Vice-Chancellor’s Forum 7 – 8 September 2009 Bathurst

 Political climate  Skilled workforce  Increased participation

At recent Universities Australia (UA) meeting David Phillips gave a very critical take on ‘the known unknowns’ in a demand-driven system. He noted:  the lack of any official analysis to inform how the targets (40% of year-olds, etc.) might be achieved  the lack of clarity about the starting point  the failure to make links between the participation targets and possible increases achieved as a result of skilled migration. Thus the questions: what increase, what structural change might be needed to achieve the 40% participation target?

 Compacts At the UA meeting DEEWR gave a reassuring view on Compacts:  emphasising the need for consistency and transparency, individual institutional improvement over time rather than comparative assessment of performance (mentioning attainment, participation, engagement, quality)  a change in State-Federal relationships was foreshadowed - universities will play more of a role through compact negotiations with the Federal government.

 Compacts  DIISR vs DEEWR  DEEWR ‘wants universities to tell them what should be done’  DIISR has an agenda (with the task given to bureaucrats being enormous)

 Compacts  National Objectives vs DIISR/DEEWR goals  CSU will develop a goal-oriented strategy directed towards national priorities:  for Compacts  for the Charles Sturt University 2012 – 2016 Strategy

 Compacts  At the UA meeting there was concern/disquiet about the DIISR presentation on research:  need for better modelling for Sustainable Research Excellence (SRE)  problem in introducing ERA before properly thought out.

Template for Mission ‐ based compacts for universities - Draft preamble template - University mission - What the university is at present [general statement] - What the university aspires to be [general statement] - What differentiates the university from others Within its region/state or territory/nationally Does the institution intend to accentuate/diminish that differentiation? If so, how? - Major planned initiatives Academic Research Organisational Infrastructure Any other  Compacts

 Structural Adjustment Fund (SAF)  Reported at the UA meeting:  is designed for one-off ‘injections’ and large rather than small allocations  intended to improve outer-metropolitan and regional provision  has to be a substantial impact on an institution that positions it for the future  has to align with government objectives  SAF funding should align with EIF funding.

 Low SES target and associated performance funding still unclear  Regional loading under review

 EIF bids  National Institute of Paramedic Education (NIPE)  National Water and Carbon Remote Sensing Facility

 AUQA  Prep visit held on 4 September 2009

 Industrial action

 Recent Publications and Research Income

 Recent Publications and Research Income continued…

 Good Universities Guide 2010  Research Intensitivity – 1 star =  Research Income – 2 stars =  Teaching Quality   Graduate Outcomes   Getting a job   Staff Qualifications 

Key Questions:  Is our current culture right for the research outcomes to which we aspire?  What are the right questions to ask to solve the issues that face us?