and depth of the current suite of engagement
activities. It believes that the questions canvassed within the current chapter are germane to
UWS‟s future impact as „a University for the region‟.
3.1 Regional needs and expectations
As outlined in Chapter 2, the Panel considered that the suite of engagement initiatives in
which the University partners with the region reflects a substantial commitment to GWS.
The operational model by which UWS partners with the region involves the investment of
considerable institutional expertise and resources. It is equally clear that engagement
partners make a substantial commitment, for example in making their sites available as
places for work-based learning.
In its submission to the Review, the University devoted a chapter to the area of civic
engagement, where the phenomenon was characterised as the leadership dimension of
regional engagement, and inter alia the benefits of engagement fall more towards the region
as a partner than the institution. The University outlined in its submission some excellent
examples of this dynamic, such as its SMExcellence initiative aimed at assisting small to
medium sized businesses, TVSydney (a regional community television station), and the
United Nations University endorsed Regional Centre of Expertise (RCE) on Education for
Sustainable Development – RCE Greater Western Sydney. Through these case studies the
Panel was able to appreciate the position that UWS has taken as the
catalyst/facilitator/beacon for bringing together a number of levels of community and
government expertise in the name of developing regional capacity.
Term of Reference 2
The UWS engagement strategy is focused on key needs and expectations within Greater Western Sydney (GWS)
24 242012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Commendation 5
The University’s extensive and valuable work in civic engagement
within the region, including initiatives such as SMExcellence,
TVSydney, and the Regional Centre for Expertise on Education for
Sustainable Development in GWS.
The University has indicated that many examples of civic engagement are relatively recent
(in the past three years), and that this leadership dimension is an area for further
development. In its discussions with University staff and community representatives during
the Review the Panel agreed that the leadership dimension of engagement is the area in
which the community expectations of the institution have the greatest potential to be
furthered. The Panel noted two areas in which UWS is assuming a stronger voice and
interest in partnering with the community. The first is the alliance with state and local
governments in representing the transport needs of the region. The second is the
Chancellor‟s „Gateway‟ project through which the University is “exploring its capacity to
provide an expertise, facilitation and linking role in respect of key GWS economic and social
priorities” in order to become “the „first point of call‟ for government, industry and community
sectors in locating, accessing and linking to relevant research, data, information and
resources (including people) within the region”19.
In the context of the University‟s mission in GWS, the Panel supports the proposition that, as
the most senior source of learning in the community, UWS is uniquely placed to contribute to
both the conceptual and practical dimensions of building regional capacity. Moreover, an
approach in which UWS is an increasingly active and equal partner in leading regional
strategy for addressing GWS issues would add both dimension and weight to the
University‟s regional profile. As UWS seeks to engage with the region of GWS, it is in no
small way helping to „create‟ the region. This is an important consideration as the University
seeks to strengthen its leadership role in the region.
Affirmation 2
The decision by the University to strengthen its role in the
leadership dimension of regional engagement.
19
UWS, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, pg.122, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission
25 252012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
3.2 A University for the region
In recognising UWS‟s strategic intention to increase its leadership role within the region, the
Panel believes this is best approached from a very clear conception on the part of the
University of the „place‟ it wishes to occupy within GWS within a 10-20 year timeframe. In
this regard the Panel considers that the very substantial performance and sophistication of
UWS engagement at an activity level over the past 3-5 years presents an excellent platform
to take engagement leadership and impact to the next level. The Panel believes that the
paradigm of „a University for the region‟ has much to offer as a theme in shaping an
enhanced leadership dimension.
In the New South Wales (NSW) State Government‟s recently released Western Sydney
Regional Action Plan: Community Discussion Paper (which will inform government planning
to 2021), a number of priorities were identified including: growing the economy of Greater
Western Sydney; improving access to jobs; and dealing with housing, transport, and
environmental issues20. The Panel notes that the State Government‟s vision for Western
Sydney is to “strengthen its regional economy through the development of additional
employment, and, extensive unique parklands, modern housing options, first-class
educational facilities and new transport linkages, while maintaining its unique urban and rural
residential lifestyles"21, and that the University is well placed to play a leadership role in this
regard.
As identified in a recent study by Deloitte (2012) into the economic contribution of UWS
towards the region22, GWS as a growing peri-urban community and economy is highly
distinctive in terms of its regional demographics. The Panel argues that this may represent a
microcosm of sorts for the future challenges of communities on the urban fringes of large
cities around the world. In this context, the demands of managing cultural and religious
diversity, population growth, the retreat of manufacturing bases, and complex issues around
education, language, health, housing and transport may be increasingly characteristic of
peri-urban settings during this century. The Panel considers that this presents a unique
opportunity area for the University as a focal point for regional engagement. With the
community as partner, the University would bring the weight of its educational and research
concentrations, and its gravitas as a key regional employer and shaper of values, attitudes
and skills. A thorough „stakeholder‟ analysis of current and potential regional partners would
provide a solid base from which to develop this theme, including the sharing of risk with
other agencies and funders. Such analysis necessitates the University‟s differentiating
between partnerships that involve mutual risk-sharing and investment of resources, and
those that relate more to the provision of general intelligence or advice. While all
20
NSW Government (2012), „Western Sydney Regional Action Plan: Community Discussion Paper‟, page 5, downloaded 16 October 2012, from www.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/document/show/146 21
NSW Government (2012), „Western Sydney Regional Action Plan: Community Discussion Paper‟, page 3, downloaded 16 October 2012, from www.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/document/show/146 22
Deloitte Access Economics, (2012), „Economic contribution of the University of Western Sydney‟, February, accessed 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/site/assets/media/documents/Panel-Review-docs/8_Economic-Contribution_Deloitte.pdf
26 262012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
relationships are potentially important, the University should concentrate on developing
those relationships that represent a mutual sharing of risk and investment of resources.
In the paradigm of the region as a natural „laboratory‟ for such settings, and in alignment with
the State Government‟s vision for Western Sydney as outlined above, the Panel considers
there is considerable potential for UWS to embrace, research and develop expertise and
substantial policy influence in areas such as:
Economic growth and employment
Economic diversification (how does technology transfer work?)
Transport (a real deficit area in GWS)
Housing and town planning (the Panel was particularly struck by the problem of creating smaller centres near where there is one big centre (Sydney central business district (CBD) nearby); subsidiary effects
Cultural, including tourism
Health and wellbeing
Education, with languages a subset of this (the Panel observes that while new immigrants learn English, they should also preserve their own language)
Situated and relevant research and development (R+D)
Criminal justice and security
Community cohesion including working with First Nations (which is a global issue)
Youth citizenship and agency
An international example of a University that has successfully established itself as a „go to
place‟ for such R+D is „LSE London‟ of the London School of Economics (LSE). As outlined
on its homepage, LSE was “set up to improve society and to „understand the causes of
things‟”, while putting “engagement with the wider world at the heart of its mission”23.
Recommendation 3
UWS adopt ‘a University for the region’ as the overarching theme
for its regional engagement strategy, focus and activity, becoming
the ‘go to place’ for information on Greater Western Sydney, and
brokering a forum with the University at its heart.
An important consideration in this respect is the substantial population growth predicted for
GWS, from 2.2 million residents in June 2011 to almost 3 million residents by 203624. The
Panel notes that, in response to this growth, higher education in general has an important
role to play in developing new economic and cultural „centres‟ across the region.
Notwithstanding the predicted growth of GWS, the region has stronger sub-regional identity
than with the wider region, uneven levels of development and prospects between the major
population and commercial centres, and the experience of successful and capable
23
See the London School of Economics and Political Science homepage, accessed 2 October 2012, from http://www2.lse.ac.uk/aboutLSE/aboutHome.aspx 24
NSW Government, Premier and Cabinet, homepage, (2012), „About Western Sydney: Demographics‟, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.westernsydney.nsw.gov.au/about-western-sydney/demographics/
27 272012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
individuals leaving the region. These considerations infer a potentially important role for
UWS in overall community leadership because of the combination of the University‟s
orientation to the region as a whole, and its local sub-regional campus configuration. No
other single potential partner in regional development is able to bring this breadth of
perspective. The Panel considers that adoption by the University of a compelling and robust
philosophical orientation for the future along the lines of „a University for the region‟ would
provide a very good frame and platform for UWS in shaping its future regional leadership
role.
Recommendation 4
In its engagement as ‘a University for the region’, UWS should see
the potential of Greater Western Sydney as a ‘natural laboratory’ in
which to develop expertise in meeting the challenges of peri-urban
settings within large cities.
The Panel is cognisant of the Chancellor‟s commitment to an increasing leadership role for
the University, and considers that a vital enabler for the leadership direction envisaged is a
high level of recognition of and commitment to this from the trustees of the institution. As
such, the Panel considered that the Chancellor‟s Circle concept, initiated by Professor
Shergold, could be a very good platform on which to build a stronger leadership role for the
University, complementing University engagement with pre-existing local economic and
community development bodies.
Affirmation 3
The Chancellor’s Circle proposal as an effective overarching
framework for UWS’s taking forward the next iteration of regional
leadership in community engagement.
The Panel was impressed with the University‟s engagement with industry through student
work experience programs and industry partnerships. However, there is a sense that the
economic base of the region is poorly understood in terms of its comparative advantages.
While the University has undoubted strengths in producing scientific innovation, there may
be opportunities to strengthen research in areas that have a particular relevance for the
region‟s export industries. For example, food manufacturing is one industry that has the
potential for additional growth, particularly in the context of the growth of Asian export
markets. The Australian Government‟s 2011 census data show, for example, that the GWS
suburb of Westmead has the second highest number of postgraduate residents of any
suburb in NSW25. In economic terms, this represents a very thick labour market in a precinct
that includes four hospitals and at least two major research institutes. The Panel considers
that there may be „cold spots‟ where research could be better aligned and connected.
25
Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011 Census data, accessed 19 November 2012, from http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/data?opendocument&navpos=200
28 282012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Recommendation 5
In adopting ‘a University for the region’ as the overarching theme
for regional engagement the University should develop a clearer
understanding of its role in supporting industries in which the
region has a comparative advantage through scientific innovation.
Innovation and productivity in these sectors will likely generate the
greatest economic multipliers for the economy of Greater Western
Sydney.
An important issue in relation to developing and sustaining a stronger leadership role for the
University in its regional engagement is the commitment of resources required to achieve the
University‟s engagement aspirations. The Panel recognises that, for a University such as
UWS which does not have substantial endowment resources, any funds invested in this area
are in effect diverted from the core business of education and research. In this respect, the
Panel believes an important consideration is to ensure current capacity is aligned and
optimised. This will require a thorough assessment of current capabilities and identification
of any gaps in expertise. The University submission indicates that there is scope to improve
this alignment, and the Panel has affirmed this in Chapter 2.
More generally, the Panel considers that this is an area of investment that needs to be
examined in terms of its longer term returns. In particular, the investment should be seen in
terms of opportunities for the University as a partner in new education/business/commercial
enclaves and incubators in the region, in more embedded research partnerships with
business and government, and in attracting students to UWS. An important further
consideration is the opportunity for strengthening alumni endowment as a means of
supporting and funding University engagement. Realignment of the University‟s media
strategy will also be a key consideration in embedding a stronger leadership profile for the
University within the community.
Recommendation 6
Action should be taken to align external media strategy in the
context of promoting UWS as ‘a University for the region’.
The Panel noted the extensive discussion of the Whitlam Institute in the University
submission, and had the opportunity to visit and discuss the Institute with its Director, Mr Eric
Sidoti, during sessions on Parramatta Campus. The Panel found the intention and focus of
the Whitlam Institute interesting in the context of the question that emerged during the
Review of leadership in community engagement. In many respects the Whitlam Institute
provides a model for the University in the Institute‟s very clear focus on regional issues. The
Institute‟s mission is “to promote equality; to involve the people of Australia in the decision-
making processes of our land; and to liberate the talents and uplift the horizons of the
29 292012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Australian people” through research, debate and enquiry26. The Panel considers that through
the Institute and in conjunction with faculty, the University already has in place the
intellectual foundation stone for a stronger leadership dimension in its engagement with the
region.
Commendation 6
The leadership displayed by the Whitlam Institute in promoting
research, debate and enquiry for the benefit of all Australians.
3.3 Parameters for community engagement
In its discussions with University staff the Panel noted an interesting dynamic with respect to
the question of community leadership. In its self-assessment submission, the University
indicated that one of the themes in staff submissions to the Review was the perception of the
need for UWS to take a stronger leadership role within the region. The University also
briefed the Panel on the extent to which there is strong staff commitment to meeting the
needs of the region as indicated in findings of the recent MyVoice survey27.
During discussions with staff a recurrent view emerged that they would not support an
overwhelmingly top-down approach to engagement manifest in the form of controls and
administrative requirements that add little value, and that take away from their limited
resources (time) for community engagement. The Panel understands and sympathises with
this view and notes the University‟s own assessment that the significant reach and
endurance of engagement projects is essentially driven by the commitment and passion of
individual staff members.
Notwithstanding the importance of ensuring an organic approach is able to continue, the
Panel considers that there would be advantage to UWS in having a foundation on which to
respond to community expectations on the basis of clarity as to „what‟s in and what‟s out.‟
Such clarity would provide a framework within which staff and the University could apply
scarce resources to the engagement task, maximising the benefit of that engagement. In this
respect the Panel notes that some 35% of engagement activity is currently not in areas that
comprise the current regional priorities. The experience of Panel members within their own
jurisdictions suggests that having a „crispness‟ to a University‟s engagement orientation
within the region provides a good basis for both the community and staff to prioritise
resourcing and activities. The discussion in the foregoing section of this chapter about the
UWS raison d‟être for engagement is germane to this point, as are the discussion and
recommendations within Chapter 2 about improving strategic planning. The challenge is
26
See „Mission and Guiding Principles‟, The Whitlam Institute home page (2012), accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.whitlam.org/about_us2/mission 27
Voice Project (2012), UWS MyVoice Staff Engagement Survey: Executive Summary, 4 May 2012, downloaded 24 October 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/people_and_culture/opc/working_at_uws/myvoice_uws_staff_engagement_survey/myvoice_faqs
30 302012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
around managing community expectations while not inhibiting the ability of University staff to
openly engage in projects of importance. This should be the subject of a dialogue with the
staff who are leading proponents in UWS engagement practice.
Recommendation 7
The University should engage in an institutional dialogue about
improving the planning and focus of engagement in a way that
does not reduce the ability of staff to engage in projects of
importance.
3.4 Relationship management
An issue that arose during the Review was the way in which the community „finds its way
into‟ the University. The Panel notes from external submissions that there is confusion about
where and how to contact UWS with a new engagement proposal, and this view was
confirmed by several external partners during the visit. The Panel considers that the
„Gateway‟ project has the potential to resolve this issue, but that it should be settled as a
priority. The Panel recognises in this respect that there is at least one other University
already engaging actively with GWS institutions, and that their „shopfront‟ arrangements for
this are relatively sophisticated compared to UWS 28 . There are other examples of
Universities making good progress on simplifying the „way in‟ for external stakeholders29. A
guiding principle in addressing this should be a minimum of bureaucracy and barriers. While
technology could be a key enabler in matching external and internal contacts, the overall
emphasis from the community perspective should be on the ability to seamlessly contact key
individuals who will manage the contact process to a suitable outcome. The Panel considers
it necessary to further develop the UWS website in order to facilitate engagement with
external stakeholders, including potential industry partners.
Recommendation 8
As a matter of priority UWS should institute clear and seamless
arrangements for intending engagement partners to make contact
with the University and for effective management of their
proposals.
28
See the University of Technology‟s „Shopfront‟ at http://www.shopfront.uts.edu.au/, accessed 15 October 2012 29
For example, see the University of Brighton‟s „Community University Partnership Programme (CUPP)‟ at http://www.brighton.ac.uk/cupp/contact-cupp/helpdesk.html; and the University of Newcastle‟s „Engage Newcastle‟ at http://www.newcastle.edu.au/engage/#engage - all accessed 15 October 2012. Also see Tufts University‟s Community Outreach Portal at http://outreach.tufts.edu/ accessed 11 November 2012.
31 312012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
From an outward-facing perspective the Panel formed the view that the campus provosts are
to all intents and purposes the public face of the individual campuses. The Panel considers
that these arrangements work quite effectively within the current approach to regional
engagement. However in a stronger regional leadership paradigm, the Panel considers there
would be advantage in having this responsibility exercised by staff with greater responsibility
and authority in relation to campus administration and engagement matters. This would
imply provosts being members of the University Executive or employed at Dean of School
level. The Panel considers that it would be important for University representatives to be in a
position where they are able to respond and commit on community engagement matters as
and when they arise, rather than have to refer everything to „head office‟. This approach
would also facilitate improved planning and responsiveness at the local level. The Panel
notes that the majority of University Executive is concentrated on a campus without
students, and that the Executive would wish to be mindful of its potential isolation when
developing, executing and sustaining broad based engagement across UWS.
Recommendation 9
In a stronger regional leadership of engagement context, UWS
should review its current arrangements for Provosts as the face of
campus interaction with local communities.
The University has identified in its submission the need to more effectively manage
relationships as they mature and come to an end, which the Panel endorses, including the
database and protocols proposals. The Panel agrees to the need for an effective,
institutional-wide customer relationship management (CRM) database.
Affirmation 4
The proposal to acquire an institutional-wide customer relationship
management (CRM) database.
Over and above the database issue, the Panel observes that effectively managing
relationships as they mature and come to an end is part of the wider issue of relationship
management which is canvassed in this section of the report. With respect to the proposed
schema for the management of relationships at Chapter 7 of the submission30, the Panel
respectfully suggests that key partnerships be managed through senior contacts, in a model
of a stronger University leadership profile for engagement within the region. For example,
each senior executive might be allocated responsibility to actively engage with particular
stakeholders or contacts in a centre or industry. These key partnerships are likely best
30
UWS (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, see Figure 7.1 (Relationship Development and Management Institutional Partnerships), page 115, accessed 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/site/assets/media/documents/INC3407_EngagementReview_Booklet_LR.pdf_8Nov.pdf
32 322012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
managed at University Executive or Dean of School level, and could be supported by a
dedicated business development service role.
Recommendation 10
The overall management of key engagement partnerships be
undertaken through senior contacts at the University Executive or
Dean of School level.
33 332012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Chapter 4: Partnerships
In this chapter the Panel examines the framework and approach to mutual benefit between
the University and its engagement partners. The Panel also reflects on the extent to which
the current settings are likely to build sustainable mutual benefit. The Panel concludes the
chapter with observations about the current approach to evaluation of engagement, including
its adequacy within the higher impact strategic model discussed in Chapters 1 and 2.
4.1 Community and regional partnerships
As discussed in Chapter 1, the Panel considers that the partnerships the University has built
with the community and region are impressive in terms of their breadth and depth. The sheer
scale of these is reflective of institutional commitment. The University submission provides
numerous testaments from partners about the benefits their organisations receive from
relationships with UWS, and this was confirmed in discussions conducted during the visit.
The Panel believes that the approach outlined in the operational model for engagement has
contributed substantially to the establishment, nurturing and growth of relationships. In
particular the goal of inclusion of all interactions within a model of developing mutuality and
reciprocity over time has worked effectively.
The Panel discussed in Chapter 1 the importance of the University‟s joining with other
organisations in GWS in order to advocate for the region. While this necessitates an
institution-wide approach, it should be stressed that each member of the University‟s
Executive must play a crucial role in leading this activity. Such involvement could include
membership of a regional body or board, as well as regular liaison with state officials,
politicians and leading business people who are particularly interested in GWS.
The Panel is aware that an important consideration for community and regional partnerships
is the University‟s engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, and
notes from the University‟s submission that GWS has the “highest number of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander persons compared to any other metropolitan region in Australia” (page
103). The University has made progress in this area of engagement, including in a very
Term of Reference 3
The University’s engagement practices are building sustainable community and regional partnerships which have mutual
benefit
34 342012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
practical way by increasing the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders employed at
UWS from 15 in 2007 to 58 in 2012. The Panel notes that a goal in the University‟s Making
the Difference strategic plan, under the „create a superior and engaged learning experience‟
pillar, is to “implement a comprehensive Indigenous education strategy” 31 . Moreover,
institutional KPIs relate directly to improving Indigenous participation rates in university study
at UWS. In its submission the University presented a number of examples of engagement
with this under-represented community, including the Indigenous School Student Mentoring
Program (ISSMP) (which includes the Heartbeat project and the Rural Indigenous Students
Visit Program), and the Indigenous Health Outcomes Patient Evaluation (IHOPE) project. In
the case of ISSMP, it is noteworthy that – in addition to supporting Indigenous secondary
school students across GWS – potentially any UWS student can benefit by becoming
exposed to the barriers being faced by Indigenous students in education while also gaining a
deeper understanding of Indigenous Australian culture. In terms of engaged research into
Indigenous issues, the Panel was impressed that UWS is the most successful university at
attracting Australian Research Council (ARC) Indigenous Discovery grants.
During its visit to the University, the Panel had the opportunity to meet representatives of the
UWS Indigenous Advisory Council and the UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Employment and Engagement Advisory Board – including Elders on Campus. In addition, a
comprehensive external submission was received from the UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board which cited an “increase in
employment and training for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders” as a direct benefit of the
University‟s engagement activities, while raising various suggestions for improvement32. The
Panel was impressed with the goodwill expressed by those Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islanders met during the visit, particularly in terms of their willingness to support students
and potential students. The Panel did note tensions relating to organising frameworks of the
governing committees, and considers this an issue that the University should address as a
matter of priority and in consultation with relevant stakeholders. In addition, there was a
desire on the part of Elders to be more systematically engaged with the University and with
students. Ideas emerged in the discussion indicating the additional value Elders might add.
For example, Elders raised the idea of a special Welcome to Country for Indigenous
students from outside local country both to formalise their relocation and to indicate support
available to them from within the local community.
Commendation 7
The commitment to improving both the academic and non-
academic achievements of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
members of the community, including development of an array of
targeted engagement activities that have resulted in increased
participation rates in higher education as well as increased
employment at UWS.
31
UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015: Making the Difference, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/uws/mission_goals_strategic_plan/uws_making_the_difference_strategy 32
External submission 44
35 352012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Notwithstanding the successes achieved in developing community and regional
partnerships, the Panel considers that the current organic approach whereby individual staff
members develop these relationships within a model where there is limited recognition for
this activity in workload terms has limitations for the University‟s overall leadership, strategy
and organisation of its engagement impact over the long haul. As discussed in Chapters 1
and 2, the Panel is arguing for a more deliberate, strategic and planned approach to
community and regional engagement as the step change for taking the engagement to the
next level of sophistication and impact, recognising the excellent base of expertise and
relationships already in place on which to build and without which a step up in approach and
activity is unlikely to be achieved.
In its submission to the Review the University has identified the need for greater cohesion
and planning and for optimising current resources that are already involved in engagement.
This is affirmed by the Panel in Chapter 1 which discusses the strategic settings for
engagement. There is, however, a sustainability dimension to this question. The Panel
considers that without a clear frame for engagement, projects may become diffuse to the
point where they lose alignment with regional priorities (as previously noted, currently only
65% are aligned). Moreover there is a risk factor associated with the extent to which projects
are dependent on the good will and commitment of individual staff members. All of these
considerations point to the desirability of a more structured approach with an appropriate
resourcing model.
That said, the Panel wishes to commend the University on the quality of the partnerships
which have been developed over the past five years in particular, while endorsing the
University‟s having recognised the need for a more systematic and planned approach. The
Panel notes however that this is an issue of sustainability as much as one of cohesion and
focus.
Commendation 8
The quality and depth of engagement partnerships which is evident
in the indicative case studies presented by the University in
support of the Review.
Recommendation 11
The University develop and implement processes for ensuring the
sustainability of its engagement activities.
36 362012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
4.2 Mutual benefit
In its submission to the Review, the University proposes that in its Operational Framework
for Community and Regional Engagement, mutual benefit is assessed by the community and
the University as partners not on an individual project basis, but by weighing the balance of
benefit over time and multiple exchanges. The Panel believes this is a practical and realistic
approach in the regional context, and the positive feedback received from partners during
the Review suggests that there is a strong sense of reciprocity involved. Certainly in the
case study examples in the University‟s submission, and where partners who presented at
UWS EngageLab met with the Panel, this dynamic was evident.
In its submission to the Review, the University discussed evaluation of its engagement
strategy and activity, identifying this as an area for improvement. The Panel notes that
evaluation is currently based on the sense of mutual benefit which flows from partner
feedback during projects and activities, from student success in units of engaged learning,
and from the percentage of school students involved in University outreach programs who
go on to attend university. While these are appropriate measures at a micro level, the Panel
notes that the University is examining options for evaluating more broadly impact at the
community/regional level. A key opportunity area, which would be of joint institutional and
regional interest, is the extent and impact of lifelong learning where the University and the
community in partnership define the elements that would apply within a GWS regional
context.
Following the discussion in Chapters 1 and 2, the Panel considers that the question of
evaluation in a macro sense should be examined in the context of the need for a stronger
UWS regional engagement identity and purpose. In a stronger community leadership model,
the University would be well placed to identify the focus and priority required of its
engagement activity, and with regional partners, to identify the indicators of success on
which activities should be jointly evaluated. The Panel notes that while employment is one of
the five key priorities for the region, the current suite of engagement activities includes only
ten (less than 5%) which are identified as being in the area of regional employment. The
Panel proposes a comprehensive and integrated evaluation model where the five elements
of University engagement (i.e., learning, research, Schools and student, and civic
engagement) are evaluated in terms of their contribution to regional priorities within a shared
purpose regional context. This could also apply to the support of local enterprises and Non-
Government Organisations (NGOs) in the work, leadership and procurement of activities of
the divisional units.
While the Panel did not reflect in detail on potential models for evaluation, it concurs with the
University‟s proposal in its submission that the model should focus more on strategic
impact/outcome indicators than on micro-process indicators.
Affirmation 5
The University’s proposal for developing a more robust evaluation
framework for engagement which is linked to regional priorities.
37 372012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Chapter 5: Engaged Learning, Teaching and Research
In this chapter the Panel considers the concepts of engaged learning, engaged teaching and
engaged research as practiced institutionally, including the broad issues of strategic
alignment, performance and measurement. The issues raised in Chapter 2 also relate to
further strategic development by the University in this area. It is acknowledged that further
strengthening of engaged learning, teaching, and research activities at the University will
have human resource implications in terms of operational processes (including recruitment,
training, and recognition), as well as other operational implications such as communications,
and these issues are addressed in Chapters 7 and 3 respectively.
5.1 Strategic focus
The Panel acknowledges the University‟s integration of engagement within learning,
teaching, research, and institutional strategies, as outlined in the University‟s strategic plan
Making the Difference: 2010-201533. The Panel also recognises that community engagement
is embedded across the three strategic pillars of the plan34. It is noteworthy that the concepts
of engaged learning and teaching, and engaged research have evolved progressively at the
University over the past decade, with strategies developed following the 2005 internal review
of community engagement in particular placing greater emphasis in these areas. This
evolution is also apparent across the higher education sector in Australia, as highlighted by
the University when citing the 2008 Review of Australian Higher Education report, which
stated that “engaged teaching and research should be the norm in universities”35. Growth of
the engaged learning/teaching/research movement is also increasingly evident
33
UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015: Making the Difference, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/uws/mission_goals_strategic_plan/uws_making_the_difference_strategy 34
The three strategic pillars of the plan relate to learning and teaching, research, and operations 35
Bradley, D.B., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., Scales, B., (2008), Review of Australian Higher Education, Commonwealth of Australia, page 169, downloaded 29 September 2012, from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Review/Documents/Higher_Education_Review_one%20document_02.pdf, cited in the University Submission, page 17
Term of Reference 4
The concepts of engagement are realised in and integrated across learning & teaching, research and institutional
strategies
38 382012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
internationally, as manifest in the vision statement of The Talloires Network, an organisation
dedicated to building a global movement of engaged universities:
“We believe that higher education institutions do not exist in isolation from
society, nor from the communities in which they are located. The Talloires
Network envisions universities around the world as a vibrant and dynamic
force in their societies, incorporating civic engagement and community
service into their research and teaching mission.” (The Talloires Network
vision statement36, emphasis ours)
As highlighted in Chapter 2, engaged learning, teaching and research are firmly linked to the
University‟s mission of serving GWS, and the Panel acknowledges that “UWS has sought to
respond to the needs of the region through its core activities of teaching and research”37.
This was reinforced in findings of the 2007 AUQA audit which stated that “strategic
engagement with GWS regional communities is a distinguishing feature of UWS through
regional participation, engaged research, and engaged learning”38.
The Panel was impressed with the array of case studies presented by the University in its
submission to the Review, noting that these represented a well balanced and clear
illustration of current best practice in engaged learning and teaching and engaged research
across the institution. The depth and breadth of these activities – as well as the sheer
quantity of activities being undertaken – suggest a deeply ingrained and highly successful
engagement strategy, and one which must place UWS as a leader in this area amongst
Australian universities. The Panel congratulates the University on the broad range of
engagement opportunities that are being undertaken across the institution. However, the
Panel considers that – as noted in the Chapter 2 – there is currently a lack of strategic
oversight or effective dedicated leadership and coordination of these activities, which are
often dependent on the energy and goodwill of individuals, and this was highlighted in the
internal and external submissions to the Review (see Recommendation 1).
Commendation 9
The extent to which engaged learning and engaged research are
manifest in current UWS engagement projects and activities.
The Panel notes with interest the University‟s hypothesis that a positive correlation exists
between performance of current research concentrations and associated teaching
programs39. This tends to confirm the integrated nature of engaged learning, teaching and
research, and the synergies that can and do exist between the three. Staff met by the Panel
36
The Talloires Network homepage, accessed 7 August 2012, from http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/ 37
UWS, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, pg.21, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission 38
Australian Universities Quality Agency (2007), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – January 2007‟, page 4, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/7060/Final_UWS_AUQA_Report.pdf, 39
See “Relationship between research concentration and teaching program performance”, Table 8.1, page 122, University Submission to the Review (note typographical error: should be Table 8.2)
39 392012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
reinforced this view when referring to a “blurring” of engaged teaching and engaged
research, and the Panel encourages the University to further develop strategies that address
and refine the integrated and complex nature of the relationship between engaged learning,
teaching and research.
5.2 Engaged learning
The University stated in its submission that “there is clear alignment between the University‟s
MTD and the UWS Learning and Teaching Plan as it relates to the University‟s commitment
to engaged learning” (page 67), and notes that this commitment is also reflected in two of
the six UWS Graduate Attributes40. The Panel supports this assessment. Moreover, the
Panel notes the affirmation relating to engaged learning that was received by the University
in the AUQA 2011 report (“Affirmation 7: UWS‟s inclusion of engaged learning experiences
in all its courses, which should be developed and refined after review of the scope of its
concept of engaged learning, is affirmed”41).
In its submission to the Review, the University presented an impressive array of case studies
and examples that encapsulate engaged learning at UWS. These covered service learning
(including the School of Law‟s Parramatta Community Justice Clinic (PCJC); the School of
Medicine‟s Lifeline Macarthur Project and Paediatrics Community Schools Program; the
School of Social Science and Psychology‟s Richmond Fellowship NSW Project; and the
School of Education‟s Classrooms without Borders and Refugee Action Support and
Australian Literacy and Numeracy Foundation (ALNF) Project; capstone projects (such as
the School of Humanities and Communication Arts‟ Professional Design Studio („The Rabbit
Hole‟); the School of Business‟ international marketing capstone unit; and the School of
Science and Health‟s Bachelor of Natural Science field projects); as well as
practicum/placements (for example, the School of Nursing and Midwifery‟s clinical
placements). Engaged learning activities at the University are diverse in nature and reflect a
number of typologies. The Panel recognises that the examples presented are not by any
means exhaustive, and commend the University on the breadth of engaged learning
activities being undertaken (see Commendation 5).
A pertinent strategic goal of the University is to “embed engaged learning in every
program”42, and the Panel notes the recently launched „create@UWS – curriculum renewal
for excellence and transformative education@UWS initiative‟43, outlined in the University‟s
40
“applies knowledge through intellectual inquiry in professional or applied contexts”, and “brings knowledge to life through responsible engagement and appreciation of diversity in an evolving world” – see UWS Graduate Attributes, accessed 21 September 2012 from http://policies.uws.edu.au/download.php?id=189 41
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, pp. 10-11, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf. Note that this report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) 42
UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015: Making the Difference, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/uws/mission_goals_strategic_plan/uws_making_the_difference_strategy 43
UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, page 2, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
40 402012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Learning and Teaching Plan. More than a decade ago, the Vice-Chancellor Professor Reid
wrote of the University‟s intention to “seek ways to enrich the student experience by bringing
research and practical experience of the world they will enter into the curriculum”, and the
Panel recognises that the University has made considerable progress in this respect. In their
international study of university engagement, Watson and his colleagues (2011)44 noted that
the University at that time was well on its way to developing experiential learning in every
course of study. The Panel of the AUQA 2011 audit referred to a stocktake undertaken in
January 2011 to establish the extent to which engaged learning was included in courses,
describing the results as “impressive”45. Data concerning the current proportion of units with
evidence of engaged learning was not presented to the Panel, although it is acknowledged
that such measures are currently being developed and fine-tuned. The Panel affirms the
University‟s intention to “build experiential learning (e.g., service learning, volunteering) into
all undergraduate courses beyond that required for clinical and practicum placements in the
core curriculum”46, and its introduction of a performance measure as being the “proportion of
units with evidence of engaged learning” 47.
Affirmation 6
The proposal to build experiential learning into all undergraduate
courses (acknowledging the very good practice already in place
within some disciplines).
In its submission, the University acknowledges that “there would be merit in articulating the
range of engaged learning typologies” (page 67). The Panel agrees. The report goes on to
suggest that “it would also be beneficial to define the expected outcomes of engaged
learning activities and to evaluate these in order to build stronger organisational cohesion in
this area. This could be further augmented by a more systematic approach to capacity
building for academic staff with respect to strategies for embedding and evaluating engaged
learning in the curriculum.” (page 67). During discussions with the Pro Vice-Chancellor
(Education) and members of her senior management team, the Panel appreciated the frank
feedback received concerning areas perceived to require improvement. This included an
acknowledgement that, whilst there is much successful activity being undertaken, engaged
learning is not yet systemic at UWS. These views were further reiterated by many of the staff
met during the Panel visit. The Panel observed that, while it is intended that engaged
44
Watson, D., Hollister, R., Babcock, E., Stroud, E.s., (2011), „The engaged university: International perspectives on civic engagement‟, Routledge, New York pp. 58-60. 45
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, pp. 10-11, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf. Note that this report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) 46
UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, objective 2, strategy 10, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review 47
Performance measure 2, Strategy 10, UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
41 412012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
learning be managed within the academic standards framework 48 , there was a lack of
evidence of such a process, and no mention of engaged learning in the framework.
Affirmation 7
The proposal to identify typologies of engaged learning and employ
these systemically within curriculum design.
5.3 Engaged teaching
Unlike the concept of engaged learning, the definition of which is addressed in considerable
detail in the University‟s submission, engaged teaching lacks a clear working definition in the
University, and is not fully embedded within institutional practice. The University
acknowledges this in its submission (pages 67-8), where it recognises that “broad principles
for developing an engaged approach to teaching are well established in the literature”, and
goes on to list relevant focus areas in need of development in order to embed engaged
teaching into institutional practice.
Recommendation 12
More concerted attention be given to developing the concepts and
frameworks for engaged teaching within UWS.
While engaged teaching can perhaps be seen as the weak link in the engaged
learning/teaching/research triptych, the Panel recognises that a solid base exists on which to
inform engaged teaching in a practical sense. For example, it was evident to the Panel that
the importance of involving the community in matters relating to academic teaching has long
been recognised by the University. As far back as 1999, in her paper on UWS and its
communities, Vice-Chancellor Reid discussed the importance of the then new idea for UWS
of establishing external advisory councils, noting that “the Advisory Councils could provide
an effective and purposeful link between UWS, the academic communities, the professions
and the communities that make up the region, and places and people beyond”49 . It is
understood by the Panel that such councils, currently known as Academic Advisory
Committees, now support each of the nine Schools by advising on curriculum design
standards and relevance of courses, as well as touching on broader issues that would
“facilitate networking with business, industry and community figures to leverage consultancy
ventures, foster support for the University, attract donations for scholarships, provide
48
UWS, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, pg.5, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission 49
Reid, J., (1999), “UWS and its Communities – a time for change‟, University of Western Sydney, pg 3, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/background-documentation
42 422012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
opportunities for research collaborations, and provide vocational experience for student
placements” 50 While such engagement of the community (including employers) in the
development of the University‟s teaching programs is an important element of engaged
learning, the Panel believes the intelligence from prospective employers can also provide
important context for engaged teaching. In this regard the Panel supports the University‟s
intention to “strengthen the strategic focus and contributions of External Advisory
Committees”51.
5.4 Engaged research
The Panel acknowledges that UWS is a research-led institution52, with explicit goals to
“develop focused, relevant and world-class engaged research”53 while actively increasing the
“number and concentration of funded research partnerships”54. The latter goal is correctly
identified by the University as being essential to the development of successful engaged
research. As noted in the research strategic plan, engaged research is dependent on the
development of research partnerships and, as such, is aligned with the values of an
engaged university55. In its submission the University highlights “the role that linkage grants
play in effective community and regional engagement over the longer term, and the need for
the University to improve focus and performance in this area” (page 121).
Achievements in engaged research, particularly in a regional context, were also identified by
the 2007 AUQA Panel when it stated “in engaged research, UWS has an appropriate set of
KPIs and notable successes. It is consistently among the top five national performers in
terms of the success rate of ARC Linkage grants, and has secured significant grants for
research in rural industries on plant, food and water sciences. Most of these ARC Linkage
projects are with partners located in Greater Western Sydney” 56.
In its submission to the Review the University presented an impressive and interesting range
of case studies within the engaged research realm. These included examples from research
institutes (Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment‟s Western Sydney Insect Infestation
research; Marcs Institute‟s BabyLab; and Institute of Culture and Society‟s Hot Science
research), as well as from the Schools and their research centres (CompleMED‟s Chinese
herbal medicines research; the Centre for Health and Research‟s IHOPE project; and the
50
UWS External Advisory Committee Policy, 1 May 2012, accessed 4 October 2012, from http://policies.uws.edu.au/view.status.php?id=00141 51
UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, objective 2, strategy 9, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review 52
UWS Strategy and Plan 2010 – 2015: Making the Difference, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/uws/mission_goals_strategic_plan/uws_making_the_difference_strategy 53
UWS Strategy and Plan 2010 – 2015: Making the Difference, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/uws/mission_goals_strategic_plan/uws_making_the_difference_strategy 54
UWS Research Plan 2012-2014, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review 55
UWS Research Plan 2012-2014, page 5, accessed 21 September 2012 from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review 56
Australian Universities Quality Agency (2007), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – January 2007‟, page 4, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/7060/Final_UWS_AUQA_Report.pdf,
43 432012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Urban Research Centre‟s Building Arabic Businesses study). The Panel is concerned that
the University‟s submission was silent on research students however, whose voice is
necessary as the University refines its engaged research strategies.
Recommendation 13
The University develop and implement processes to ensure that
engagement permeates programs for Higher Degree by Research
(HDR) students. This could potentially include opportunities for
exchange with other Talloires Network members globally57.
The Panel had the opportunity to meet a number of staff and external partners involved in
various research projects, and heard that engaged research is a particularly labour intensive
endeavour – both for the University and for the external partner. This is an issue pertinent to
recent MyVoice survey results suggesting that “many staff felt they did not have the time and
opportunities for community engagement”58 . Some researchers met by the Panel were
critical of funding, recognition, and University procedures (including innovation and legal
services). However, when challenged for examples of better practice elsewhere, it was
agreed that „UWS is better than most‟. This issue of recognition is dealt with in Chapter 7.
The University has developed over 1500 engaged research partnerships since 2007, but this
growth has been largely organic. The next step is to be more proactive, and sound
suggestions for doing this were presented by the University in its submission (page 98).
While recognising the many achievements in engaged research, the Panel agrees with the
University‟s assertion in its submission on the need for “a more deliberate and planned
engaged research strategy” that would “provide greater institutional direction for engaged
research and also better position the University for collaborative grant funding” (page 98).
Such a strategy should aim to strengthen the international reach and focus of engaged
research, in alignment with institutional goals of producing “world-class engaged research”.
One Dean met by the Panel referred to focus group findings within his School indicating that
outsiders saw UWS as a ghettoising institution („we teach you to teach kids in Western
Sydney‟) yet to being completely unaware of the important engaged research work being
undertaken by the University on a national and international level. Refining the engaged
research strategy will allow the University to move to a higher level of sophistication as part
of its overall engagement strategy, and should also include effective and expanded
strategies for improving marketing of the research successes of UWS (both within the
institution and externally). This view was supported by management and researchers met by
the Panel.
Affirmation 8
The decision to embed engaged research activity within a stronger
strategic framework for engaged research.
57
Talloires Network Members, accessed 3 November 2012, from http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/talloires-network-members/ 58
Cited in University submission to the Review, page 25
44 442012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Chapter 6: Students
This chapter builds on the Panel‟s comments on engaged learning in the previous chapter,
focusing more specifically on students and their experience with the University – as related
to engagement – including their experiences both prior to enrolment and after graduation.
This approach aligns with the student lifecycle framework presented by the University in its
submission59.
6.1 Engagement with potential students
Engagement with potential students presents a significant opportunity for the University to
influence views within GWS in particular and of higher education in general, and is aligned to
Australian Federal Government strategies of increasing participation in higher education60.
The Panel notes that the University was commended as part of the 2011 AUQA review on its
“extensive programs for engagement with schools and prospective students in the Greater
Western Sydney region”61, and was impressed with the extensive suite of engagement
activities presented in the University‟s submission that specifically target secondary school
students. This influence can potentially extend to the students‟ families. For example, the
Panel notes that a goal of the successful Fast Forward program is to “promote the benefits
of lifelong learning, vis-a-vis life opportunities, to students and their families”62. Benefits of
59
UWS, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, see „The Student Experience: 5 stages to connect, retain and engage‟, pp 72-3, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission 60
Australian Government, (2008), „Review of Australian Higher Education – Final Report‟, December, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://www.innovation.gov.au/HigherEducation/ResourcesAndPublications/ReviewOfAustralianHigherEducation/Pages/ReviewOfAustralianHigherEducationReport.aspx 61
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, commendation 8, page 9, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf. Note that this report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA). 62
University submission to the Review, page 46
Term of Reference 5
Engagement is a focus for scholarly practice, and engaged learning is manifest within the experience of students
45 452012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
engagement programs with potential students also serve to shape the experience of current
students that become involved in the programs (as mentors, for example).
Students met by the Panel (from participating high schools as well as from UWS) spoke
highly of their experiences with these programs, and of the many benefits received. These
early experiences with UWS create both an important and positive transition into the
University. Some suggestions received from students involved in these programs include:
engaging with high school students earlier than Year 9; better promotion of the Fast Forward
program (which some viewed as being undervalued by the students themselves); and, in
direct alignment with the strategic repositioning recommended in this report, focusing “less
on disadvantage and more on opportunity”.
Commendation 10
The impressive results being achieved within Greater Western
Sydney secondary schools through the University’s Schools
Engagement Program.
6.2 Student engagement
The Panel notes that „primacy of the student experience‟ is entrenched in the University‟s
strategic plan 63 , and that an institutional goal is to “embed engaged learning in every
program”64 (which includes launching initiatives such as create@UWS65). The Panel affirms
the University‟s intention to “build experiential learning (e.g., service learning, volunteering)
into all undergraduate courses beyond that required for clinical and practicum placements in
the core curriculum”66, noting that the proposed performance measure of this will be the
“proportion of units with evidence of engaged learning” 67 . Engagement can impact the
University‟s positioning in the market, and it is noteworthy that a number of students met by
the Panel cited the practical focus of programs as being a key reason for choosing UWS
over its competitors.
The Panel was impressed that “each year somewhere between 800–1200 UWS students
increased their personal and professional skills by assisting with schools engagement
63
UWS Strategy and Plan 2010 – 2015: Making the Difference, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/uws/mission_goals_strategic_plan/uws_making_the_difference_strategy 64
UWS Strategy and Plan 2010 – 2015: Making the Difference, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/uws/mission_goals_strategic_plan/uws_making_the_difference_strategy 65
UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, page 2, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review 66
UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, objective 2, strategy 10, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review 67
Performance measure 2, Strategy 10, UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
46 462012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
activities on a voluntary, academic service learning, or paid casual basis”68, and that this
number increases significantly when considering the full suite of engagement activities
currently available to students. In its submission, the University presented a number of
excellent case studies as examples of student engagement activities. These included „for
credit‟ activities such as Students in Free Enterprise (SIFE) within the School of Business,
and Experiential Learning in Communities (ELC) within the School of Education. There is
also an impressive mix of extra-curricular engagement opportunities available to students
across the institution, including SMExcellence (which supports small to medium enterprises
in the region); Indigenous School Mentoring Program (through which UWS students provide
one-on-one mentoring to the region‟s Indigenous high school students); cadet programs for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students; as well as the highly successful Peer Assisted
Study Sessions (PASS) program in which students positively influence the academic
outcomes of less experienced students. On the latter example, the Panel notes that the 2011
AUQA panel commended the University on the PASS program and its valuable contribution
to both student learning and retention 69 . Furthermore, students met by the Panel also
confirmed the highly positive nature of PASS, both in terms of improving academic results as
well as in providing a rich and valuable development experience for the student mentors.
Somewhat ironically, the Panel heard that many students were choosing to attend PASS
sessions rather than attend lectures.
As highlighted in section 5.1, there is a need to strengthen the strategic focus of these
activities, and this is dependent on the University‟s developing a more solid analysis of the
programs themselves, including analysis of the students for whom they are intended. This
was echoed in comments made by the Vice-Chancellor Professor Reid, who raised with the
Panel her desire that the University develop a better understanding of its students, as well as
better support them to become self-consciously involved in activities such as volunteering
that lead to an increased understanding of other communities. A related desire of the Vice-
Chancellor is that UWS students become more highly visible in the community as a direct
result of their engagement activities.
Affirmation 9
Identification of the need for a more precise understanding of how
student commitment and interest in their communities can be
translated to engagement activities that are attractive and which
they regard as adding value to their University experience.
Students met by the Panel provided valuable feedback on their experience at UWS. There,
was overwhelming agreement that community engagement „does matter‟, and that an
68
UWS, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, pg.49, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission 69
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, pg 33, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf. Note that this report was published by TEQSA in order to complete the cycle of quality audits initiated by the former Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA).
47 472012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
important opportunity exists for the University to take on a greater leadership role in the
region. Some students spoke of their desire for a „richer experience‟ on campus, and of the
changing nature of the „university experience‟ due to technological advancements that are
increasingly allowing students to download content in lieu of attending lectures. Students
appeared to appreciate the unique challenges of a multi-campus university, noting that the
student experience can be quite different from campus to campus. Some students were
critical of overall communications (including the new website), and by what they saw as a
lack of transparency on key data such as assessment outcomes and employability.
Predictably, a major concern affecting their experience at UWS related to travelling to/from
campus, and the Panel notes that this problem could be alleviated with the introduction of
blended learning strategies, with students also commenting on their desire for lectures to be
available online. Another concern raised with the Panel was the lack of child care facilities
available to students on Parramatta campus. Overall, there was strong recognition by
students of the value of participating in engagement activities within the community. This
was supported by staff met by the Panel who observed that the University is effectively
helping students to „enrich their CV‟ by making engagement activities available to them.
While measurement of engagement outcomes is addressed within Chapter 4, it is
noteworthy that academics met by the Panel emphasised that employability is an important
outcome.
In terms of improving the overall student experience at UWS, many students (and alumni)
told the Panel that they want more support in developing academic writing and professional
skills (suggesting, for example, introduction of a first-year compulsory subject in academic
writing), and that this could be a critical success factor relating to student retention. One
alumnus commented that, once students have been accepted into the University, there is a
moral obligation to provide support to ensure that they are able to succeed. PASS is one
program that is directly addressing this, and the University should consider other
opportunities to offer greater support in both academic writing and English language skills
that will directly impact student learning and student retention. Similar to PASS, these
initiatives could become an important element of the University‟s engagement strategy (for
example, by involving volunteer retirees in the community) and can serve to further
differentiate UWS from its competitors.
The Panel notes the University‟s desire to make service learning more deliberate across the
institution (once again, representing a potential point of differentiation) and move beyond
academic indicators of success. This would incorporate volunteering, civic engagement, and
involvement in student societies. Staff met by the Panel spoke of a perceived desire on the
part of students to become more involved in their communities, and this view was confirmed
by the students and alumni met by the Panel. In discussions with the Panel, the Pro Vice-
Chancellor (Students) observed that service learning is not well developed at Australian
universities and, despite indications that it would be highly valued by UWS students,
embedding service learning across the institution may present challenges. Nevertheless,
there is a clear intention on the part of the University to better prepare students for success
(using service learning or work integrated learning), and a strong recognition that strategies
around this need to be developed.
The Panel considers that development of a student portfolio, where the University
authenticates learning outside of academic programs, is a further opportunity for the
University to address in its engagement strategy. The Panel notes the existence of an
48 482012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
e-portfolio facility on Career-Hub (an online student portal available at a number of
Australian universities) that allows students to upload any engaged learning (including
service learning) activities, maintain their content, and use this as a reference when applying
for jobs. However, the documentation uploaded is not verified by the University, and the
Panel has been advised that work is underway to develop an alternative solution as part of
the University‟s Cube strategy70. This will capture and validate students‟ extra-curricular
activity, and will incorporate an e-portfolio system which will be supported by an institutional
policy and practice framework.
Commendation 11
The work being undertaken as part of the University’s Cube
strategy to develop an e-portfolio for students that allows for
University authentication of learning outside of academic
programs.
Perhaps one of the more „big picture‟ ideas to be raised with the Panel was that of
strengthening the concept of agency within all courses across the University. By helping
students to develop a sense of agency, the University can instil in students the confidence
and belief that they are able to initiate change and make a valuable contribution to their
communities. It was suggested that much of the messaging about the UWS student cohort
could be framed more positively, and that the University experience should inter alia „show
them how good they are‟ and encourage them to consider aspiring to leadership roles as
part of their future. This relates to the issues raised in Chapter 4 concerning the need to
focus on outcomes and impacts rather than on inputs and processes, and the role that
positive messages play in this.
Finally, in terms of supporting international students, the Panel heard that there is currently
untapped potential to more formally engage domestic with international students from similar
backgrounds. The Pro Vice-Chancellor (Engagement and International) gave the example of
Indian students. With over six hundred domestic students who were born in India, this is a
potentially welcoming group for the institution‟s four hundred Indian international students.
This is an opportunity for engagement that is currently not being utilised, and which has the
potential to impact retention rates.
6.3 Engagement beyond graduation
Students, staff, and alumni met by the Panel all raised the importance of the University‟s
developing ongoing relationships with students that extend well beyond graduation, including
the value of preparing the way for long-term relationships by engaging with them well before
graduation. The Panel notes that alumni was “not addressed in detail” in the University‟s
70
Proposed „my portfolio‟ application, which is part of ongoing student lifecycle program work
49 492012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
submission71, yet considers the issue of alumni to be an essential element in the University‟s
future engagement strategy (and the importance of developing a long-term understanding of
alumni is discussed in Chapter 2). The Panel observes that the University has significantly
expanded its alumni database in recent years (from less than 10,000 contactable addresses
in 2008 to more than 60,000 today) and that over 1,300 alumni are currently enrolled with
the University as volunteers72 (representing an important and possibly untapped resource for
the University‟s engagement activities). Furthermore, in terms of resourcing, it is noteworthy
that staffing levels for alumni relations are lower at UWS compared to many other
universities in Australia (with three staff at UWS compared to more than ten staff in at least
eight other universities)73.
The Panel appreciates that strengthening the alumni function requires investment. However,
it also believes that the potential for impact beyond the institution is great, as alumni can
become engaged contributors in the communities in which they reside, thus amplifying the
engagement outputs of the University.
The Panel considers that the University‟s progress towards developing a more sophisticated
knowledge and understanding of its alumni is highly opportune, and that this would likely
necessitate further investment in database technology in order to be better able to track
„touches‟ (such as recording how many sign onto a podcast lecture, for example). Such
tracking technology is not only relevant to alumni, but can also be applied throughout the
student lifecycle. This is confirmed by comments from staff who identified the need to track
students involved in the many engagement programs being run by the University – including
those offered to secondary school students – noting that such tools are currently not
available to them. This is an issue closely related to the development of a CRM database
(see Affirmation 4).
The Panel heard positive comments from alumni concerning the perceived richness of UWS
graduates, largely seen to be the result of excellent professional preparation received during
their programs. Several alumni referred to how they had returned to the University to tutor or
otherwise work with students, and their desire to help current students.
The Panel believes that tackling the alumni issue represents an important „next step‟ in the
University‟s strategic development, and emphasises the crucial link that alumni presents in
developing any life-long learning strategies. While the University has touched on life-long
learning as part of some of its programs74, the Panel sees benefit in expanding this to a
more strategic level. In Australia, the sense of life-long learning beyond undergraduate/
postgraduate is largely underdeveloped, and represents untapped potential both for the
University and the region. Development of a life-long learning strategy could incorporate the
accreditation of courses with employers, provision of courses by remote access/blended
learning, and would ultimately result in greater exposure of UWS in the community as well as
development of the people of GWS.
71
UWS, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, pg.82, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission 72
Internal submission 27 (received from the Alumni Relations Manager) 73
Internal submission 27 (received from the Alumni Relations Manager) 74
For example, a goal of the Fast Forward program is to “promote the benefits of lifelong learning, vis-a-vis life opportunities, to students and their families”, see University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement, page 46
50 502012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Recommendation 14
The University develop and implement a life-long learning strategy.
The existence of greater opportunities for engaging with alumni – as well the need to
develop a deeper knowledge and understanding of this important group – was reinforced by
many of the staff met by the Panel, and the Panel considers it prudent to incorporate more
strongly the alumni issue into institutional strategies.
Recommendation 15
The University take a more strategic approach to alumni in the
context of enabling regional and community engagement.
51 512012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Chapter 7: Staff
In this chapter the Panel considers issues relating to staff recruitment, development and
recognition (including promotions) as they relate to the University‟s engagement strategy
and practice. These are important considerations. Many staff interviewed during the Panel‟s
visit made plain their personal commitment to making a difference within the communities
they serve and their desire for engagement to be an enduring feature of life at UWS.
Appropriate approaches to recruitment, development and recognition of engagement will be
essential to affirming an engagement orientation to scholarly life at UWS.
The Panel‟s perspectives have been shaped by the priorities identified in the University‟s
strategic plan Our People 2015 (although the Panel is concerned that engagement is not
referred to in that plan), as well as on briefings received on the recent University MyVoice
survey results. As noted in preceding chapters, the future refinement and implementation of
engagement strategies at the University will have human resource implications in terms of
recruitment, training, and recognition. Several Deans met by the Panel raised the issue of
resourcing and strategic focus, including concerns for impact on workload. The Panel
considers that effective alignment of human resource strategies is crucial to the University‟s
moving its engagement agenda to the next strategic level.
7.1 Staff recruitment
The Panel notes that a strategic goal of the University is to “promote UWS as an employer of
choice by establishing an employer brand that has clear links with the UWS mission and
values and with GWS”75. The Panel considers that the University‟s strong engagement focus
should form a prominent part of that employer brand, and that recruitment practices should
firmly reflect this focus. This is especially important for recruitment to senior leadership
positions. The University‟s engagement agenda, with its impressive performance both
75
UWS Human Resources Plan: Our People 2015, page 3, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/_media/main_site/documents/people_and_culture/special_projects_unit/Our_People_2015_Strategy_Final.pdf
Term of Reference 6
Building capacity for community engagement is reflected in corporate-level strategy and practice, including the University’s
systems of recruitment, staff development, promotions, and practice.
52 522012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
regionally and internationally, should now be considered an area of competitive advantage,
and promoted as such in recruitment practices. Moreover, it will be imperative for the
University to appreciate that it is both „buying‟ and „selling‟ when recruiting staff, and this
should be reflected in actual recruitment practice (i.e., there is scope to present engagement
as a selling point).
Commendation 12
The excellent foundation of commitment to regional engagement
on which the University can actively differentiate itself in attracting
academic and professional staff.
7.2 Staff development
According to the current engagement plan, the University has injected “intentional and
strategic investments of funds and staffing to increase its engagement capacity”76. The
Panel supports this move, while appreciating the inherent nature of competing demands on
limited financial resources. The plan also refers to increasing capacity for engaged teaching
and research by “providing academic staff development programs using proven strategies
that align with the diverse interests and skill levels of staff”77. While the Panel did not
investigate specific details of the University‟s staff development programs, it notes that there
is opportunity to further develop staff capacity by embedding an institutional culture that
instils both a confidence and desire to engage with its community – especially as this relates
to the University‟s taking on a greater leadership role in GWS as discussed earlier in this
report. This view was supported by both management and staff met by the Panel.
7.3 Staff promotions and recognition
The Panel notes that a strategic goal of the University is to “reward and recognise high-
performing staff”78. According to the current engagement plan, “University policies have been
revised, including career promotion criteria, to ensure that staff members are recognised for
engagement activities”79. The plan also refers to a goal of increasing capacity for engaged
teaching and research by ensuring “academic staff are recognised for their engaged
76
UWS Engagement Strategy 2010-2013, page 2, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/135345/OPQ1719_-_Engagement_Strategic-plan5.pdf 77
UWS Engagement Strategy 2010-2013, goal 3.1, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/135345/OPQ1719_-_Engagement_Strategic-plan5.pdf 78
UWS Human Resources Plan: Our People 2015, page 3, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/_media/main_site/documents/people_and_culture/special_projects_unit/Our_People_2015_Strategy_Final.pdf 79
UWS Engagement Strategy 2010-2013, page 2, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/135345/OPQ1719_-_Engagement_Strategic-plan5.pdf
53 532012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
research and teaching activities”80. The Panel did not find evidence that such goals are
being successfully implemented, and notes results from the MyVoice survey indicating that
the majority of staff felt that they have neither time nor opportunities for community
engagement.
A reoccurring theme highlighted in discussions with the Panel (as well as within the internal
submissions) was that staff felt they were not being appropriately recognised by the
University for the considerable time and effort put into engagement activities. In some cases,
this understandably led to staff reducing or even ceasing their engagement activities in order
to concentrate on competing priorities that they deemed were being recognised by the
University. This may explain comments from a number of external partners met by the
Panel, who observed that their dealings with the University had at times been impeded when
their University contact had become preoccupied with competing priorities.
While this also represents a resourcing issue, the Panel considers that the University‟s
engagement strategy needs to be embedded more fully within its reward and recognition
policies and practices as a matter of priority. The Panel noted unanimous agreement on the
need to incorporate engagement into the recognition and reward system (including
promotions), and this was highlighted by the University both in its submission as well as
during discussions with the Panel. It was also an important focus of the Panel‟s discussions
with Vice-Chancellor Professor Reid, who raised her concerns that staff were not being
appropriately recognised for performance in relation to engagement. She highlighted to the
Panel an urgent need to review the current reward system in order to align it with the
University‟s engagement strategies, commenting that this must incorporate input from staff
concerning assessment processes, whether they be related to learning and teaching,
research, or engagement. The Panel notes an explicit goal in the recently released learning
and teaching plan is to “review the promotion policy to ensure that academic staff are
appropriately recognized and rewarded for scholarly leadership in learning and teaching”81,
and observes that this would by default incorporate engagement.
Affirmation 10
Identification of the need to integrate engagement activity more
directly within the recognition and reward framework for University
staff.
80
UWS Engagement Strategy 2010-2013, goal 3.2, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/135345/OPQ1719_-_Engagement_Strategic-plan5.pdf 81
UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014, Strategy 5, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
54 542012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Afterword
Undertaking this Review has been, in the Panel‟s opinion, a bold, timely and imaginative
step by the University. Members of the Panel trust that they have played their parts in
assisting the University of Western Sydney to secure what it has achieved, scope the future
possibilities, and enhance its deserved reputation as a national and international leader in
University Civic and Community Engagement.
While the Panel recognise that the University has in place a framework for implementing
review recommendations82, it wishes to stress the strategic importance of developing an
appropriate action plan to address the recommendations of this Review, and of regularly
reviewing progress towards the achievement of planned outcomes. The Panel consider that
the University may wish to conduct a follow-up Review of Community and Regional
Engagement in perhaps six to eight years.
82
See UWS website: http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
55 552012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Acronyms and Abbreviations of Titles
ALNF Australian Literacy and Numeracy Foundation
ARC Australian Research Council
AUCEA Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance
AUQA Australian Universities Quality Agency
BOT Board of Trustees
CBD Central Business District
CRM Customer Relationship Management
DVC Deputy Vice-Chancellor
ELC Experiential Learning in Communities
GWS Greater Western Sydney
HDR Higher Degree by Research
IHOPE Indigenous Health Outcomes Patient Evaluation
ISSMP Indigenous School Student Mentoring Program
KPI Key Performance Indicator
L&T Learning and Teaching
LSE London School of Economics
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MTD Making The Difference (UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015)
NGO Non-Government Organisation
NSW New South Wales
OMC Office of Marketing and Communication
OSQ Office of Strategy and Quality
PASS Peer Assisted Study Sessions
PCJC Parramatta Community Justice Clinic
PVC Pro Vice-Chancellor
R+D Research and Development
RCE Regional Centre of Expertise
SIFE Students in Free Enterprise
TEQSA Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency
TOR Terms of Reference
TVSydney Television Sydney
UWS University of Western Sydney
VC Vice-Chancellor
WSROC Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils
56 562012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Appendix A: Review Panel
Following are brief biographies of the four Panel members to the 2012 Review of UWS
Community and Regional Engagement.
Panel Member
Professor Lawrence S. Bacow
President in Residence, Harvard Graduate School of Education
Lawrence S. Bacow is an economist and lawyer who served as the President of Tufts
University from 2001 through 2011. During his tenure as President, he helped to found and
then served as the Chair of the Talliores Network of Engaged Universities. Also during this
period, he served on the Executive Committee of Campus Compact, the national
organization in the US that promotes civic engagement and service learning on college
campuses.
Prior to coming to Tufts, Dr. Bacow was the Lee and Geraldine Martin Professor of
Environmental Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology where he served on the
faculty for 24 years. From 1998 through 2001 he served as the Chancellor of MIT, one of
the Institute‟s two most senior academic officers, and from 1995-1997 he served as
Chairman of the MIT Faculty. A member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
and a recipient of five honorary degrees, Professor Bacow also serves as a member of the
White House Advisory Committee on Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
Note: Due to illness, Professor Bacow was not able to personally participate in the site visit
of the Review Panel. However, he did review all documents submitted to the Panel,
participate in conference calls and video conferences to set the Panel‟s agenda, and
participated by video conference in the Panel‟s final deliberations, and in the drafting of this
final report.
57 572012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Panel Member
Mr David Borger
Western Sydney Director, Sydney Business Chamber
Prior to entering public life David worked as an Urban Planner and adviser to the Minister for
Planning. At 30 years of age, he became the youngest person to hold the office of Lord
Mayor of Parramatta where he served for three terms. During this time David provided
leadership in progressing the Civic Place development, and promoting urban renewal in the
city centre through the adoption of new planning controls with a strong urban design focus.
The city commenced a number of new civic projects to increase investment and employment
while also transforming the city‟s parks, public spaces and walkways. He chaired the
Mayors‟ Forum on City Design at the University of Sydney and the Central Parramatta
Planning Panel.
In 2007 David was elected to represent the Granville electorate in the NSW Parliament. He
served as Minister for Housing, Minister for Western Sydney and Minister for Roads as well
as assistant Minister for Transport in the NSW Government.
As Housing Minister David oversaw the construction of approximately 9,000 new social
housing dwellings – including 6,300 through the Nation Building Economic Stimulus Plan.
During this time he championed major reforms to expand the community housing sector in
NSW by transferring the title of $2 billion worth of public housing to highly performing
community housing associations. This reform allowed community housing to develop a
balance sheet, and to trade and develop existing housing assets.
Following the 2011 election David along with Adam Byrnes established Think Planners, a
busy planning firm with a focus on Western Sydney.
David lives in North Parramatta with his wife Giselle and daughters Grace and Zoe.
58 582012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Panel Member
Professor Sandra Harding
Vice-Chancellor and President, James Cook University – Cairns, Townsville, Singapore
Professor Harding took up her appointment as Vice-Chancellor and President of James
Cook University in January 2007. In this role, she is responsible for ensuring clear and
effective leadership and management of the University across all operating sites, including
campuses in Townsville, Cairns and Singapore.
Educated at the Australian National University, The University of Queensland and North
Carolina State University (USA), Professor Harding is an economic sociologist with a keen
scholarly interest in markets and how they work, and organisation survey methodology. She
also has a keen professional interest in education policy and management. She has
authored and co-authored a wide range of publications, conference papers and press
articles in her areas of interest.
Professor Harding has extensive academic and academic leadership experience, including
more than 15 years in Australian university senior executive positions. In addition, she has
undertaken a wide variety of senior university-aligned roles as well as
memberships/directorships of a variety of local, national and international Boards and
Councils.
Current roles include: Deputy Chair, Universities Australia; Commissioner, Queensland
Independent Commission of Audit; Director, Regional Australia Institute; Board member,
Skills Queensland; Council Member, Australian Institute for Marine Sciences; Director, North
Queensland Cowboys NRL Club; Member, Defence Science and Technology Organisation
(DSTO) Advisory Board.
She was recognised as North Carolina State University‟s College of Humanities and Social
Sciences Distinguished Alumna for 2003 and, in 2010, received an Honorary Doctorate for
services to education from Japan‟s Josai International University. She was recently named
as the Australian College of Educators 2012 Queensland Medallist for services to education.
Professor Harding is a Fellow of the Australian College of Educators, Fellow of the
Queensland Academy of Arts and Sciences, Fellow of the Australian Institute of Company
Directors and a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Management.
59 592012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Panel Member
Professor Sir David Watson
Professor of Higher Education and Principal of Green Templeton College
University of Oxford, United Kingdom
David Watson has been Principal of Green Templeton College and Professor of Higher
Education at the University of Oxford since October 2010. He was Professor of Higher
Education Management at the Institute of Education, University of London, from 2005-2010,
and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Brighton between 1990 and 2005. His most recent
books are Managing Civic and Community Engagement (2007), The Dearing Report: ten
years on (2007), The Question of Morale: managing happiness and unhappiness in
university life (2009), and The Engaged University (2011).
He has contributed widely to developments in UK higher education, including as a member
of the Council for National Academic Awards (1977-1993), the Polytechnics and Colleges
Funding Council (1988-92), and the Higher Education Funding Council for England (1992-
96). He was a member of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation's National Commission on Education
(1992-1993), and the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education chaired by Sir
Ron Dearing (1996-1997). He was the elected chair of the Universities Association for
Continuing Education between 1994 and 1998, and chaired the Longer Term Strategy
Group of Universities UK between 1999 and 2005. He is President of the Society for
Research into Higher Education, a Trustee of the Nuffield Foundation, a Companion of the
Institute of Management, and a National Teaching Fellow (2008). He chaired the national
Inquiry into the Future for Lifelong Learning, and co-authored its report Learning Through
Life (2009). He was knighted in 1998 for services to higher education. In 2009 he received
the Times Higher Education Lifetime Achievement Award.
60 602012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Appendix B: Terms of Reference
Following are the Terms of Reference of the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional
Engagement83:
1. the UWS engagement strategy aligns with the University‟s Making the Difference
Strategy and Plan, and with international directions in strategic community
engagement
2. the UWS engagement strategy is focused on key needs and expectations within
Greater Western Sydney (GWS)
3. the University‟s engagement practices are building sustainable community and
regional partnerships which have mutual benefit
4. the concepts of engagement are realised in and integrated across learning &
teaching, research, and institutional strategies
5. engagement is a focus for scholarly practice, and engaged learning is manifest within
the experience of students
6. building capacity for community engagement is reflected in corporate-level strategy
and practice, including the University‟s systems of recruitment, staff development,
promotions, and practice.
83
2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement: Terms of Reference, accessed 5 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/terms-of-reference
61 612012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Appendix C: Review Methodology
1. Develop and approve Terms of Reference: Using the UWS Cyclical Review template
based on the Making The Difference priorities, OSQ develop draft TOR in consultation
with PVC (Engagement). TOR approved by Vice Chancellor and endorsed by BOT.
2. Approve Review Panel membership: OSQ, in consultation with PVC (Engagement),
propose a list of external Review Panel members, from which 4 are approved by the VC.
VC approves Panel Chair.
3. Select Project Officer: OSQ, in consultation with PVC (Engagement), selects Project
Officer to be responsible for coordination of the review process, including self-
assessments.
4. Approve Steering Committee membership: OSQ, in consultation with PVC
(Engagement), propose a list of approximately 5-6 internal Steering Committee
members, from which 3-4 are approved by the VC. VC approves Steering Committee
Chair. Steering Committee members should comprise UWS academics and professional
staff with pre-eminent expertise in community engagement.
5. Approve Reference Group membership: OSQ, in consultation with PVC
(Engagement), propose a list of approximately 5-6 internal Reference Group members,
to be approved by the VC. VC approves Reference Group Chair. Reference Group
1 BoT
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Engaged Learning
14 Engaged Research
15 Engaging Students
16 Engaging in GWS Planning & Development
17 Engaged Sustainability
18
19
20
21
22
23 Panel visits University
24 Preparation of Panel Report
25 Presentation of Panel Report
26 Consideration of Report27 Agreement to Action Plan28 Follow up on ActionPlan
Panel considers briefing materials
Advise University and Community
Invite Submissions
Integrate with Centre for Western Sydney study
Self Assessment Submission
Receive SubmissionsConduct Focus Groups
Undertake
focused
assessment
& evalution
Presentation of Exemplars and Critical Review
"Virtualise" the exemplars and other good practice
Complete Self Assessment Submission
Provide briefing materials to Review Panel
Develop Framework for Self Assessment
Jun Jul Aug Sep
Develop and approve Terms of Reference
Approve Review Panel membership
Select Project Officer
Approve Steering Committee membership
Approve Reference Group membership
OctPost
Review
2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement
Activity Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
62 622012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
membership should comprise UWS academics and professional staff working with
engagement issues on a daily basis, with representation from the five areas of focused
assessment and evaluation (see points 13-17 below).
6. Develop Framework for Self Assessment: Project Officer, in consultation with OSQ,
PVC (Engagement), PVC (Education), PRC (Research), PVC (Students), develops a
framework for the Self Assessment submission, covering engagement history, stock take
(including exemplars), benchmarking, gap analysis, and proposed strategies for future
development, all framed within the five TOR.
7. Advise University and Community: OSQ, in consultation with PVC (Engagement) and
OMC, announce the Review both within UWS (to academics, professional staff,
students), and also to external stakeholders including community and business groups,
employers, government, secondary schools, graduates/alumni. The announcement will
encourage involvement in the Review process.
8. Invite Submissions: Project Officer invites submissions from within the University and
externally from interested stakeholders (community and business groups, employers,
government, secondary schools, graduates/alumni). Submissions may include both
exemplars and suggestions for improvement/ new areas to explore etc.
9. Integrate with Centre for Western Sydney study: Examine findings of recent
interviews with business groups about a Centre for Western Sydney and integrate these
within the self-assessment and any focus group initiatives.
10. Self Assessment Submissions: PVC (Engagement) leads this process under the
overall direction of the Steering Committee, with a view to developing a submission
which assesses performance under each of the TOR. This report is to be evidence
based and should identify action plans in areas where performance improvement is
identified. This process should reflect a high degree of liaison with other PVCs and
Executive Director Sustainability, and should be as inclusive as possible of both internal
and external stakeholders. The self-assessment is to address current provisioning as
well as future positioning considerations around the TOR. OSQ compiles a package of
performance data as required.
11. Receive Submissions: Project Officer receives and collates submissions, and submits
them to the PVC (Engagement) for analysis.
12. Conduct Focus Groups: Project Officer co-ordinates the conducting of Focus Groups
(preferably by an external facilitator) with stakeholders such as community, employers,
government, secondary schools, graduates/alumni, students, academics and
professional staff. Results submitted to PVC (Engagement) for analysis.
13. Assessment and evaluation of Engaged Learning: PVC (Education) undertakes
assessment and evaluation of the University‟s engaged learning activities. Results
submitted to PVC (Engagement).
14. Assessment and evaluation of Engaged Research: PVC (Research) undertakes
assessment and evaluation of the University‟s engaged research activities. Results
submitted to PVC (Engagement).
63 632012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
15. Assessment and evaluation of Engagement and the Student Lifecycle: PVC
(Students) undertakes assessment and evaluation of the University‟s engagement with
students, including prospective students, current students, and graduates. Results
submitted to PVC (Engagement).
16. Assessment and evaluation of Community Engagement: PVC (Engagement)
undertakes assessment and evaluation of the University‟s engagement with external
organisations associated with the planning and development of GWS, including
community and business groups (such as Chambers of Commerce), employers,
government, and donors. This process should reflect a high degree of liaison with other
PVCs, and the process should be as inclusive as possible of both internal and external
stakeholders.
17. Future Directions: PVC (Engagement), in consultation with OSQ, undertakes
assessment and evaluation of possible future directions of the University‟s engagement
strategy. This process should reflect a high degree of liaison with other PVCs, and the
process should be as inclusive as possible of both internal and external stakeholders.
18. Presentation of Exemplars and Critical Review: Two full day workshops are held
where exemplars are showcased, followed by a facilitated discussion of themes arising
from the exemplars, and a discussion of where/how the exemplars relate to evaluation of
the University under the TOR. The intention of these workshops is to both „celebrate‟
and critique, with a view to inclusion of both the exemplars and the critique within the
self-assessment. Exemplars to be broad-based encompassing engaged research,
engaged learning, student transition, and sustainability.
19. “Virtulise” the Exemplars and other good practice: OMC, in consultation with OSQ,
develop a series of videos that capture a range of exemplary practice.
20. Complete Self Assessment Submission: The draft submission is considered and
endorsed by the Steering Committee, and sent for approval by the VC.
21. Provide briefing materials to Review Panel: The University provides the Review Panel
with Self Assessment submission and other briefing materials.
22. Panel considers briefing materials: Using the self-assessment submission and
briefing materials the Panel develops a preliminary view about the veracity of the self-
assessment as supported by the evidence. The Panel requests clarification and/or
further data or explanation where necessary. It also considers the
relevance/quality/achievability of future positioning strategy, and identifies issues for
potential focus in their report, and for further exploration through a visit to the University.
23. Panel visits University: Panel meets with individuals and groups of staff as it
determines appropriate. The schedule for the visit activities is pre-arranged (to the
extent possible) by the OSQ to maximise the effectiveness of the time the Panel has
available. The Panel provides indicative impressions by way of feedback to the PVC
(Engagement) at the conclusion of the site visit, as well as to the other relevant PVCs
and Executive Director. The final 2-3 hours of the Panel visit are dedicated to the Panel‟s
meeting to decide the content of their report so that the OSQ can commence the drafting
process.
64 642012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
24. Preparation of the Panel Report: This report is drafted by the OSQ at direction of the
Panel Chair.
25. Presentation of the Panel Report: As arranged between the Panel and the University
26. to 26. Consideration of Report, Agreement to Action Plan, and Follow up on Action
Plan: PVC (Engagement) is invited to comment on the report findings before
consideration by University Executive. An Action Plan is developed by PVC
(Engagement) and agreed by the VC. Copy of Panel Report Executive Summary and
Action Plan are presented to University Executive and BOT. OSQ monitors
implementation and assists the PVC (Engagement) to report to Executive and BOT on
progress. Progress reports required on a six-monthly basis until ass aspects addressed.
65 652012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Appendix D: Submissions
In addition to the University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and
Regional Engagement, the Panel considered the 98 external and 27 internal submissions to
the Review. These submissions were received on the Panel‟s behalf by the University during
April and May 2012.
External submissions
Organisation/Individual External
Submission Number
ActronAir 5
AECOM ANZ 81
Anglican Retirement Villages 30
ANGLICARE- Chesalon Care Richmond 33
Anonymous independent submission by Business Partner 55
Anonymous independent submission by Careers Advisor 15
Anonymous Independent submission from Parramatta City Council 20
Anonymous independent submission by Teacher 8
Anonymous independent submission by Teacher 13
Auburn City Council 57
Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect) 39
Bankstown City Council 72
Blacktown City Council 46
Blacktown City Council 47
Blacktown City Libraries 94
Blacktown Hospital VMO 61
Campbelltown City Council 35
Care Connect Ltd 73
CBRE 40
Cerebral Palsy Alliance 90
Coleman Greig Lawyers 32
Community Organisation Partner 45
Connect Child & Family Services 66
Corrective Services NSW 71
Cumberland Business Chamber 27
Department of Education & Communities 3
66 662012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
External submissions (continued)
Organisation/Individual External
Submission Number
Department of Education and Communities 58
Dept of Biological Sciences, Fordham Uni., NY, USA 54
Emerson Network Power 24
Fairfield City Council 96
Fuji Xerox Australia 50
Green, Mrs Jenny – independent submission 82
Gyrate Advertising.Design.Events. 22
Hayman, Mrs Vimla – independent submission 19
Henley Long Day Care Centre 76
Heslep, Ms Jan – individual submission 14
Holroyd City Council 29
Holroyd High School 68
Kellyville High School 53
Ku-ring-gai Council 74
Leumeah High School 38
LexisNexis 83
Liquor Marketing Group 98
Lithgow City Council 65
Lu Papi & Associates 86
Macarthur Disability Services 69
Macarthur District Temporary Family Care 1
Magdalene Catholic High School 42
Manser, Mr Hardy – individual submission 10
Member for Wollondilly 17
Mission Australia 64
MPower 44
Nordoff-Robbins Music Therapy Australia Ltd 18
NSW DEC 62
NSW Department of Education and Training 60
NSWPF 37
NYAS 88
Older Women's Network NSW 84
P.A.P.A. org. 80
PAPA 36
PartnerUp Pty Ltd / Novello, Ms Simone 11
Penrith Business Alliance 21
67 672012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
External submissions (continued)
Organisation/Individual External
Submission Number
Penrith City Council 2
Pittwater Council 63
Population Health, NSW Health 56
Powerhouse Discovery Centre 75
Prysmian Power Cables Australia Pty Ltd 67
Quadrant Recruitment Pty Ltd 48
RDA Sydney 89
Representing Hawkesbury Environment Network 91
Samuel Terry Public School 51
Scouts Australia NSW 23
Sir Joseph Banks High School 87
South East Neighbourhood Centre 31
South West Sydney Academy of Sport 34
South Western Sydney Local Health District 95
Springwood Neighbourhood Centre Co-op Ltd 26
St Andrews College 92
St Anthony's Family Care 52
St Paul's Grammar School 85
SydWest Multicultural Services Inc. 49
TAFENSW Northern Sydney Institute 93
Tan, Ms Beeleng – individual submission 7
The Exodus Foundation 16
The Hills Holroyd Parramatta Migrant Resource Centre 28
The Smith Family 12
The Street University - Ted Noffs Foundation 6
Tunstall Healthcare 41
UnitingCare Burnside 70
UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Board 97
WentWest 78
West Ryde Early Learning Service 25
Winmalee N/C 9
Wirripang Pty Ltd 4
Wykes, Mrs Gail – individual submission 43
Yarramundi AECG and IDAS 77
Yfoundations 79
Zonta Club of Sydney Hills Inc. 59
68 682012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Internal submissions
School/Unit/Research Institute/Research Centre/Individual Internal
Submission Number
Anonymous submission from School of Business Academic 5
Anonymous submission from School of Computing, Engineering & Mathematics Academic
19
Anonymous submission from School of Medicine Academic 10
Careers & Cooperative Education – Tayebjee, Ms Freny 7
Careers & Cooperative Education – Holman, Mrs Judy 8
Computing, Engineering & Mathematics – Filipovic, A/Prof Miroslav 12
Dollin, Ms Jen / Office of Sustainability – individual submission 6
Falzon, Mr Paul – individual submission 3
Forbes, Mrs Heidi / School of Medicine/Department of General Practice – individual submission
21
Humanities and Communication Arts – Bloom, A/Prof Diana 4
Jarvis, Ms Kim / Office of PVC, Engagement and International – individual submission
26
Jeewani Anupama, Dr Ginige / School of Computing, Engineering & Mathematics - individual submission
16
McLean, Ms Anne / Schools Engagement Unit – individual submission 23
Mullins, Ms Trish / Office of Higher Education Policy and Projects (CSS) – individual submission
20
O‟Neill, Professor Phillip / Urban Research Centre – individual submission
15
Oppliger, Ms Amanda - individual submission 2
Rawling, Mr Steve / Careers & Cooperative Education – individual submission
18
Robinson, Mrs Vickie / IT Services – individual submission 1
School of Computing, Engineering & Mathematics 22
School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics – Bhathal, Dr Ragbir
17
School of Law – Adams, Professor Michael 13
School of Medicine – McCarthy, Dr Louella 25
School of Social Sciences & Psychology – Apostolatos, Ms Zoe 24
Schraner, Dr Ingrid / School of Business – individual submission 11
Shane, Ms Kate / Office of Director Education Partnerships, Dean & CEO UWS College – individual submission
14
Wendon, Mr Robert / Office of PVC Students – individual submission 27
Wright, Ms Suzie / Careers & Cooperative Education – individual submission
9
69 692012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Appendix E: Consultations
Venues and dates of consultations
In a collaborative approach between the Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Engagement and
International), and the Office of Strategy and Quality, the University invited students, staff
and external stakeholders to attend meetings with the Panel on 5, 6, 7 and 10 September
2012 as follows:
Sydney CBD Wednesday 5 September 2012
UWS Parramatta Campus Thursday 6 September 2012
UWS Campbelltown Campus Friday 7 September 2012
UWS Bankstown Campus Monday 10 September 2012
The consultations provided participants with an opportunity to discuss with the Panel issues
raised in the Terms of Reference.
A list of attendees (in alphabetical order) appears on the following pages.
Notes:
1. The discussions held in these sessions helped to inform the view of the Panel and,
while notes were taken, there was no formal record kept of these discussions.
2. In addition to consultations at the University, the Panel took part in a teleconference
on 29 August 2012, a preliminary Panel meeting in the Sydney CBD on Wednesday
5 September 2012, and a final teleconference on 3 December 2012.
70 702012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Attendee Name Position/Organisation
Allie, Mr Harry Elder and Community Advisor (Board Member), UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board
Andrei, Mr Brendon Bushland Project Officer, Blacktown City Council
Anning, Assoc. Prof. Berice Dean, Indigenous Education, UWS
Arias-Alvarez, Mr Nelson UWS Alumni
Armstrong, Mr Paul Student, School of Law, UWS
Arvanitakis, Dr James Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities and Communication Arts, UWS
Bailey, Dr Trevor Director (Engagement), School of Science and Health, UWS
Bensoussan, Prof. Alan Director, National Institute for Complementary Medicine Research, UWS
Bentley, Ms Rachel CEO, Television Sydney (TVS) Limited
Bhathal, Dr Ragbir Lecturer, School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, UWS
Bourne, Ms Nola Administrative Support Officer, Parramatta Community Justice Clinic, School of Law, UWS
Brace, Mr Eric Executive Educational Advisor, Australian Literacy and Numeracy Foundation
Bressan, Mr Alessandro PhD Student, School of Business, UWS
Brocken, Mr Eric Convenor Hawkesbury EarthCare Centre
Cardona, Dr Beatriz Project Officer, Office of PVC Engagement and International, UWS
Cheetham, Prof. Andrew Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research), UWS
Cole, Dr Bronwyn Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education), UWS
Dennis, Mr Mark Group Editor, Fairfax
Dolin, Ms Jen Sustainability Coordinator, Office of Sustainability, UWS
Dunn, Prof. Kevin Dean, School of Social Sciences and Psychology, UWS
Ellis, Dr Betty Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education), UWS
Fallon, Dr Wayne Lecturer, School of Business, UWS
Ferfolja, Dr Tania Senior Lecturer, School of Education, UWS
Fernandes, Ms Celeste Teacher, Sarah Redfern High School
Firth, Mr Rob Business Development Manager, UWS Consulting, UWS
Forbes, Mrs Heidi School of Science and Health, UWS
Ford, Ms Janet Manager, Richmond Fellowship NSW
Frankum, Prof. Bradley Deputy Dean, School of Medicine, UWS
Gajo, Ms Kimberley Student, School of Business, UWS
Gavin, Mr Paul Manager, Smarter Schools National Partnerships, Sarah Redfern High School
Goldsmith, Ms Rosalie Associate Lecturer, PASS, Student Learning Unit, UWS
Ha, Mrs Katrina Head of Quality, Teaching and Learning, Macarthur Anglican School
71 712012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Hamilton, Mr James UWS Alumni
Hannan, Ms Jenny Director (Engagement), School of Business, UWS
Hawkins, Ms Rhonda Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Corporate Strategy and Services), UWS
Hengstberger-Sims, Assoc. Prof. Cecily
Acting Dean, School of Nursing and Midwifery, UWS
Herrera, Ms Lily Student, Sarah Redfern High School
Hinley, Mr Craig Disability Action Plan Project Manager, Equity and Diversity, UWS
Hudson, Dr Kerry CEO, UWSCollege
Hutchings, Prof. Peter Dean, School of Humanities and Communication Arts, UWS
Jarvis, Ms Kim Engagement Facilitator, Office of the Pro-Vice Chancellor (Engagement and International), UWS
Jazz, Mr Sam Student, Sarah Redfern High School
Johnston, Assoc. Prof. Christine
Director (Engagement & International), School of Education, UWS
Jorm, Prof. Louisa Director, Centre for Health Research, UWS
Kerr, Ms Sharon Director of Education, Mount Druitt TAFE
Kitamura, Dr Christine Research Fellow, Marcs Institute, UWS
Kolt, Prof. Gregory Dean, School of Science and Health, UWS
Kourtis, Mr Angelo Pro Vice-Chancellor (Students), UWS
Krause, Prof. Kerri-Lee Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education), UWS
Lakin, Ms Cossette Student, Sarah Redfern High School
Lam, Ms Katie Student, School of Science and Health, UWS
Lantz, Ms Julie Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Engagement & International), UWS
Lee, Mrs Rachel Infant Research Laboratory Coordinator, Marcs Institute, UWS
Lee, Ms Sandra Elder and Community Advisor (Board Member), UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board
Linnell, Dr Sheridan Senior Lecturer, School of Social Sciences and Psychology, UWS
Marne, Mr Wes Consulting Member, UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board
Martin, Mr James Business Excellence Manager, ActronAir
Masya, Ms Lena Abdul Student, School of Science and Health, UWS
McCarthy, Dr Louella Director (Engagement), School of Medicine, UWS
McGrath, Mr Timothy UWS Alumni
McKenna, Prof. Wayne Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Research), UWS
McLean, Ms Anne Manager, Schools Engagement, UWS
Meller, Ms Nikki-Maree Student, School of Nursing and Midwifery, UWS
Micsko, Mr Jim Manager, Fast Forward Program, UWS
Mihajlovic, Mr Peter CEO, Lifeline Macarthur
72 722012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Miller, Ms Jane Community Arts Coordinator, Richmond Fellowship NSW (UWS graduate)
Mitchison, Ms Debbie 6th Year Master of Clinical Psychology student, UWS
Mooney, Dr Mary Deputy Dean, School of Education, UWS
Moss, Ms Linda PRA Disability Employment Service
Naidoo, Dr Loshini Senior Lecturer, School of Education, UWS
Nguyen, Ms Thuy Le UWS student (Classrooms Without Borders)
Nobel, Assoc. Prof. Greg Institute for Culture and Society, UWS
Noble, Dr Anthony Director, SFI
Obola, Ms Ola St Vincent de Paul Society
O'Neill, Prof. Phillip Professorial Fellow, Urban Research Centre, School of Social Sciences and Psychology, UWS
Pacchiarotta, Ms Samantha UWS student (PASS facilitator)
Pearson, Mr Jack Board Member (Industry Employment and Engagement), UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board
Reid, Prof. Janice Vice-Chancellor, UWS
Riegler, Dr Marcus Senior Researcher, Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, UWS
Rivera, Mrs Kaylene Community mother participating in BabyLab research
Robinson, Aunty Mavis 'Mae'
Elder on Campus; Consulting Member to UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board Representative; and Community Member, UWS Indigenous Advisory Council
Rowland, Dr Paul Executive Director, Strategy and Quality, UWS
Rutledge, Ms Pam CEO, Richmond Fellowship NSW
Sartor, Ms Annette Lecturer, School of Education, UWS
Schraner, Dr Ingrid Senior Lecturer, School of Business, UWS
Scott, Prof. Geoff Executive Director, Sustainability, UWS
Shane, Ms Kate Senior Executive Officer, UWSCollege
Shergold, Prof. Peter Chancellor, UWS
Shorrocks, Mr David Student, UWS
Sidoti, Mr Eric Director, Whitlam Institute, UWS
Simoff, Prof. Simeon Dean, School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, UWS
Smallman, Prof. Clive Dean, School of Business, UWS
Smith, Prof. Gary Pro Vice-Chancellor (Engagement and International), UWS
Sorby, Mr Rex Consulting Member, UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board
Spirou, Ms Cherine Science Project Officer, Lachlan Macquarie College
Stevenson, Prof. Deborah Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research), UWS
Stoker, Ms Narelle General Manager, Cumberland Business Chamber
73 732012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Sweeney, Prof. Deborah Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research), UWS
Tapson, Prof. Jonathan Deputy Dean, School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, UWS
Tisserand, Ms Janelle Manager, Planning and Review, Office of Strategy and Quality, UWS
Trajkovski, Ms Suza Deputy Director (Engagement and International), School of Nursing and Midwifery, UWS
Uy, Prof. Brian Director, Institute for Infrastructure Engineering, UWS
Watkins, Ms Lyn Customer Development Manager, Mission Australia
Wellington, Mr Ivan Consulting Member, UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board
Wendon, Mr Robert Alumni Relations Manager, UWS
Wilkinson, Ms Zona Consulting Member, UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement Advisory Board
Williams, Ms Melissa Director, Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and Engagement, UWS
Wilson, Prof. Steve Dean, School of Education, UWS
Whitehead, Ms Vicky Department of Education and Communities
Wood, Ms Annamaria Macarthur Family Care
Wright, Mr Eric Principal, Nepean Community College
Wright, Ms Suzie Employer Liaison Coordinator, Careers and Cooperative Education, UWS
Zielinski, Mr Paul Principal, Leumeah High School
Zou, Dr Jeffrey Director (Engagement), School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, UWS
74 742012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Appendix F: Program
Following is the program for the on-site visit.
Day 1: Parramatta Campus
Engagement Overview 9.00 – 9.20 am Pro Vice-Chancellor (Engagement & International) – Professor Gary Smith Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Engagement & International) – Ms Julie Lantz 9.20 – 10.20 am Deans and Directors of Engagement 10.20 – 10.50 am MORNING TEA – Panel Deliberations
Engaged Learning 10.50 – 11.10 am Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education) – Professor Kerri-Lee Krause Associate Pro Vice-Chancellors (Education) – Dr Bronwyn Cole; Dr Betty Gill 11.10 – 12.10 pm Deputy Deans, Lecturers, Partners, Students and Alumni involved with engaged learning 12.10 – 12.30 pm Panel Deliberations 12.30 – 2.00 pm Lunch with community representatives (Selection of focus group participants/external submission people) 2.00 – 2.30 pm Panel Deliberations
Case studies represented: 1. Richmond Fellowship NSW Project 2. Lifeline Macarthur-UWS Partnership 3. Classrooms Without Borders
75 752012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Engaged Research 2.30 – 2.50 pm Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Research) – Professor Wayne McKenna Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research) – Professor Andrew Cheetham Associate Pro Vice-Chancellors (Research) – Prof. Deborah Stevenson and Prof. Deborah Sweeney 2.50 – 3.50 pm Meeting with Directors of Research Institutes/Centres, Researchers and Partners 3.50 – 4.20 pm AFTERNOON TEA – Panel Deliberations 4.20 – 5.00 pm Tour of campus led by Mr Eric Sidoti (Director, Whitlam Institute) 5.00 pm Close
Day 2: Campbelltown Campus
Schools Program and the Student Experience 9.00 – 9.20 am Pro Vice-Chancellor (Students) – Mr Angelo Kourtis 9.20 – 10.20 am Meeting with staff, partners, students and alumni involved with engagement 10.20 – 10.40 am MORNING TEA – Panel Deliberations 10.40 – 11.40 am Meeting with Students and Alumni
Case studies represented: 1. Western Sydney Insect Infestation Project 2. BabyLab 3. Centre for Complementary Medicine Research 4. The IHOPE Project 5. Building Arabic Businesses
Case studies represented: 1. Schools Engagement 2. Fast Forward Program 3. Indigenous Student Mentoring Program 4. PASS 5. UWS Young Writers Day 6. Science and Maths Exposed Program 7. Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS) 8. Alumni
76 762012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
11.40 – 12.00 pm Panel Deliberations 12.00 – 12.30 pm UWS Relationship Development and Management Committee Representatives 12.30 – 2.00 pm Lunch with staff representatives (including Reference Group and selection of staff who made a submission)
2.00 – 2.30 pm Panel Deliberations
Civic Engagement 2.30 – 3.00 pm Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Corporate Strategy and Services – Ms Rhonda Hawkins 3.00 – 4.00 pm Meeting with staff and partners involved with civic engagement 4.00 – 4.30 pm AFTERNOON TEA – Panel Deliberations 4.30 – 5.00 pm Tour of campus led by Dr Louella McCarthy, School of Medicine 5.00 pm Close
Day 3: Bankstown Campus
9.00 – 10.00 am Video Conference with Panel Member: Prof. Larry Bacow US east coast: EDT 19:00 hrs (previous day) 10.00 – 11.30 pm MORNING TEA – Panel Deliberations 11.30 – 12.00 pm Tour of campus led by Prof. Peter Hutchings, Provost, Bankstown Campus; Dean, School of Humanities and Communication Arts
Case studies represented: 1. RCE GWS (Regional Centre of Expertise on
Education for Sustainable Development) 2. SMExcellence 3. Television Sydney (TVS) 4. Riverfarm 5. The Youth Eco Summit
77 772012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
12.00 – 1.30 pm Lunch with o UWS Indigenous Advisory Council representatives o UWS Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment and
Engagement Advisory Board representatives o Elders on Campus
1.30 – 2.30 pm Panel Deliberations 2.30 – 3.30 pm Afternoon Tea and presentation of initial findings
Prof Janice Reid, Vice-Chancellor
Ms Rhonda Hawkins, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Corporate Strategy and Services)
3.30 pm Close
78 782012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
References
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2011), „Census home: data and analysis’, accessed 19
November 2012, from http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/data?opendocument&navpos=200
Australian Government, (2008), „Review of Australian Higher Education – Final Report, December 2008’, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://www.innovation.gov.au/HigherEducation/ResourcesAndPublications/ReviewOfAustralianHigherEducation/Pages/ReviewOfAustralianHigherEducationReport.aspx
Australian Universities Quality Agency (2007), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – January 2007‟, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/view-all
Bradley, D.B., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., Scales, B., (2008), „Review of Australian Higher Education‟, Commonwealth of Australia, downloaded 29 September 2012, from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Review/Documents/Higher_Education_Review_one%20document_02.pdf
Deloitte Access Economics, (2012), „Economic contribution of the University of Western Sydney‟, February, accessed 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/site/assets/media/documents/Panel-Review-docs/8_Economic-Contribution_Deloitte.pdf
Engagement Australia home page (2012), accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.engagementaustralia.org.au/
London School of Economics and Political Science website (2012), accessed 2 October 2012, from http://www2.lse.ac.uk/aboutLSE/aboutHome.aspx
NSW Government (2012), „Western Sydney Regional Action Plan: Community Discussion Paper‟, downloaded 16 October 2012, from www.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/document/show/146
NSW Government, Premier and Cabinet, (2012), „About Western Sydney: Demographics‟, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.westernsydney.nsw.gov.au/about-western-sydney/demographics/
79 792012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Reid, J., (1999), „UWS and Its Communities: A Time for Change‟, accessed 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/site/assets/media/documents/Panel-Review-docs/3_UWS-and-Its-Communities.pdf
Syracuse University, (2012), „Our Vision’, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.syr.edu/about/vision.html
Talloires Network, (2005), „The Talloires Declaration on the Civic Roles and Social Responsibilities of Higher Education’, 17 September, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/talloires-declaration/
Talloires Network, (2012), „Talloires Network Members‟, accessed 3 November 2012, from http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/talloires-network-members/
Talloires Network, (2012), „Talloires Network Steering Committee‟, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/what-is-the-talloires-network/talloires-network-steering-committee/
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2011), „Report of an audit of University of Western Sydney – October 2011‟, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/auditreport_uws_2011.pdf
Tufts University, (2006), „Education for Active Citizenship: A longitudinal Study of Civic Outcomes‟, presentation to the AAC&U Annual General Meeting, January 2006, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://aacu-secure.nisgroup.com/meetings/annualmeeting/AM06/documents/TuftsLongStudyPresentationAACUWebsite.pdf
Tufts University, (2012), „Outreach at Tufts University‟, accessed 11 November 2012, from http://outreach.tufts.edu/
United States Government (undated), „Transcript of Morrill Act 1862‟, accessed 24 October 2012, from http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=33&page=transcript
University of Brighton, (2012), „Community University Partnership Programme (CUPP)‟, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.brighton.ac.uk/cupp/contact-cupp/helpdesk.html
University of Newcastle, (2012), „Engage Newcastle‟, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.newcastle.edu.au/engage/#engage
80 802012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
University of Technology, (2012), „Shopfront’, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.shopfront.uts.edu.au/
University of Western Sydney (2010), „UWS Engagement Strategy 2010-2013‟, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/135345/OPQ1719_-_Engagement_Strategic-plan5.pdf
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „Planning and Review‟, accessed 30 November 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟ website, accessed 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „Our People 2015‟, downloaded 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/_media/main_site/documents/people_and_culture/special_projects_unit/Our_People_2015_Strategy_Final.pdf
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „University Submission to the 2012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement‟, downloaded 2 October 2012, from http://reviews.uws.edu.au/staff-submissions/university-submission
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „UWS External Advisory Committee Policy‟, 1 May, accessed 4 October 2012, from http://policies.uws.edu.au/view.status.php?id=00141
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „UWS Learning and Teaching Plan 2012-2014’, accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „UWS Research Plan 2012-2014‟, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/strategy_and_quality/sg/planning_and_review
University of Western Sydney, (2012), „UWS Strategy and Plan 2010-2015: Making the Difference‟, accessed 2 October 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/7301/Strategy-for-web10.pdf
University of Western Sydney, (undated), „Graduate Attributes‟, accessed 21 September 2012, from http://policies.uws.edu.au/download.php?id=189
81 812012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
Voice Project (2012), „UWS MyVoice Staff Engagement Survey: Executive Summary‟, 4 May, downloaded 24 October 2012, from http://www.uws.edu.au/people_and_culture/opc/working_at_uws/myvoice_uws_staff_engagement_survey/myvoice_faqs
Watson, D., Hollister, R., Babcock, E., Stroud, E.s., (2011), „The engaged university: International perspectives on civic engagement‟, Routledge, New York
Whitlam Institute website (2012), „Mission and Guiding Principles‟, The Whitlam Institute home page (2012), accessed 15 October 2012, from http://www.whitlam.org/about_us2/mission
82 822012 Review of UWS Community and Regional Engagement – Panel Report
For information relating to this report, please contact:
Janelle Tisserand
Office of Strategy and Quality, UWS
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: +61 (2) 9678 7861