School, Centre, Institute and generalist degree reviews

If you would like to make a submission an upcoming review, please consider the terms of reference and provide your comments on the school/centre/institute and their activities based on your own knowledge and experience. If you are not familiar with all the matters addressed by the terms of reference, please only respond to those that apply to your knowledge and experience.

Please include a contact name and email with your submission, in case the review committee wishes to discuss any of your submission with you.

Completed submissions should be sent to uqreviews@uq.edu.au.

Requesting confidentiality

If you do not wish to have your identity revealed, please download and complete a Request for confidentiality form (PDF, 91.3 KB) and email it along with your submission. The contents of your submission will still be disclosed, but we will make every effort to remove information that will reveal your identity.

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 comprises five to six members who will:

• review a comprehensive submission from the unit under review, and individual submissions; and
• interview 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 the following areas, as set out in the Terms of Reference document:

• Governance and Vision;
• Teaching and Learning; 
• Research and Research Training; 
• Internationalisation; 
• Professional and Industry Links;
• Alumni and Community Links;
• Equity and Diversity;
• Organisation and Administration; and
• Resources.

Additional areas may also be nominated for specific reviews. 

Approval

The review committee reports to the President of the Academic Board, and through the Board, to the Vice-Chancellor.

Outcomes and follow-up

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

A 3-year implementation report is required to be submitted to the Academic Board Standing Committee, three years after the Vice-Chancellor's approval of the review report. The implementation report addresses each recommendation of the review report and details progress made on implementation. This report is then sent to the Vice-Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor’s Risk and Compliance Committee for consideration.

Please refer to the Review Coordinator for information about the terms of reference, submissions and reports for completed reviews.

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:

• Supervisory Organisational Structure Policy
• Research Centres and Research Networks Policy
• Review of Schools Procedure
• Review of Academic and Administrative Service Units Procedure
• Review of University Institutes and Centres Procedure
• Academic Program Review Procedure

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 (PPTX, 2 MB) provide information about the review process that may be helpful to members of schools and institutes, including an outline of how to structure the submission.

Tips for School Managers

The 'How to get the most out of your school review process' (PDF, 265.8 KB) 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

Review submission examples

The following unit review submissions have been provided as examples.

• School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences (2021)
  Submission (PDF, 10.9 MB) | Appendices (PDF, 3.9 MB)
• School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences (2021)
  Submission  (PDF, 18.1 MB)
• School of Education (2023)
  Submission
• School of Psychology (2023)
  Submission | Appendices

Data support and resources of information

Data sources and support to assist with a unit’s review submission are listed below:

• Planning and Business Intelligence has compiled a list of standard reports that units can refer to for data typically sourced for school reviews, available from UQ Reportal (UQ staff sign-on required)
• The Research Analytics team can provide assistance to Schools & Institutes in accessing research data and analyses not available in UQ Reportal. This includes compiling performance benchmarking data with comparable Go8 Schools/Departments, subject ranking results (where relevant), and creating internal and external collaboration visualisations. Depending on the complexity of the request, the team requires at least 4-6 weeks' notice and an initial meeting to determine the requirements and parameters of the analysis.
• The Research Outputs and Impact team in the UQ Library offers a service to units to produce a report covering unit-specific and standard analyses of publications using a range of metrics and data sources. Units can lodge a request to the team's email address roiteam@library.uq.edu.au. At least 4-6 weeks notice is required, and an initial meeting is organised to discuss the specific requirements and standard analyses the report will provide, and to nominate institutions or specific units within institutions that they would like to benchmark themselves against for the benchmarking section of the report.

Helpful links

• University mission, vision and values
• Request for confidentiality form (PDF, 91.3 KB)
• Sample Questions for the review committee (for school reviews) (DOCX, 57.1 KB)