A review of arts and social science tutorials at the Australian National University will consider the consultation process as well as the evidence for and potential risks of large forums.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Deputy vice-chancellor (academic) Professor Marnie Hughes-Warrington has outlined the terms of reference for the review she will chair - aiming to report to vice-chancellor Ian Young by mid-September.
Professor Hughes-Warrington wrote to staff and students on Tuesday saying she has asked the college to provide evidence of consultation and approval through college governance structures of the move from traditional university tutorials to large interactive workshops and forums.
This follows two weeks of student outrage at the plan over which they say there was no consultation, and revelations that Professor Young told students he was not made aware of the moves until he was asked to comment on the unfavourable reaction it was receiving on campus.
The National Tertiary Education Union disputes Professor Young was unaware that budget cuts to the college would lead to tutorial cuts and said the review was ''clearly an attempt to shift the responsibility for this response to budget cuts by the college to some form of governance failure''. The terms of reference include national best practice and trends in humanities as well as sound academic and corporate governance of the proposal.
This would be ''demonstrated through documentary evidence showing consultation and approval through existing CASS governance structures''.
Professor Hughes-Warrington would also examine evidence of ''effective communication of the project, as demonstrated through evidence showing consideration of impact and consultation with key stakeholders''.
NTEU ACT division secretary Stephen Darwin said the review would not consider the underlying cause of the tutorial cuts, which was savage budget cuts to the college.
''Rather than any consideration of the specific budget factors forcing the decision, there is almost a complete focus on how the decision was made by the college,'' he said.
''The simple fact was the abandonment of tutorials was a result of the college no longer being able to afford to run tutorials based on the draft budget for 2014 given to it by the vice-chancellor.
''Instead of seeking a rationale to justify reductions in student contact hours, this review should examine what resources are necessary to provide a high-quality teaching program in humanities and social sciences that befits Australia's national university.'' The NTEU was also concerned that despite the vice-chancellor previously using local examples of teaching forums to justify the dropping of tutorials, no college staff or union representation was included on the review.
Staff and students have been invited to make submissions by August 30. Students are planning a rally against the cuts on Thursday.