1. Quality Management for Community Engagement in Higher Education Geoff Scott PVC Quality, UWS

2. Need External audits and reviews have found that the area is often poorly understood, resourced, led and managed Need to test ‘Fitness for purpose’ - where the university’s explicit mission is access & leveraging its resources to address key community issues Often poorly resourced – with little linkage and reinforcement between direction, accountability, funding, rewards, promotion Tends to be ‘the poor cousin’ behind L&T and Research Unclear KPIs UWS as a case study

3. UWS as a Case Study Mission & UWS Act: access for first in family, engagement with Greater Western Sydney communities & key issues of importance to the Region 31000 domestic students from 174 countries with more indigenous students than Vic or SA; 5400 international students from 100 countries Multi-campus & comparatively low funding per EFTSL Pockets of significant poverty in GWS – the new housing debt; LSES as first in family Digital divide Strategy – issues in urban communities with the above profile – international benchmarking

4. Definition of University Engagement at UWS The collaboration between the University and a targeted community (regional, national, global) for mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in the context of partnership and reciprocity The focus is on engaged learning and research

5. Key Elements of the UWS Quality Management Framework Clear, ‘nested’ strategy (University sets parameters; Colleges action these in ways specifically appropriate to their capabilities, role & resources) Learning & Teaching Action Plan includes engaged learning. Research Centres with direct focus on UWS issues. Concentration on ARC Linkage KPIs explicitly linked to strategy PVC (UE) & A/Deans (UE) lead the area & act as the key contact point Governance groups: Regional Council, Business Advisory Committee, Indigenous Advisory Council Online tracking system for engagement: how do you know? Funding – UFM rewards; scholarships; regional partnership funding; ARC HR in synergy: promotion, workload, performance plans Support for quality: Office of Research Services; Office of UE; EDC University wide links & focus: ASL, Coop Education Unit, Units of study which focus on GWS issues.

6. Benchmarking Quality Management Benchmarking with ‘fellow travellers’: Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance The January Round 2007 Table; AUQF 2005 focused on this area; US Coalition of Metro Unis; Barabara Holland Adjunct; Talloires; Canadian Quality Network of Universities; RSA links; Leadership of the Australian Collaborative Education Network.

7. The 2005 UWS Institution-wide Review of Community Engagement A key step in setting up an institution-level QM Framework for University Engagement Clear checkpoints for self-assessment –Profile of submitting group –Key current goals for the area –Key activities: engaged research, learning, service, access –How do you know these are working productively? –Quality of current management, coordination, reward & support –How could we best improve QM for the area? Evidence-based

8. Tracking Quality Online Four levels: idea, resourced, satisfaction, impact Data points UWS Area/group; Partner: type, interests, current projects, contact; Type of engagement activity ; Focus of the activity; Where it takes place; Scope of funding and support; Outcomes achieved (evidence-based);

9. Performance Engaged Learning Number of study units/1100 which explore GWS issues 669 Number of study units/1100 focused on practice oriented learning609 Engaged Research UWS success rate in ARC linkage grants (2006 round one) 56% Sector success rate in ARC linkage grants (2006 round one) 37% Partnerships Number of UWS engagement projects underway 2005 369 Number of partnerships involved with these projects 568 Number of active partners 430

10. Incentives to address quality are key Incentives to enter data onto UWS Online UE database Can’t cite UE work for promotion if not on the data base Funding rewards are based on the data entered Awards based on data entered Incentives to ramp up quality, consistency & focus Funding and rewards Leadership Focus Incentives for leaders of the area A/Deans (Engagement) – performance plans Deans accountabilities and bonuses PVC (UE) – KPIs reviewed

11. Funding & Rewards UWS Regional and Community Grants Scheme provides $200,000 per annum for UWS-GWS partnership projects The UWS Academic Service Learning Grants provide $50,000 per annum The UWS Funding Model includes Performance Rewards for UE. In 2007 more than $1 million is available to reward significant increases in the number of students undertaking Academic Service Learning Vice-Chancellors’ Awards recognise excellence in the area; Performance Review includes a focus on achieving agreed targets in the area

12. Effective Implementation What does 25 years’ research on how to ensure effective implementation of desired changes in Universities tell us? Four recurring themes: Change is learning & learning is change; Organisational & individual capabilities to manage change are intimately linked; There is a profound difference between ‘change’ and ‘progress’; Strategic change and continuous quality improvement are two sides of the same coin.

13. Nine recurring lessons on effective change implementation in Higher Education 1.You can’t address every change idea that comes along. So evidence- based priorities must be set 2.Because change is a learning process, understanding what motivates staff to engage in it is key –Intrinsic motivators: moral purpose/job satisfaction/relevant/feasible –Extrinsic motivators: peer group/promotion/pay/praise/listen, link and lead/just-in-time just for me help when I need it/solutions to my gaps/a forthcoming AUQA audit or accreditation review 3. The university culture (‘the way we do things around here’) is a powerful influence on staff motivation to engage 4. Change in one area almost always triggers a need for change in others - alignment

14. Change Management Lessons Cont’d 5. Successful change is always a team effort 6. Focus on both the present & the future 7. Change unfolds in a cyclical fashion 8. Look both inside & outside for change solutions 9. Change does not happen - it must be led

15. What makes for an effective HE Leader (of change)? UWS-ACER Carrick Project 2006-7 – 1000 leaders in 20 universities: from DVC to Head of Program Preliminary results align with earlier research on effective school leaders & successful performers in 9 professions –One’s capability is most tested when things go wrong –Emotional Intelligence is central (personal & interpersonal) –A distinctive set of cognitive capabilities –Generic and role-specific knowledge & skills are necessary but not sufficient for effective performance –Everyone is a leader of change in their own area of expertise –How successful leaders develop and what helps this process is poorly understood

16. Follow up Questions