BZ queried whether there had been an outcome from this action item. JS pointed out that this action item referred to the first year experience research work that GB and SC have commissioned. The committee agreed that this action item should be carried over to the next meeting. GB to arrange meeting to discuss research projects. 3. of reference Common Units Committee MC confirmed that the two Faculty Pro Vice-Chancellors have been added and noted the following changes to the incumbency: 5. Associate Dean Learning & Teaching, FEHSE now Barbara White 6. Associate Dean Learning & Teaching, FLEBA now Greg Shaw 7. ACIKE representative MC queried whether there should still be a representative from ACIKE on the committee. Historically the ACIKE representative position was part of the management committee from when one of the units was embedded in SAIKS. However, this is no longer the case. The unit coordinators represent the other units and not individual representatives from schools. However the common units play an important role in terms of students from low SES backgrounds including Indigenous students and it is important to ensure that those voices do not get lost. FT commented that it be good to continue to include a representative from ACIKE; as often Indigenous people can be left out of the equation and particularly considering the issues we are talking about with Batchelor. 12. Student representative MC pointed out that if the PASS scheme gets up and running and one of the foci is the common units then a PASS leader would be ideal. The current policy is to go to the student representative council (SRC) and they appoint from within their elected committee membership. However, this often results in their being no one to attend the committee meetings. FT advised that the student representative council did advertise this semester but without success. TN queried whether committee members could approach students who might be interested. MC advised that there is no policy in the university at present indicating that the SRC must be approached if student representation is sought. MC confirmed that students who are approached by the unit coordinators will be required to submit an expression of interest in the form of a letter. They should be sent the TOR and their representation will be recorded on their AHECS. MC to with GB and Steven Larkin and advise that the committee would like to continue to representative from ACIKE ensuring a continuing focus on retention and success for LSES Unit Coordinators to approach students regarding representation on CU committee
GS queried whether the current TOR allows the Chair to appoint committee members on a needs basis. MC confirmed that this is commonly used in other committees. MC proposed that the membership be amended as follows: 12. student representative (internal) appointed by the Chair 13. student representative (external) appointed by the Chair MC moved that, subject to the amendment noted above, the TOR be recommended to Academic Board for approval. Motion carried. CU Theme leader to arrange for TOR to be tabled at next academic board meeting. 4. Standing 4.1 Academic Consultant report 4.1.1Overview FT reported that semester 1 ran smoothly, BZ took on the role of Unit Coordinator for CUC107 at the last minute and has carried that through successfully. The CUC100 team have carried a full student load and been working with various teaching cohorts. The CUC106 team have focused on supporting external students particularly in the group work aspect of the unit. 4.1.2 Budget/Staffing FT advised that the common units are currently underfunded and there are insufficient funds in the budget to last beyond semester 1. The additional funding required is for unexpected student numbers. JS advised that the figures quoted are conservative, Jean Mary Robbins came to these figures on a pro rata basis and the figures quoted may be insufficient for the remaining semesters. MC queried whether JS had submitted a mid-year budget review. JS advised that she had consulted with MC, GB and Scott Snyder about the budget deficit and the fact that a new funding model is needed as there are insufficient funds each year, despite these units being some of the largest in the university. MC pointed out that this matter was raised at the last meeting and it was agreed that all of the funding for the common units was to be allocated to SALL and then the teaching would be ‘bought back’ depending on how it was distributed. However, the timing of this decision, at the end of November, was after the budget process had been completed. JS stated that this year the various schools were apportioned EFTSL according to their teaching loads. 4.1.3 Induction for teaching in the common units MC to raise with GB the need for additional funds for S2 and SS. JS to discuss redefining budget approach for 2014 with GB.