The University of New South Wales

The UNSW mission

UNSW will be an international university of outstanding quality.

The UNSW mission has been translated into an interlocking set of objectives and targets in the UNSW Strategic Plan. The demand for quality has been identified as one of five key drivers for improving performance at UNSW.

The University’s planning processes provide a framework for monitoring and improving quality through collection and analysis of data, assessment of performance against key indicators and development of strategies and targets for improvement. Key performance indicators that are reported to Council focus on the quality of the student intake, evaluation of courses, postgraduate training, research management and funding, staff profile, and equity (see Endnote 1).

The performance, reporting, evaluation and planning (PREP) process is the centrepiece of a new planning process that was initiated in 1997. The PREP process has arisen from UNSW 2000, the University’s current major program of review and reform. As part of this process, all Deans are required to comment on a set of common elements relating to the Council performance indicators and a set of core standards. The elements, for which Deans are accountable for faculty performance, and for which data are reviewed and targets agreed, are:

• Per capita published output - compared with that at other institutions where available.
• Postgraduate research completions – time series and comparisons with other institutions where available.
• Grant applications, success rates and grant income.

• Student progression rates.
• Median Tertiary Education Rank (TER) by faculty for undergraduate courses.
• Evaluation of teaching quality by the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ).
• Use of education technology.
• Mechanisms for reviewing postgraduate supervision, support and facilities and student progress.

• Commonwealth funded revenue as a percentage of total faculty revenues, separately identifying individual fee and continuing education programs.
• Percentage of total faculty expenditures that are for payroll, equipment and other non-payroll purposes.
• Equipment management and replacement programs highlighting the quantum of obsolete equipment that is still in use.

• Statistics on appointments, resignations, retirements, or other (noting equal employment opportunity - EEO - and affirmative action - AA).
• Staff profile, gender by level.
• Staff profile, qualifications.
• Statistics on honorary/adjunct/conjoint appointments.
• Programs for staff development and training - type, participation rates.
• Workload distribution - by staff category; allowances made for research supervision.

• Performance in achieving enrolment plan in DETYA, international fee-paying students (ISFEE) and local fee-paying students (LFEE).
• Resource planning in relation to staffing, space, leadership and development, infrastructure and strategies for securing non-government funding.

Strategies and performance

A. Teaching and learning

Key planning goal: attract high performing students. Performance indicators include:

• Median TER by faculty and course
• Proportion of students drawn from the top one per cent, top five per cent and top 10 per cent Higher School Certificate (HSC) students in NSW
• International student applications, offers and acceptances.

In 1997, UNSW received the largest number of entrants from the top one per cent, top five per cent and top 10 per cent pools of HSC students in NSW and the ACT. The mean TER of local students direct from school remains the highest in the State. When these indicators are viewed in conjunction, it is clear that UNSW has been able to attract high quality undergraduate students even though there has been a reduction in demand for university places across the sector. Data on all the above indicators are provided in an annual report to Council (see Endnote 2).

Key planning goal: provide a high quality teaching and learning experience. Performance indicators include:

• Student satisfaction ratings (Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) and UNSW Student Survey).
• Evaluations of courses and teaching using UNSW’s subject evaluation and teaching surveys.
• Student progress rates.
• Employer satisfaction with attributes of graduates (UNSW Employer Survey).

In the 1997 CEQ, graduates across all faculties and at all levels of study reported overall satisfaction with their courses at UNSW. Courses at both undergraduate and postgraduate level were given highly favourable ratings on appropriateness of assessment, favourable ratings on the acquisition of generic skills, and moderately favourable ratings on the provision of clear goals and standards. Graduates indicated less satisfaction in relation to teaching and workload, particularly in undergraduate courses.

Table 1: Percentage of students expressing broad satisfaction, CEQ 1997, bachelor degrees, UNSW (Source: 1995-1996 DETYA statistics; 1997 Planning Office, UNSW)

To enhance the value of CEQ data in quality improvement, CEQ results at UNSW are reported in two separate but parallel ways. Results are analysed using UNSW course codes to generate tables that are specific to each faculty and that are at the finest level of aggregation possible. Results are also analysed using the national field of study codes so that comparisons with other universities become possible. 1997 is the fifth consecutive year in which CEQ data have been collected and reported at UNSW in this fashion.

The changes in CEQ scores at UNSW over the five years have been small in scale. However it is encouraging to note that in almost all cases the trend has been either stable or improving. In the two key indicators, overall satisfaction with the course and satisfaction with the quality of teaching, every faculty has either improved or maintained its position during this period (see Endnote 3).

UNSW compared favourably to other research intensive universities (the Group of Eight) on overall satisfaction in 1997, achieving the highest rating in this group in 19 of the 49 disciplines for which data were available. This result is similar to that of the previous year when UNSW was placed first in 21 of the 49 disciplines for which data were available. UNSW was placed in the top half of the Group of Eight universities in 29 of the 49 disciplines (28 of the 49 disciplines in the previous year, 1996). UNSW was placed in the top quarter of all universities on overall satisfaction in 10 of the 49 disciplines (15 in 1996) (see Endnote 4).

Figure 1: Comparison of ratings on good teaching, CEQ and UNSW student survey 1997, percentage of students expressing broad satisfaction, bachelor degrees (Source: Planning Office, UNSW)

To obtain a better understanding of the somewhat lower ratings given to the quality of teaching in some courses at UNSW, a range of questions on the quality of the teaching and learning experience at UNSW were included in a survey of all currently enrolled students in the latter part of 1997 (see Endnote 5). The results on the quality of teaching were strikingly similar in pattern across faculties, but the overall level of satisfaction appeared to be considerably higher than has been found for graduates in the CEQ (Figure 1). The survey also provided faculties with useful feedback on related matters such as the quality of teaching materials and the communication skills of lecturers. CEQ results and action to be taken by faculties in response to the data are discussed with Deans during PREP sessions.

UNSW matches learning outcomes to the University's educational goals and objectives, as specified in the Strategic Plan. Our graduates will have:

• specialist training in one or more fields;
• a significant component of general education;
• direct experience of an active research culture;
• skills and training that meet the needs of industry and the community;
• an understanding of their social, ethical, and environmental responsibilities;
• the experience of a highly diverse, international and multicultural university;
• learning skills, including English language proficiency;
• critical reasoning skills combined with breadth of vision;
• ability to use relevant advanced technologies; and
• they will have completed part of their education in industry, the community, or overseas.

In 1997, UNSW undertook a major survey of employers to assess their perceptions of the University and of the skills of UNSW graduates. A total of 160 employers across all States and business sectors responded to the survey. Employers in this sample rated UNSW highest in quality of all Australian universities, both in overall quality and in quality of graduates. The survey also identified some skills which were perceived by employers to be very important but in which UNSW graduates were rated as needing improvement. The results of the survey have been evaluated by the University’s Education and Marketing Committees, and forwarded to Deans for review and appropriate action through such bodies as faculty teaching and learning committees. The responses of faculties will be followed up with Deans in the annual PREP session.

Employment and further study outcomes for UNSW graduates have shown little change over the past three years (Table 2), reflecting a relatively stable graduate labour market. Higher degree graduates from UNSW enjoy particularly strong employment prospects (Table 3). As with CEQ data, Graduate Destination Survey (GDS) data at UNSW are reported against UNSW course codes to maximise utility within faculties and against national field of study codes to make university comparisons possible (see Endnote 6).

UNSW has developed an indicator of positive outcomes from GDS results by combining the percentage of graduates who proceeded to full-time employment with the percentage of graduates who undertook further full-time study on graduation. UNSW compares favourably to other large research universities on this indicator, ranking in the top half of these universities on 12 of the 29 disciplines for which comparative data were available. UNSW also ranked favourably on this indicator in

comparison to all Australian universities, ranking in the top quarter of all universities in eight of the 29 disciplines and in the bottom quarter in only four (see Endnote 7).

Table 2: Percentage of UNSW graduates in full-time study, and percentage of UNSW graduates in full-time employment expressed as a proportion of those available for full-time employment, GDS 1997, bachelor degrees, Australian residents (Source: 1995-1996 DETYA statistics; 1997 Planning Office, UNSW)

Table 3: Activity of UNSW graduates at time of graduation by level of degree, GDS 1997 (Source: Planning Office, UNSW)

B. Student services

Key planning goal: provide student services which enhance the quality of life for all students, and which help to create a campus environment that is attractive to students. Performance indicators include:

• Satisfaction with services and facilities (UNSW student survey)
• Provision of scholarships to attract high performing students and equity needs
• Provision of facilities for students to improve study skills.

The first of what will become an annual survey of all UNSW students was carried out in 1997. Critical service areas such as examinations, enrolments, student enquiries and campus security received very favourable ratings (see Endnote 8) on quality. Ratings for other student services were more variable, reflecting different levels of student need and access across faculties. Key facilities such as library, lecture theatres and computer laboratories were also given very favourable ratings. Students were asked to rate the importance as well as the quality of each service to assist the University in identifying priorities for improvement, as in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Quality and importance of services at UNSW, UNSW Student Survey 1997 (Source: Planning Office, UNSW)

C. Research

Key planning goals: produce high quality research across all disciplines and be the University of choice for research training for high performing students. Performance indicators include:

• Research participation and research output indicators (grant participation index, postgraduate supervision rate, publications rate)
• Research funding
• Research degree completions
• Satisfaction of students with research supervision and infrastructure.

UNSW continued its strong performance in research in 1997, attracting the highest proportion of ARC large grants for all universities and improving its share of National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC) funding over the previous year. The research quantum as a percentage of operating grant (the Brennan Index) was 9.7 per cent in 1997, second only to the University of Melbourne amongst the large research universities, and fourth overall.

The 1998 UNSW Student Survey addresses satisfaction with research training infrastructure and supervision. This builds on surveys carried out in 1994 and 1995 by the University’s Office of Postgraduate Studies. Benchmarks have been established for minimum levels of resources required for postgraduate teaching and research in all disciplines.

D. Community Service

Key planning goal: increase effective communication with alumni and friends of UNSW. Performance indicators include:

• Membership of the alumni association has grown significantly for the last two years, and the renewal rate (an indicator of member loyalty) increased by 8.5 per cent in 1998.

• Attendance by alumni at University functions, including reunions. The staging of more relevant functions has seen outcomes such as the attendance of more than 1000 alumni at the most recent Back to UNSW function, the largest number recorded to date.
• Validity of the alumni data base. Data maintenance as a result of the annual appeal has improved the accuracy of the alumni database by at least 27 000 names over the last two years.
• Funds raised by donors and sponsors. The last three years have seen the creation of 40 new permanently endowed scholarships. The UNSW annual appeal has in its second year significantly exceeded its target by raising $279 725 from 940 individual donors.

UNSW has identified key external stakeholder groups and has developed a broad spectrum of events and communication tools to build strong and substantial relationships with each of them. In 1999, the number and scope of events will expand considerably as UNSW celebrates its 50^th anniversary. The goals for the 50^th anniversary program are:

• To raise awareness of UNSW’s earned reputation, by providing a focus on the history and achievements of UNSW.
• To strengthen the sense of UNSW community, by providing the opportunity for a shared experience.
• To create an impetus for future achievements, by providing physical, cultural and intellectual legacies from which future action can be launched.

Outcomes will be measured with a set of indicators that focus on increased community participation in UNSW reunions and other events, increased media awareness, identification of new donors, improvements to the alumni data base, and support for projects such as the University Centre and Great Hall.

E. Management

(a) Human resources: attract and retain high performing staff, while providing equity in access to employment at UNSW, and offer staff development opportunities to improve skills and career prospects of staff. Indicators include:

• Enterprise bargaining outcomes for staff at UNSW are among the best in Australia.
• Strengthening of performance evaluation across all levels of staff.
• Council Indicators on staffing and equity.

(b) Financial resources: identify high performing areas to be promoted and declining areas to be upgraded or discontinued, diversify the funding base, and monitor effects of resource allocation on quality of activities. Indicators include:

• Increased fee income over time.
• Increased donations over time.
• High performance in investments.
• Full funding of recreation and long service leave liabilities.
• Identified savings from restructuring through UNSW 2000 and consolidation of capital asset (sale of St George Campus).

(c) Administrative systems: provide effective support for all UNSW activities through the development, maintenance and ongoing improvement of, and associated training, for administrative systems. Key indicator:

• Completion of NewSouth Solutions project (integrated student, human resources and financial systems using PeopleSoft software).

Contacts

Executive responsibility for quality assurance and improvement

Associate Professor Jane Morrison, Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Development)
Tel: (02) 9385 3511
Fax: (02) 9385 1039
Email: j.morrison@unsw.edu.au

Senior officer responsible for quality assurance and improvement

Mr Kerry Trembath, Senior Planning Officer, Planning Office
Tel: (02) 9385 3832
Fax: (02) 9662 6848
E-mail: k.trembath@unsw.edu.au