A key role of the Academic Board is to oversee the University's review process for institutes, university centres, schools and generalist degree programs. 

Institutes, university centres, schools and generalist degree programs undergo comprehensive external review on a septennial basis.  The Academic Board Standing Committee oversees the review process on behalf of the Academic Board.  The Standing Committee establishes the schedule of reviews in consultation with Executive Deans and members of the University's senior executive.

Purpose

The review:

  • aims to achieve improvement in academic performance through a process of self-assessment, benchmarking, critical reflection, forward planning and peer review; and
  • provides the catalyst for a continuing cycle of development and improvement with a view to adopting good practice by international standards.

Process

A review committee comprised of five-six members:

  • reviews a comprehensive submission from the unit under review, and individual submissions; and
  • interviews staff, students, professional representatives, and employer groups.

The unit's submission is developed in accordance with procedures developed by the Academic Board Standing Committee.

Scope

The review considers the unit's performance and planning in relation to:

  • education;
  • discovery; 
  • engagement; 
  • equity and diversity; 
  • internationalisation;
  • governance and administration; and
  • resources.

Approval

The review committee reports to the President of the Academic Board, and through the Board, to Senate.

Outcomes and follow-up

A 12-month implementation report is required to be submitted to the Academic Board Standing Committee 12 months after Senate's approval of the review report. The implementation report addresses each recommendation of the review report and details progress made on implementation.

It is expected that reviews of the following units will be undertaken in 2017:

  • School of Languages and Cultures: date to be advised
  • School of Business: date to be advised
  • Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology: date to be advised

 

2016

  • School of Education
  • Global Change Institute
  • School of Communication and Arts
  • School of Pharmacy
  • Centre for Advanced Imaging

2015

  • School of Agriculture and Food Sciences
  • School of Psychology
  • School of Chemical Engineering 
  • School of Economics
  • Bachelor of Science degree program
  • School of Dentistry

2014

  • Centre for Microscopy and Microanalysis
  • UQ Diamantina Institute
  • School of Population Health
  • Institute of Social Science Research
  • School of Political Science and International Studies
  • School of Veterinary Science
  • Sustainable Minerals Institute

2013

  • School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences
  • School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management
  • School of Mechanical and Mining Engineering
  • School of Human Movement Studies
  • School of Mathemathics and Physics

Please refer to the Review Coordinator for information about pre-2013 reviews. See Review SharePoint site for review terms of reference, submissions and reports.

Procedures and guidelines have been developed to assist review committees and the units under review by providing information on the following:

  • preparation for the review;
  • review process;
  • implementation process;
  • content of the unit's submission;
  • description of standard terms of reference and related performance indicators; and
  • roles of the review committee members and secretariat.

The following Policy and Procedures Library documents govern the review processes:


Briefing sessions

In preparation for the reviews, two briefing sessions are held in the year prior to the review. One session is held for the Heads of Schools and Directors of Centres and Institutes, and is led by the President of the Academic Board. The second session is held for the school/centre/institute's staff, postgraduate students, and is led by an Academic Board Standing Committee representative. A member of Academic Policy and Programs will contact your Head of School or Director to schedule the briefing sessions.

Slides from the President’s briefing session can be downloaded by clicking here.

Administrative arrangements for reviews

The "Administrative arrangements for reviews" document outlines the arrangements in place for the review process. It provides an outline of the review timeline, and what information schools, centres and institutes will be asked to provide in the lead up to the review. It can be downloaded by clicking here.

Tips for School Managers

The 'How to get the most out of your school review process' document is a collection of tips from school managers and professional staff members who have been involved in the review process. The information is collated specifically for school managers in an effort to assist with the review process.

The document includes tips and information on:

  • Preparing for the review
  • Compiling the submission and strategic plan
  • After the submission
  • Staff engagement

Submission and Strategic Plan examples

Review committees often wish to read the reviewed unit's strategic plan.  If units require assistance in developing a strategic plan, the strategic seminar series conducted by the Human Resources Division each year might be beneficial.  Contact Human Resources directly to obtain seminar details. Other examples of unit submissions are below.

Helpful links

    Review terms of reference, submissions and reports are available on the Review SharePoint site.
    Contact:
    Review Coordinator
    Academic Policy and Programs 
    Academic Services Division
    Phone +61 (07) 3365 1986