Printer-friendly version

1. Purpose and Objectives

These procedures enact PPL 3.20.05a Collaborative Service Teaching - Policy.

2. Definitions, Terms, Acronyms

Collaborative Service Teaching – teaching of or into a course offered in a specific program, for example a core course, by a provider academic unit other than the school or faculty generally aligned with administering the program. Teaching cross- listed electives would not be regarded as collaborative service teaching. Single guest lecturing events would not normally be regarded as collaborative service teaching.

Collaborative Service Teaching Agreement – an agreement between a host school/academic unit and the relevant service teaching provider(s).

Discipline expertise – a school, faculty or institute may be recognised as having discipline expertise through:

  • its leadership in teaching and research in the discipline; and
  • acknowledgement by the University.

Host unit – the school or academic unit (for example, faculty) that is generally aligned with the program that requires the delivery of service teaching.

Program owner – the faculty that administers the program into which service teaching is being delivered.

Service teaching provider – the school or academic unit with the recognised discipline expertise that collaborates with a host school to design and deliver service teaching.

3. Procedures Scope/Coverage

These procedures apply to all instances of collaborative service teaching at The University of Queensland. While it is acknowledged that non-academic units may contribute to the University’s teaching and learning efforts, these procedures apply explicitly to academic units.

4. Procedures Statement

These procedures provide direction on managing collaborative service teaching arrangements, in particular, the requirements associated with:

  • funding;
  • collaborative service teaching agreements;
  • dispute resolution;
  • responsibilities of units;
  • quality assurance and monitoring; and
  • reporting and record-keeping.

5. Funding

5.1 Funding splits must be negotiated by the Heads of School and signed off by the relevant Executive Dean(s).

5.2 EFTSL is the default basis for collaborative service teaching funding split, and other remuneration models will be avoided.

6. Collaborative Service Teaching Agreements

6.1 A Collaborative Service Teaching Agreement must be established between the host school and the service teaching provider(s)prior to the approval of a new course. The agreement must be provided with the program approval documentation and must accompany approval of the course through University committees (refer PPL 3.20.05a Collaborative Service Teaching - Policy – section 4.3).

6.2 To ensure a clear understanding between the host school and the service teaching provider(s), collaborative service teaching agreements must include:

  • course details including learning objectives, assessment, location and delivery mode;
  • responsibilities of the host school and the service teaching provider(s), including the provision of resources, teaching schedule, and the specific requirements of content delivery (for example, scope, contextual requirements);
  • the EFTSL split for the provision of collaborative service teaching and the basis on which it has been determined;
  • the term of the agreement;
  • arrangements for consultation and review of the program/course;
  • timelines that accommodate the academic and technical staff delivering the course; and
  • agreed measures of success.

Refer PPL 3.20.05 Collaborative Service Teaching - Forms for the agreement form.

6.3 A copy of the approved Collaborative Service Teaching Agreement must be kept by both the host school and the service teaching provider(s). Agreements must be recorded in SI-net and lodged with Records and Archives Management Services in accordance with PPL 1.60.04 Records Management.

7. Dispute Resolution

7.1 Transparency is a feature of the dispute resolution process. A concise record of key points and the agreed outcomes must be documented at all stages of the dispute resolution process.

7.2 It is acknowledged that disputes could include disagreements about:

  • an element of an existing collaborative service teaching arrangement (such as the quality of the service teaching or sharing of funding);
  • details of proposed courses to be included in a new or revised program;
  • the restructuring of an existing program that includes service taught courses; and
  • the duplication of teaching expertise and courses across schools or the academic unit in which the expertise for a given discipline most appropriately belongs.

7.3 In the event of a disagreement between the host school and the service teaching provider(s), the collaborative service teaching dispute resolution process outlined below must be followed.

  • In the first instance, the parties concerned must endeavour to resolve the issues informally through discussion. Where either the host school or the service teaching provider(s) are dissatisfied with some aspect of the collaborative service teaching arrangement, all parties concerned, in consultation with the relevant Associate Deans (Academic), will be responsible for determining mutually agreed arrangements and strategies for their achievement.
  • Where a dispute remains unresolved, the relevant Executive Deans must be notified in writing of the details under dispute, including a chronological account of the background circumstances. Formal discussions about the problem areas must be held between the parties concerned, the Associate Deans (Academic), the Heads of relevant schools or academic units, and the Executive Deans.
  • Where the dispute is not resolved by the Executive Deans, the Provost in consultation with the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) will be the arbitrator and final decision-maker.

7.4 Any academic policy issues that emerge out of the dispute resolution discussions must be reported to the Committee for Academic Programs Policy for consideration.

8. Responsibilities of Units

8.1 The host school and the service teaching provider(s) are responsible for consulting about any proposed changes that will impact on the collaborative service teaching agreement.

8.2 Where it is determined (e.g. through the program review process) that a change in service teaching is required, the proposing party is responsible for providing the other parties with timely notification of relevant changes and/or new course requirements that impact on the collaborative service teaching agreement.

8.3 The Heads of School, or equivalents, are responsible for ensuring all decisions and agreements are communicated to and within the relevant schools or academic units.

9. Quality Assurances and Monitoring

9.1 All collaborative service teaching arrangements must be reviewed as part of the cyclic academic program review process or as required by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

9.2 Quality of collaborative service teaching is further assured through implementation and follow-up of:

  • clear and agreed quality measures and guidelines;
  • the central academic program approval process;
  • regular student feedback and student evaluation, such as student satisfaction surveys; and
  • program and course approval processes within schools and faculties, in accordance with the academic program approval process (reference PPL 3.20.01 Academic Program Approval).

9.3 Each collaborative service teaching agreement must be established in accordance with section 6 of these procedures.

10. Transitional Arrangements

10.1 All existing collaborative service teaching arrangements are expected to comply with these procedures within three years.

10.2 These procedures apply to all new collaborative service arrangements from the date of approval of the policy.

Academic Registrar Mr Mark Erickson