Griffith University

Introduction

Established in 1971, Griffith University has grown to encompass six campuses in the Brisbane-Gold Coast region. Innovative courses, cross-disciplinary teaching and research, and flexible entrepreneurial responses to community needs have characterised the University’s work. The University is widely recognised as one of the most interesting and influential universities in the Asia-Pacific region.

Embedding quality

Griffith University is committed to embedding methods of achieving quality in its practices to ensure that the University performs at the highest levels of teaching and learning, research, community service and management. Griffith has had a Quality Management Plan since 1993 supported by a Quality Advancement Committee. The plan is based on the principles behind the operation of a learning organisation, which include:

• the presence of quality management processes
• programs which allow for evaluating improvement continuously
• staff development and empowerment
• benchmarking
• networking
• good practice.

The Quality Management Plan was developed in the context of the University’s Mission Statement and the values, goals and objectives which support it. The mission is the enrichment of Queensland, Australia and the international community through the pursuit of excellence in teaching, research and community service while being committed to innovation, bringing disciplines together, internationalisation, equity and social justice and lifelong learning.

Since 1992 responsibilities for quality have been at a Pro-Vice-Chancellor level. With the recent appointment of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, portfolio responsibilities for quality and teaching and learning have been transferred to this position. The seniority of this position is seen as critical for providing leadership, strategic planning and a culture of continuous improvement. In pursuing excellence, the University’s activities are underpinned by our view of the University as a learning organisation, committed to continuous review where we routinely use monitoring and evaluation to inform strategies for improvement.

A system of committees supports the Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s role in providing expert academic input, peer review, stakeholder contributions and viewpoints from a range of disciplines to influence the development and delivery of academic programs. The Teaching and Learning Excellence Committee is concerned with improving the quality of teaching and learning. It provides support services for National Teaching Development Grants and innovative grants to improve teaching and learning. The committee also develops policies and procedures for teaching excellence awards and drafting the University’s Teaching and Learning Management Plan. The University has continued its tradition of commitment to excellence in teaching and learning. From its inception it has maintained a unit with specific responsibility for promoting and supporting teaching excellence. The Griffith Institute for Higher Education (GIHE) has the brief of supporting excellence through academic staff development.

The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) ensures quality in research. The position has responsibility for co-ordinating the University’s research management structures and the development, monitoring and review of policy and performance in research and research post-graduate training across the University. The Office for Research provides a range of support services for research carried out in Australia and internationally, and for the commercialisation of such research. The Research and Postgraduate Studies Committee promotes the University’s research programs and co-ordinates its research policies. An important part of this work is the development of the University’s Research Management Plan which provides the framework for the faculties to develop their own research management plans. From 1999, five per cent of academic budgets will be redistributed on the basis of research performance.

The Deputy Vice-Chancellor is also responsible for providing leadership and policy advice to the administrative Pro-Vice-Chancellors, Deans and Office Directors who have line responsibilities for the delivery of community services by their elements. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor facilitates and coordinates these separate activities and is a member of the Community Service Committee established by the University’s Council in 1994. The Community Service Committee formulates the University’s Community Service Plan and allocates funding for community service projects ($100 000 in 1998). Within this framework each faculty and element has developed its own community service plan.

As well, the quality portfolio has sponsored formal process reviews of administrative areas with the assistance of an external consultant. So far, four administrative areas have participated in these reviews.

Quality objectives in relation to teaching and learning

The University’s mission commits it to innovation, bringing disciplines together, internationalisation, equity and social justice, and lifelong learning and seeks to ensure that our graduates possess the distinctive mix of attributes this implies. There is a strong focus on the process and content of student learning, including innovative assessment, multidisciplinary curricula and flexible learning modes.

The above diagram represents a modified version of a successful model introduced four years ago. The model animates Griffith’s quality management processes and has led to consistent performance in areas of special strength, including generic skills development among graduates. It is used to inform both quality improvement and assurance in teaching and learning.

The Griffith graduate

Griffith's graduates have the following attributes:

Knowledge base: demonstrate comprehensive and coherent knowledge in one or more disciplines; apply appropriate professional skills; understand problems from a multidisciplinary perspective.

Analysis and problem-solving: think precisely and critically; link experience, formal knowledge and theory to make decisions; identify and frame problems; form strategies to deal with them and evaluate the effectiveness of the solutions.

Communication: read, write, speak and listen capably; interpret and express ideas visually and quantitatively; are able to explain, create interest, and carry on a dialogue with their audiences; can use information technology, data, graphics and other media competently.

Capacity for independent learning: find, use and evaluate a variety of information quickly and effectively; are willing to learn and experiment with ideas; show adaptability, innovation and entrepreneurial skills; are committed to lifelong learning, intellectual development, and improving their personal effectiveness.

Teamwork: work effectively either as a leader or as team member, accepting direction or asserting authority as appropriate; know how to find out the views of others and get things done in groups; manage projects to achieve outcomes.

Global and national perspectives: understand and work effectively within different cultures and economic systems, in Australia and internationally; act with awareness of the interdependence of community and global affairs.

Creativity, values and aesthetic response: appreciate the relations between creative, practical and theoretical activity; make judgements about artistic statements; recognise and respect different value systems while not compromising their own.

Student outcomes and employer satisfaction

Griffith’s graduates achieve the positive learning outcomes and employment-related attributes shown above. Results of the most recent employer survey indicate an increase in employer satisfaction levels since 1994. In 1998, 90 per cent of employers compared with 84 per cent in 1994 indicated that Griffith's graduates demonstrated high levels of the lifelong learning attribute they regarded as being the most important of all – a willingness to learn. In 1998, 75 per cent indicated that Griffith graduates demonstrated high levels of oral communication skills compared with 63 per cent in 1994.

Since 1993 Griffith graduates have reported higher levels of generic skills acquisition than graduates from most other universities. This confirms the effectiveness of the University’s commitment to an education that equips graduates for lifelong learning and engenders key employment skills. Outcomes of the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) verify the University’s above-average performance in developing attributes of lifelong learning. Eighty-eight per cent of our 1995 graduates, and 89 per cent of our 1996 graduates, agreed broadly with the items forming this scale. As many as 91 per cent of our 1996 graduates said that they had developed the ability to plan their own work and improved their problem-solving skills as a result of studying at Griffith. Inspection of course level results confirms consistently higher-than-average performance in generic skills across nearly all courses.

While 1993 and 1994 undergraduate students and graduates had reported similarly above-average scores on the good teaching scale (see Quality Portfolio 1994, p.38), 1995 graduates were marginally below national averages at 71 per cent. Overall satisfaction was 86 per cent. The latest data (for 1996 graduates) indicate that the position is returning to the previous level, with good teaching at 73 per cent and overall satisfaction at 89 per cent.

Available data for student retention, progress, and completion indicate average retention rates of 77 per cent and 78 per cent for 1995 and 1996; student progress rates of 88 per cent and 87 per cent for 1995 and 1996; and program completion rates of 65 per cent, 67 per cent and 62 per cent for 1995, 1996 and 1997 respectively.

Employment and further study

To use employment rates as a true performance indicator, the raw data supplied by the Graduate Careers Council of Australia (GCCA) must be corrected for field of study effects and must exclude graduates who were in the same full-time employment in the final year of study as at the time of the Graduate Destination Survey (GDS). If these corrections are not made, the data represent factors unrelated to quality such as proportions of students in different modes of study and fields of study.

The results show that full time employment rates are higher for Griffith graduates than the national averages. Griffith percentage rates for 1995, 1996 and 1997 (national corrected percentages in brackets) were 65.2 (64.7), 54.8 (53.5) and 58.3 (55.8) respectively. After applying the same correction for the confounding effect of final year students in employment, analysis within fields shows that Griffith’s humanities, languages, visual and performing arts, psychology, education, law, business, economics, engineering, health, nursing, computer science, life sciences and mathematics graduates are more likely than graduates nationally to be in full time employment. These results are consistent with favourable reports from employers about Griffith graduates’ employment skills.

Griffith's further study rates average 3.5 percentage points below national averages corrected for field of study. Griffith percentage rates for 1995, 1996 and 1997 (national corrected percentages in brackets) were 20.0 (25.2), 17.5 (19.6) and 17.4 (21.2) respectively. The University’s rates are associated with Griffith’s commitment to enrolling a high proportion of students from groups such as low socio-economic-status (SES) groups which typically have lower proportions of

students who enter further study. Griffith psychology graduates are more likely than average to enter further study, while those from humanities, life sciences, languages, education (initial), justice administration and mathematics are less likely to do so.

Quality assurance and improvement strategies in teaching and learning

Surveys of employers and students became a regular part of Griffith’s quality management processes after 1994. The standard instruments include a student opinion survey which examines student satisfaction with a broad range of services; a modified CEQ; a postgraduate research experience questionnaire; and a survey of employer satisfaction. Results are correlated with other performance indicator data, such as progression and completion rates, and disseminated to relevant elements of the University. Elements of the University also use additional surveys of customer satisfaction and feed the results into their improvement processes.

Quality assurance and improvement at course level are key ingredients of Griffith’s strategy for teaching and learning. Course quality assurance processes include rigorous approval mechanisms employed by Education Committee and Academic Committee and processes of course evaluation and review, which use a combination of self-assessment and external audit. Data from the CEQ have been disseminated to faculties and schools since 1994 and are linked to faculty teaching and learning management plans.

Course evaluation and staff development

An enhanced system for evaluation of courses, subjects and teaching appropriate to the revised organisation of the University following the 1997 restructure is being developed for use in 1999. Utilising Web-site technology, and continuing to employ the course-level performance indicators established in 1994, it will enable a more efficient and timely process for evaluation at each level. The model allows data to be aggregated while maintaining local flexibility and staff ownership of evaluation processes. CEQ and other student outcomes indicators will be supplied routinely to course convenors and heads of schools, and annual reports on all courses compiled. Subject and teaching evaluation results are linked into the performance management process for academic staff. Deans have responsibility for reporting on all courses grouped in a faculty, with special attention to the competitiveness, strategic positioning and cost-effectiveness of the faculty’s academic programs. Subsequently, a University report will assist in long-term planning and identification of areas of strength. Staff development resources will support improvement strategies through the Teaching and Learning Management Committee.

Staff development programs have been integral in Griffith’s improvement strategy for teaching and learning. These include expansion of the Graduate Certificate in Higher Education and its delivery in flexible mode. The course is one of three in Australia and New Zealand to have undergone rigorous external accreditation; its graduates are recognised internationally as qualified university teachers. The University aims to double the number of staff so qualified by the end of 2000.

Targeted programs exist to enhance heads of schools’ skills in academic leadership for good teaching and to extend innovative approaches to teaching and assessment, with a strong emphasis on cost-effective student-centred strategies. Recognition and reward for good teaching have been embedded in the promotions process by mandating teaching portfolios and through the performance management (academic review) scheme. The University will expand these initiatives as a fundamental component of its performance improvement.

Deans take responsibility for leadership in academic planning, monitoring courses and supporting teaching development with the assistance of GIHE. Assistance for improving teaching and learning is provided through a network of grants and support funds, including Deans’ competitive grants, Committee for University Teaching and Staff Development (CUTSD) incentive funding and GIHE fellowships. In 1997, a budget of $450 000 was allocated to these support mechanisms.

Student services and graduate employment

Using feedback from the 1994 and 1995 student opinion surveys, and from additional focused surveys, the University has improved services to students in the library, technology, administration, support and facilities areas. The library, for example, has redesigned study areas, introduced more focused recruitment and training programs, and enhanced student access to copying facilities. Another survey will be undertaken in 1998 to assess the effects of changes in all areas of student services, and identify areas for improvement.

Current quality assurance and improvement strategies for student services include the reorganisation of administrative support for students into student centres on each campus which provide comprehensive services in admission, enrolment, course information, credit, timetables, the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) and fees, examinations and graduation, irrespective of the course or faculty of the student. Projects are under way to improve telephone access for students and Web access to timetable information, in addition to the major project of implementing the student information system, Callista.

The flexible learning program being developed initially at the Logan Campus is a significant component of Griffith’s commitment to student-centred learning. It is designed to ensure continued high performance and to further enhance graduates’ generic skills and lifelong learning attributes. High quality learning experiences accompanied by flexibility in attendance requirements and assessment modes will be provided through the use of a combination of Web-based teaching materials, small group teaching and resources in print and other media.

Griffith has instituted a program of research and development to identify underlying reasons for current GDS outcomes and improve its further study and employment rates. Many courses are developing strategies to embed industry links within their curriculum to strengthen the interface between students and potential employers of

graduates. Business, engineering, information technology and science courses are developing existing internship and work placement opportunities for students, and applying strategies derived from the best-practice examples of education and law. Incorporation within existing curricula of more specific skills for gaining employment, following good international practice, is also being explored.

Quality objective in relation to research

To establish Griffith University as a major research-based university with internationally recognised expertise in key areas of research.

Griffith University is committed to the support of research and the generation of areas of research excellence, and is close to achieving a top-ten position amongst Australian institutions, with performance indicators advancing at an average of 10-20 per cent per annum. An increasing number of research areas within the University now provide leadership within the State of Queensland (education and nursing), within Australia (culture and media studies; environmental studies) and in a global context (microelectronic engineering, natural product drug discovery; genetic analysis of hypertension, migraine and cancer; physiopathology of heart disease). Over $33 million of international investment has already been agreed upon for the support of these activities through to the year 2003. The progress of the University with regard to four performance indicators, over the years 1994-1997, is illustrated below.

Footnote: The growth levels indicated above should continue through 1998, based on funding levels already agreed.

Quality assurance and improvement strategies in research

The University continues to place considerable emphasis on the development of the research skills of its academic staff and the recruitment of research active academic staff. Fifty-five percent of academic staff now have a PhD qualification compared with 36 per cent in 1991. Our commitment to increase the proportion of staff with advanced research training will facilitate the development of a wider research culture, and that will impact on the research performance of the University.

As a consequence of the most recent enterprise bargaining agreement, performance management for all academic staff research activity, postgraduate supervision, grant generation and research outputs, is now more rigorously managed than hitherto. As a result of the restructuring of the University in July 1997, Deans, now freed from line management, have been assigned responsibility for the development and implementation of strategic research plans for their faculties and associated centres of research excellence, and for the management of research higher degree load and performance.

The management of the research sector of the University was substantially changed in the 1997 restructuring. Line management for the Office for Research and the whole postgraduate sector was passed to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research), as was the Office for Technical Services, with responsibility for the management of research space. More emphasis than hitherto is also now placed on the development of state of the art research facilities. Three committees were collapsed into one to form the new Research and Postgraduate Studies Committee, thereby generating a single focus for the development of research policy. Working parties are now convened, as required, to review grant applications, scholarships and to address new issues (eg. professional doctorates).

Quality objective in relation to management

The University is committed to continuous improvement in its operations and to managing its resources effectively and efficiently.

Management quality assurance and improvement strategies

In 1997, the University commissioned external process reviews of selected administrative units. University staff have been trained in the consultant’s methodology and in 1998 are facilitating process reviews in two administrative units. A minimum of two administrative areas will participate in formal process reviews each year.

Another quality assurance and improvement strategy is the continued participation in a national human resource benchmarking program that involves 17 universities. A yearly report that enables the University to compare itself on a number of key performance indicators with the education industry and all industry norms has been beneficial in establishing the strategic directions for the University’s Human Resource Plan.

The Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu review commissioned by DETYA in 1996 validated the University’s sound financial position. The review confirmed that the University has the ability to manage expenditure within available funds with an above average safety margin of 11.32 per cent compared to the whole sector’s average of between five and six per cent. It also identified the University’s strong cash position with a current ratio of 2.55 compared with the sector average of 1.79. The current ratio is defined as current assets measured against current liabilities.

As well, the University places a high priority on management and leadership development. Since 1995, 81 academic staff with leadership responsibilities have participated in leadership and management programs. Training in performance management for all heads of schools and academic supervisors was also provided. A further program of management development for heads of schools will take place in the second half of 1998.

In 1998, a separate review process was established for academic managers. Formalised systems have been in place since 1996 to manage the performance and skill base of all staff.

Performance indicators

The performance indicator for each process review is the degree to which inefficient activities are reduced. Performance indicators for financial management include those identified in the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu review such as maintaining the current ratio, whereby revenue is higher than expenditure, and maintaining a strong cash position. The human resource management (HRM) performance indicators include: human resource expense factor; separation rate; male to female staffing factor; recruitment cost factor; external acceptance rate; training investment per employee; occupational health and safety expenditure per capita; average time lost per incident; incident rate; absenteeism; client surveys and proportion of academic staff evaluated as being satisfactory managers.

Quality objective in relation to community service

To enhance the University’s performance as a community reference centre of expertise, advice and informed opinion for the community, including the alumni.

Community service quality assurance and improvement strategies

Griffith’s staff are active in providing expert comment to the public and media. In 1995, staff participated in 4370 media presentations, compared with 4460 in 1997. A more focussed approach whereby each campus and academic unit is targeted to provide a newsworthy story each week, has resulted in improved performance.

In 1994, the University launched a mentoring program, Connect with Success. The program links final year students with Alumni working in areas of professional interest to provide assistance and guidance on issues of career planning, networking and workplace practice. The program has expanded from 36 participants in 1994 to 80 participants in 1996.

The University supports two University of The Third Age (U3A) groups which have a membership of over 2000. U3A activities are supported by providing free office space and equipment, management of accounts, adult education expertise, access to library facilities, auditing University lectures and undertaking computing classes.

Both the Queensland Conservatorium and Queensland College of Art (QCA) have outstanding records of achievement in their fields and are widely recognised for the contribution they make to the cultural life of the community. The Queensland Conservatorium conducts on average 220 public performances each year. It has developed an integrated marketing plan following consultation with stakeholders. Improvement strategies include changes to pricing structures, an increase in the number of free lunchtime concerts and a review of the program mix in terms of quality and content. The QCA presents a regular program of exhibitions to the public, normally eight per year. In addition the University has entered an agreement with the Brisbane City Council for the joint management of the Brisbane City Gallery. Improvement strategies include the establishment of a Deputy Director (Development) at QCA to coordinate the range of community service programs.

Performance indicators

Performance indicators include: the number of occasions that staff provide expert advice to the media, increasing the Alumni membership, and increasing the number of Alumni chapters nationally and internationally.

Contact

Ms Teresa Iwinska
Executive Officer, Planning and Quality
Tel: (07) 3875 7300
Fax: (07) 3875 7848
Email: T.Iwinska@gu.edu.au