University of Auckland Council Meeting 2024-10-09
Wed Oct 09 2024 13:00:00 GMT+1300 (New Zealand Daylight Time)
Transcript
Note: transcription and dioarization are automated and may contain errors.
00:00 Speaker 1: So I won't repeat that. We have apologies
00:03 Speaker 1: from
00:05 Speaker 1: Ms. Anot Nene and Mr. McDonald. And we should all acknowledge we've just got the recording thing up. It's being recorded.
00:17 Speaker 1: Okay,
00:18 Speaker 1: so apologies have been received from Ms. Anot Nene and Mr. McDonald. And we thank Mr. Mason who has joined us despite being overseas. So thank you for that.
00:29 Speaker 1: So I'm going to move that the apologies be noted and I will ask John to second that. That's okay, John.
00:36 Speaker 1: Thank
00:36 Speaker 1: you. Now I withdraw the attention of members to the conflicts of interest policy and the need to disclose any interest in any item on the agenda of the meeting and is there anybody who wishes to make a disclosure? You know, this would include anyone who had children or family,
00:59 Speaker 1: who were at the university and paying fees or who was taking a class themselves. I think anybody, that should be disclosed. Julia.
01:10 Yes,
01:11 Speaker 2: I have a daughter at the university who's paying fees. Okay, so we'll note that. Thank you very much.
01:17 Speaker 1: As a student representative, I am a student, so I also pay fees. Yes, right. Hello. Candice, you're here twice.
01:30 Speaker 1: Somehow I've got you twice. I don't know. It's all good. And I'm muted, Candice. One's muted, one's not.
01:39 Speaker 1: You
01:39 Speaker 1: are muted now. We can't hear you.
01:42 Speaker 1: But
01:43 Speaker 1: I think you're declaring a conflict of interest
01:45 Speaker 1: as
01:46 Speaker 1: a student. All right. Great. Thank you, Candice.
01:51 Speaker 1: All
01:52 Speaker 1: right. Thank you, everybody, for that. All right. Now we're going to move.
01:59 Speaker 1: be endorsed and I will ask I will why don't I sorry Frank you have your hand up
02:08 I
02:09 Speaker 3: was just gonna say I've got three children at the university paying fees
02:12 oh
02:12 Speaker 1: thank you Frank but I though I pretty well it's that's good to hear it's good to hear but it's you know it counts remember I don't need you that's there but that is really good to hear
02:23 Speaker 1: very
02:25 Speaker 1: good please
02:25 Speaker 1: yeah
02:26 Speaker 1: okay I will ask Gemma to
02:29 Speaker 1: I'm going to move those. Now I'm going to move to the minutes of the council from the
02:43 Speaker 1: 26th
02:46 Speaker 1: of August. Are there any questions or comments on those minutes?
02:56 Speaker 1: No
02:57 Speaker 1: questions or comments? Okay.
02:59 Speaker 1: Then I'm going to move that those minutes be taken as read and confirmed. And I'm going to ask Dawn to... Oh no, it's not, it's just me. Thank you, Dawn. Okay. There's no matters arising that are not dealt with elsewhere. Okay. And now we'll move to the Vice-Chancellor's report and I'll invite Dawn to speak to that report.
03:29 Speaker 1: Thank you
03:29 Speaker 4: Chancellor. I'll do my usual thing of making sure that everybody's had a chance to read the report
03:35 Speaker 4: but
03:36 Speaker 4: noting that as always there are things to supplement during the time from which it was submitted. I want to start today just by acknowledging
03:45 Speaker 4: the
03:46 Speaker 4: achievements of our Blues Award winners and to thank the Chancellor for attending that award ceremony and to making those awards. It was a really substantial and significant
03:59 Speaker 4: for lots of reasons, but I just wanted to start with that piece of good news and congratulations.
04:07 Speaker 4: I also wanted to note that today the embargo on the World University Rankings at the time's higher education
04:14 Speaker 4: were
04:15 Speaker 4: released.
04:17 Speaker 4: And I'm really pleased to say that the university has held its ground.
04:21 Speaker 4: So in an increasingly competitive landscape where there's more than 300 additional
04:28 Speaker 4: universities being ranked, the university has managed to sustain 152 in that rankings from 150
04:36 Speaker 4: last year. And that's an increase actually in our percentile uplift in terms of those rankings,
04:43 Speaker 4: given the extra number of universities that have been ranked.
04:46 Speaker 4: I
04:47 Speaker 4: do want to say what's disappointing
04:50 Speaker 4: is that this is not something that is generally reflected in the media. And you'll see that today, a number of articles which talk about the demise of the rankings in universities, New Zealand universities. And it's fair to say
05:05 Speaker 4: that
05:06 Speaker 4: of the other seven universities, at least two of them have dropped again. And many of them are struggling to stay in the top 500. And that's been the case for a while.
05:16 Speaker 4: I
05:16 Speaker 4: actually think we need to acknowledge that
05:19 Speaker 4: what we're achieving, given that the group of eight, seven of the group of eight have dropped, 50% of the UK Russell Group have dropped,
05:28 Speaker 4: for
05:28 Speaker 4: us to maintain our position it's outstanding
05:31 Speaker 4: and
05:32 Speaker 4: given that we continue to remain number five
05:36 Speaker 4: in
05:37 Speaker 4: the QS sustainability rankings in the world, number 13
05:41 Speaker 4: in
05:42 Speaker 4: the Times Higher Education Impact rankings in the world and number 65 in the QS.
05:49 Speaker 4: and continue to improve in other rankings such as the US World News.
05:53 Speaker 4: I
05:54 Speaker 4: actually think that this is a really important message to get out to our community
05:58 Speaker 4: because
05:59 Speaker 4: this is the work of our staff and our community and our students achieving this. Really, it's an important piece of communication that we need to develop
06:09 Speaker 4: and
06:10 Speaker 4: to think about better. And I'm really looking forward to presenting the ranking strategy
06:14 Speaker 4: to
06:15 Speaker 4: the council in December, as we always do in December.
06:20 Speaker 4: and
06:21 Speaker 4: I
06:21 Speaker 4: think you'll see not only where we're still maintaining and improving year on year
06:27 Speaker 4: our
06:27 Speaker 4: rankings but our strategy to continue that trajectory we know it's important
06:32 Speaker 4: for
06:32 Speaker 4: many many reasons.
06:35 Speaker 4: I
06:35 Speaker 4: think the other thing I would point to is having just spent quite a bit of time traveling overseas with our ARD team
06:44 Speaker 4: and
06:45 Speaker 4: working through alumni events and meeting with some of our high
06:49 Speaker 4: and also
06:50 Speaker 4: having
06:51 Speaker 4: the opportunity to talk to people following the UN Global Assembly in New York
06:56 Speaker 4: and
06:58 Speaker 4: a number of people in the UK meeting with our High Commissioner and others
07:03 Speaker 4: that
07:05 Speaker 4: clearly we are still viewed as a top performing university and really well regarded, had great conversations with our high profile donors.
07:15 Speaker 4: But global sentiment at the moment
07:17 Speaker 4: is
07:18 Speaker 4: actually really challenging for universities.
07:22 Speaker 4: And I picked this up with my peers in the Russell Group
07:25 Speaker 4: and
07:25 Speaker 4: across the group of eight and across the globe at the Times Higher meeting earlier this week,
07:31 Speaker 4: where the future of universities and continued relevance and purpose was the topic of discussion and continues to be.
07:40 Speaker 4: And so we're not alone in being challenged nationally around the global sentiment of the sector.
07:47 Speaker 4: In
07:48 Speaker 4: that regard, a bit of an update on the reviews. So we had the opportunity to talk to the Prime Minister recently on this, particularly on the Science System Advisory Group review.
08:00 Speaker 4: Now,
08:00 Speaker 4: you'll have noticed that that was due to be reported into
08:03 Speaker 4: Parliament.
08:05 Speaker 4: Actually, in September, it hasn't been reported.
08:08 Speaker 4: There
08:09 Speaker 4: are, I think, some questions remaining around
08:12 Speaker 4: not
08:13 Speaker 4: simply the outcomes and recommendations of the report, but the resourcing of those and the significant change that will be required
08:21 Speaker 4: around
08:22 Speaker 4: the funding
08:22 Speaker 4: of
08:24 Speaker 4: the science system should some of those recommendations be adopted.
08:28 Speaker 4: It
08:29 Speaker 4: looks like, and having spoken to Sir Peter Gluckman recently, it looks like the
08:33 Speaker 4: review
08:34 Speaker 4: of higher education funding
08:36 Speaker 4: and
08:37 Speaker 4: the scope of that
08:38 Speaker 4: That expanded, as you know, to cover a range of issues, including the size, shape and overall composition of the whole sector, number of universities, governance, all of those things. That has slowed down. It was due to be reported in February, but that's looking like it's going to be, you know, unattainable at this stage because we've now got a second round of meetings with the advisory group,
09:07 Speaker 4: They've already had one round of meetings with each of the universities
09:12 Speaker 4: and drafted a report but now want to talk further on one or two issues and that includes the
09:18 Speaker 4: funding models and the funding mechanisms. Those meetings won't take place before November,
09:23 Speaker 4: December so it's highly unlikely that we'll see anything going through Parliament before
09:30 Speaker 4: middle of next year and I say that because of course we have extra funding that's been agreed until
09:37 Speaker 4: end of 2025 was really a temporary stopgap until the reviews were complete.
09:44 Speaker 4: But we now know that it's going to be at least 26, 27 before we have any indications of outcomes of those reviews and implications for funding into those budgets in the future.
09:57 Speaker 4: And so we remain in that uncertain position.
10:01 Speaker 4: We know that where we are
10:02 Speaker 4: essentially
10:03 Speaker 4: until the end of 2025 from government funding point of view,
10:37 Speaker 4: before Senate in the August meeting. I think I'll leave it there. Chancellor, I'm happy to take any questions or comments on the overall report.
10:51 Thank
10:51 Speaker 1: you very much. Are there any questions for the Vice-Chancellor on the report?
11:07 Speaker 1: The Blues Awards was a fabulous ceremony, absolutely magnificent. The people who organized it are to be really congratulated. It was also held in B201. As Adrian said, that's a great name we have for that building, B201, the new atrium, and it was an absolutely fabulous venue. And also as part of the Blues Awards, at the end of the Blues Awards,
11:37 Speaker 1: We acknowledged Alan Shaker, who has been the AUSA president for the last two years. And
11:43 Speaker 1: there
11:44 Speaker 1: was a haka done for him and it was a very special acknowledgement. So it was a great event and I was delighted to be there. And I got my picture with Teresa Setafano, you know, who's the rugby sevens player. So, Julia, you had a question
12:02 Speaker 1: and
12:03 Speaker 1: you're
12:03 Speaker 2: on mute. And then Cathy.
12:06 Speaker 2: Just a really minor question for the Vice Chancellor about the report. I noticed we're developing a new engagement survey tool which enables us to take multiple Pulse surveys. And I just wanted to ask a question whether, so I'm assuming that's
12:21 Speaker 2: surveying
12:23 Speaker 2: staff, and whether we're considering building feedback loops back to staff in those engagement processes.
12:32 Thanks,
12:33 Speaker 4: Julia. Just on the engagement surveys and the Pulse survey,
12:36 Speaker 4: We already do have engagement feedback loops. And you'll be aware from some of the previous work that was done, at least across the faculties, that those feedback loops not only include providing opportunities for going, working our way through the results and the outcomes, both the narrative and the data with staff, but also taking feedback and then actually looking at recommendations and action plans going forward.
13:06 Speaker 4: Now
13:06 Speaker 4: that's not just about across the academic staff that's across all staff
13:10 Speaker 4: and
13:11 Speaker 4: that will continue and in fact we've had feedback on the feedback loops that we also need to take into account Julia.
13:23 Okay
13:24 Speaker 1: Kathy.
13:27 Speaker 1: I
13:28 Speaker 1: just thought we should
13:29 probably
13:30 Speaker 3: record our thanks to Dawn and the whole of the academic and support team on achieving those
13:36 Speaker 3: Great results in the rankings. I thought it was just appropriate to acknowledge.
13:40 Speaker 1: Absolutely. You know, that's very good. Thank you. Thank you, Cathy. I agree with that.
13:45 Speaker 1: Yeah. And if you are happy to propose that and you'll second that, that's great. Thank you.
13:53 Speaker 1: Absolutely. Because it is an enormous achievement.
13:58 Speaker 1: And we need to get the word out.
14:05 Speaker 1: All
14:06 Speaker 1: right, if there are no further questions, we'll move to the reports of council committees.
14:12 Speaker 1: And
14:12 Speaker 1: the next item on the agenda is the Finance Committee.
14:18 Speaker 1: Now,
14:19 Speaker 1: that's the Finance Committee
14:21 Speaker 1: minutes
14:22 Speaker 1: from Part A. Are there any questions on that, on those minutes? Any questions, comments on those minutes?
14:32 Speaker 1: All
14:32 Speaker 1: right.
14:35 Speaker 1: those minutes, I'll move that they be received and ask Carla to... Actually, I apologise. I haven't moved that the Vice Chancellor's report be noted and I'll have Kathy second that. Okay, right. Okay, then I'm moving to the Finance Committee minutes. There's been no comments, so I'm going to move that those be received and ask Carla to second.
14:57 Speaker 1: Absolutely. And,
15:00 Speaker 1: okay, all right. Now we have the main...
15:05 Speaker 1: The item there relates to the domestic student fees and for 2025 and the international student fees for 2026.
15:14 Speaker 1: There
15:15 Speaker 1: is a paper there. I will, Dawn, if you would like to, I don't know if you'd like to introduce this, otherwise we'll turn it over to Tim.
15:23 Speaker 4: Happy to go to Tim in the interests of time, Chancellor. Thank you.
15:29 Speaker 5: Tuna koutou. So thank you. Good afternoon.
15:35 Speaker 5: I'll take the paper as read but I'll provide a summary of the different elements and then invite questions at the end if that suits the council. Obviously we start off by considering the overall backdrop and relevant context in which we're setting or proposing to set these fees and the considerations we've made, recognising that the economy remains tight in New Zealand, reflecting the
16:05 Speaker 5: the measures to bring inflation under control, noting today that the Reserve Bank has reduced the OCR by 50 basis points. Obviously, the financial sustainability considerations for ourselves as well as our peers are of great importance, noting also the uncertainty as we await the outcome from the two reviews that are currently underway for the sector.
16:35 Speaker 5: Considerations for the alignment to our strategy, looking at the market and our sector as a whole, government policy, particularly a stance around public spending, and also considering the effects to students and their perspectives given the continuing cost of living pressures that we're all seeing. Also noting that in terms of the regulated fees for
17:08 Speaker 5: The paper is addressing the component of domestic fee that the students are responsible for paying. This is governed by the AMFM or the annual maximum fee movement that's set by government. Since we reviewed this with the Finance Committee a few weeks ago, this has been confirmed now as 6% the next year.
17:34 Speaker 5: And that goes alongside the tuition subsidy, the DQ7, or what used to be called the SAC, which has been confirmed at 2.5% next year.
17:48 Speaker 5: When we look at those two components of fees, the regulated elements, we note that those have not maintained parity with inflation.
18:00 Speaker 5: And in particular, as we came out of that low inflation period leading up to COVID, there was quite a divergence that built from 2020 onwards. And that's outlined in the graph in the paper with basically an 11% gap now between inflation and the accumulated increases on these domestic regulated components.
18:36 Yeah,
18:37 Speaker 1: I mean, do you want to take
18:38 Speaker 1: questions
18:41 Speaker 1: as we deal with each part?
18:47 Speaker 5: Yeah, we can do that. It may be easier for the council. I'll just finish with a little bit more in terms of domestic fees. Obviously, we've been doing a lot of work to maintain
19:00 Speaker 5: Maintain Quality for Students, which includes some elements of investment and support, hardship support as well as scholarships, focusing very much on student experience and noting also that during the COVID period we also took a softened approach if you like to certain aspects of that during that period. The paper also compares
19:31 Speaker 5: the domestic fees against the New Zealand sector. It's a difficult one to do on an apples for apples basis, but generally we are fairly well aligned as a sector. And there's a specific example that the paper pulls out in terms of science fees, where you can see that six of the universities are clustered at a fairly similar level with two
20:03 Speaker 5: So the paper is recommending that we implement the full 6% maximum increase that has been approved as the AMFM for this year. And also applying the same increase to the regulated micro-recredential courses. So I'll pause there and invite any questions. Thank you.
20:34 Are
20:35 Speaker 1: there any questions? I mean, Hala?
20:41 Speaker 6: I guess not much of a question, but more of sort of what we spoke about in Finance Committee since the minutes aren't here. But I think it was really helpful that in Finance Committee we did discuss a lot more about sort of the university's financial environment as well as just like what AMFM is and things like that so that we can understand where the 6% is coming from.
21:00 Speaker 6: I think it's important to look at in past years when Massey didn't sort of increase it to the maximum of what AMFM was. They sort of struggled more financially. And so I think
21:09 Speaker 6: at
21:10 Speaker 6: face value, it doesn't look great that we're increasing it to 6% compared to what we have been increasing in past. But I think it's important to look at it sort of in the wider spectrum to understand why it's been increased the way that it has. And I think that's just important to give a little bit more context as to why it happened and sort of why I had shown my support in Finance Committee.
21:31 Thank
21:32 Speaker 1: you. No, it's a very good point because obviously it is significantly more than it has been increased in the past, but it is very, as you say, reflective of the
21:40 Speaker 1: financial
21:41 Speaker 1: conditions that we find ourselves facing.
21:46 Yeah,
21:46 Speaker 6: absolutely. And I think it's unfortunate with the cost of living crisis and everything that it has come down to this, but I think the messaging to students is really important about why we have increased it to this. And I think that's the only thing that I would definitely ask.
21:59 Speaker 6: that we would be very transparent in our decision-making.
22:07 Absolutely.
22:20 Are
22:21 Speaker 1: there any other questions on this part of the paper?
22:56 Speaker 5: And I think actually probably
22:57 Speaker 1: really important to say not only not where we'd like them to be, but not where they are required to be by the TEC.
23:07 In
23:08 Speaker 5: terms of maintaining the low risk rating, that's right. Yeah.
23:13 Speaker 1: Maintaining our financial viability. And now moving
23:17 Speaker 5: on.
23:18 Speaker 5: Yeah,
23:19 Speaker 5: I think moving on now to the international markets. The proposal here.
23:26 Speaker 5: Now this relates to the year after next. We always do this a year in advance. So the already agreed increase for 2025 is 4%. We are proposing a 5% increase to international fees for 2026 and a 4% study abroad increase.
23:49 Speaker 5: In
23:49 Speaker 5: terms of maintaining real value, this has our
23:57 Speaker 5: A cumulative increase to the international fees over the same period that we refer to for domestic since the beginning of COVID has actually maintained parity with CPI.
24:11 Speaker 5: We've
24:11 Speaker 5: also looked across the overall market both in terms of New Zealand and our positioning there and also importantly with the group of eight in Australia and we're looking to maintain positioning which is just higher
24:26 Speaker 5: than the New Zealand sector and just below the Group of Eight.
24:33 Speaker 5: Also
24:34 Speaker 5: recognising that we have strategic objectives to balance diversification as well as we look to build our international cohort going forward, expanding on that, building on the reliance that we've had up until now, mainly on China.
24:57 Speaker 5: Maintain a watch also on what's going on with the Australian situation and the impacts there that could be quite drastic depending what happens with the elections next year. But obviously there's a capacity issue, we're keeping a watch and brief on that and there could well be some flow and opportunity perhaps in terms of how New Zealand is perceived against that situation but also the similar trends that have been
25:26 Speaker 5: emerging in UK Canada as well. So those are generally the considerations and we feel that a 5% increase is an appropriate level to apply for 2026. So again, I'll pause for questions.
25:51 Speaker 1: Yes,
25:54 Speaker 6: sorry for another question. I guess when I'm looking at the readings, the main thing that it looks like we've looked at when considering that the increase is the world rankings and where we rank compared to other universities and how much they,
26:08 Speaker 6: what
26:09 Speaker 6: their fees are. Do we sort of, we are just confirming that we do have like evidence that international students, that is what they value the most when they're choosing different universities.
26:20 Speaker 6: because it's good to show that we are currently above the trend line. That means that our fees are lower than what we are ranking. But yeah, I just wanted to confirm that that is the main reason why international students would choose University
26:29 Speaker 5: of Auckland. That's certainly a factor. The table we were comparing rankings, the table itself was looking at the New Zealand universities and the group of ASE Australian just comparing their particular rankings against the average fees, not necessarily suggesting there's a correlation.
26:48 Speaker 5: But in terms of the way students do look at this university and potential enrolments, you know, ranking is an important factor in that.
26:59 Can
26:59 Speaker 4: I ask Frank to comment as well? Because what we know, Harla, is that international students will probably, first of all,
27:06 Speaker 4: with
27:07 Speaker 4: their parents often think about which country, where they want to be.
27:10 Speaker 4: There's lots of parameters around where
27:14 Speaker 4: and
27:15 Speaker 4: those decisions. And then once they get to that point, they're looking for the best university
27:20 Speaker 4: in
27:21 Speaker 4: that place geographically. And so if they're starting to think about Oceana, Australasia, they'll certainly look for the best universities in that region after they've decided that's where they want to be for a variety of reasons. Proximity to family, safety, a whole range of things.
27:39 Speaker 4: experience. Frank, I don't know if you wanted to comment, but it is a very good question around the international student fee particularly.
27:48 I
27:49 Speaker 5: agree, absolutely Dawn. I think we've got plenty of data to show that's exactly the way
27:53 Speaker 5: that
27:54 Speaker 5: students go about choosing where to go, international students.
27:59 Perfect,
28:00 Speaker 1: thank you.
28:09 Speaker 1: The next point is around the compulsory student services.
28:14 Speaker 1: Well
28:14 Speaker 1: the micro-credentials, compulsory student services is the main point isn't it?
28:19 Speaker 5: With the international the English Language Academy is just part of that as well and you'll note that there's a range of increases on the different programs from between 2% up to 7%.
28:33 Speaker 5: So
28:35 Speaker 5: I'll move on to the compulsory student services fee.
28:41 Speaker 5: So
28:42 Speaker 5: again, this requires us to go through a consultation process with the students, which has happened. There is a series of discussions and feedback meetings with the students' representatives during this process. And you'll note that there's been some feedback in terms of
29:09 Speaker 5: how they feel. The allocation of funding across the particular categories of spend are balanced and where they like to see less or more. We've consulted around a maximum increase of 4%.
29:30 Speaker 5: We've
29:33 Speaker 5: completed that process. And also I'll just reference the appendix
29:39 Speaker 5: where we look at the movements in cost against inflation, where we're showing an overall movement of 3.7%, noting that people costs would be around 4.4% as a key component of that cost movement that we're looking at next year.
30:04 Speaker 5: So the 4% that we're proposing to increase is reflected of those cost drivers, but also the fact that it's proposed that the AUSA will take on some support for the growing demand for advocacy services that would be delivered as part of this suite of services covered by the fee.
30:31 Speaker 5: And we've included in that allowance for the funding for them to be able to do that, which would otherwise be undertaken by the university.
30:41 Speaker 5: So
30:42 Speaker 5: again, I'll pause there for questions.
30:52 Speaker 1: Yeah, so they also Jim, a question.
30:56 Speaker 7: Thank you, Tim. I just wanted to really reassure what I said by
31:01 Speaker 7: I appreciate that there has been consultation on the total amount that the fee would be increasing. I think that's a really great change that has occurred.
31:11 Speaker 7: I
31:11 Speaker 7: also wanted to clarify in
31:12 Speaker 7: my
31:13 Speaker 7: day-to-day professional staff life, it's come to light, at least to me, that AUSA, their additional funds were consulted on with students. And I just wanted to clarify because the paper suggests that still needed to happen. That was a discussion we had. So if that's already happened, that's great.
31:31 Speaker 7: But I just wanted to understand the status of that.
31:35 Speaker 5: My understanding is that has happened. Okay. I can see other nods there. Yes, that has indeed happened.
31:42 Speaker 7: Excellent. That's even better news. And then I guess my final question, this might be looking to the future a little bit, is that we do see trends over time in the levy and
31:52 Speaker 7: in
31:53 Speaker 7: terms of conflicts. I used to run the levy survey and we
31:56 Speaker 7: see
31:57 Speaker 7: things around wanting an increased
31:59 Speaker 7: contribution
32:01 Speaker 7: to
32:01 Speaker 7: health,
32:03 Speaker 7: safety and wellbeing and things of that nature. What is our mechanism that we can slowly
32:09 Speaker 7: change
32:10 Speaker 7: our funding priorities or investment over time, acknowledging that that's not
32:14 Speaker 7: a
32:15 Speaker 7: fast change that can happen?
32:18 Yeah,
32:19 Speaker 5: no, I think that's an important part of the consulting, consultative process and the way that Campus Life work with the student representatives. I think flagging up the
32:31 Speaker 5: the changes in views in terms of the weightings across this range of services. Obviously, it does take time to make adjustments to those. So I think that's the important part also, that we can then factor in those changing needs, if you like, or demands in terms of the planning that Campus Life do put together.
32:59 Speaker 5: Thank
33:00 Speaker 1: you, Tim. That's good.
33:03 Speaker 1: Okay.
33:04 Speaker 1: So is there any more general questions about the fee increase? Obviously, this is a large increase for the students, but I think we all understand the rationale for it and the need for it. And also, I think that there, you know, I think it's really important, I think, and I think that AUSA and I think, you know, the students
33:29 Speaker 1: services and that sort of thing
33:30 Speaker 1: are
33:32 Speaker 1: aware of all this, that there is quite a lot of assistance available to students, like hardship grants and that sort of thing that, and, you know, we should just make sure, I mean, obviously we know that, I know it's something that the,
33:46 Speaker 1: that
33:47 Speaker 1: university makes sure that students are aware of. So, you know, as a council, we can be
33:52 Speaker 1: comfortable
33:54 Speaker 1: that there are some, there are some ways to assist students, you know,
33:59 Speaker 1: in hardship.
34:03 Speaker 6: Hala.
34:04 Speaker 6: Just on that point, I was just wanting to sort of clarify that with these increased
34:10 Speaker 6: fees, is there an increase in maybe the hardship funds or is the quantity of funds that we are able to give out to students increase or whether are they increased or are they the same?
34:22 Speaker 5: We do provide for funding for hardship and so does the there's other funds available to the TC and the Student Association. So we monitor that they're not always fully drawn and I'd also highlight the you know the scholarships and the the increasing value that we do allow for to support
34:52 Speaker 5: scholarships and various types of scholarship that students can apply for.
35:01 Carla,
35:02 Speaker 4: I think the concern I have is that often our hardships funds are underspent.
35:08 Speaker 4: So that, I mean, we can probably work more efficiently on
35:12 Speaker 4: making
35:13 Speaker 4: that information widely available, but we do work a lot through the various student communities to make sure that's known.
35:22 Speaker 4: But yeah, there are funds there available.
35:26 Speaker 4: Yeah, that's great. Just to provide a little bit more context. So thank you.
35:31 Speaker 1: Great. Thank you.
35:33 Speaker 1: All
35:33 Speaker 1: right. So we have a number of resolutions here. I'm going to take them all as one. Since this is an important step, I'm going to read out all of the resolutions, but I'm going to just put them all as one.
35:48 Speaker 1: and I'm going to move them. Okay, so I'm going to move that one. Obviously, the report be received and noted in the one, council approved the attached domestic fees schedule for 2025. Two, approved the attached international fees schedule for 2026, including the English Language Academy fee schedule. Three, authorize the vice chancellor to assign any new programs, including government funded micro credentials or programs becoming newly available
36:18 Speaker 1: to an appropriate band to enable offers to be made during the recruitment cycle and report these decisions back to council. Four, approve the compulsory student services fee at $9.24 per point, GST inclusive, a 4% increase in the associated changes to the student fee schedule A. And five, approve the attached other fees scheduled for 2025.
36:48 Speaker 1: resolutions and I'm going to ask Candice to second those for me. Thank you. And I'm going to ask everybody to show by a, you know, raise your hands to show that you are voting in favour of this resolution.
37:11 Speaker 1: Have
37:12 Speaker 1: I got everybody? Yes, I believe I have everybody. Thank you very much, everybody. Okay.
37:18 Speaker 1: Now I'm going to move on to the Audit and Risk Committee to the minutes of Part A there
37:24 Speaker 1: and
37:25 Speaker 1: ask if anybody has any questions or comments around the Audit and Risk Minutes.
37:36 Speaker 1: Okay,
37:37 Speaker 1: all right. If that's no comments, I'm going to move that the Audit and Risk Part A minutes be received and ask Jonathan to second that.
38:18 Speaker 2: Senate matters that doesn't comfortably fit in with the curriculum framework transformation. Is that something that I can raise here? Yes, but I would actually rather,
38:30 Speaker 1: I mean, I do appreciate that, and I see it is in 6.2, but I'll move them around when I get to them, but I prefer just to deal with the whole of Senate
38:39 Speaker 1: when
38:40 Speaker 1: we get to that. Okay, so then we have 8.1, we have the seal has been attached there,
38:47 Speaker 1: And if there are any questions around anything that the seal has been attached to.
38:54 Speaker 1: No?
38:55 Speaker 1: Okay. Well, I will move that the attaching of the seal to the listed documents be noted and ask Gemma to second that. Thank you. And then now I'm going to leave 8.2 still and I'm going to move to the elections. I'm essentially moving the Senate matters to the end.
39:17 Speaker 1: of the meeting.
39:20 Speaker 1: So I'm now moving to the elections.
39:22 Speaker 1: And I'm going to turn the chair over to Kathy Quinn.
39:27 Speaker 1: Because it's around the appointment of the alumni representative on council.
39:31 Speaker 1: And I'm going to mute my screen.
39:37 Speaker 1: I'm going to mute and I'm going to go and check on my crock pot.
39:41 Speaker 3: Okay, and I'll send you a text.
39:43 Speaker 3: So we're now dealing with
39:45 Speaker 3: two
39:47 Speaker 3: things. One, to reappoint Cecilia Tarrant for a four-year term
39:51 Speaker 3: commencing
39:52 Speaker 3: on 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2020 to fill the position
39:57 Speaker 3: in
39:58 Speaker 3: relation to an alumni member of the university. And the second is to,
40:05 Speaker 3: in
40:07 Speaker 3: relation to the appointment of
40:09 Speaker 3: Cecilia
40:10 Speaker 3: as the Chancellor for further
40:13 Speaker 3: One Year Term, I believe it is.
40:17 Speaker 3: Is
40:18 Speaker 3: there any questions or comments
40:20 Speaker 2: on that?
40:20 Speaker 2: Yes,
40:21 Speaker 2: Julia.
40:22 Speaker 2: I
40:23 Speaker 2: just have a question. I just went and looked at the Council Appointment Statute and it said the Council is to resolve to appoint one person being alumni of the University of Auckland
40:32 Speaker 2: following
40:32 Speaker 2: a call for expressions of interest from alumni. So I just wanted to check because I couldn't see in the papers that we've followed that process.
40:40 I
40:41 Speaker 3: can't comment on whether or not there's been any
40:44 Speaker 3: I'm sorry Julia. I'm not aware of any.
40:48 Speaker 3: Do
40:48 Speaker 3: you know Dawn?
40:49 Speaker 4: Catherine can comment on this one. Yeah so that's in the first instance so when
40:56 Speaker 4: we
40:58 Speaker 4: would have appointed
40:59 Speaker 8: Cecilia in the first instance that would have been the case and I think we're able to extend Wendy aren't we in terms of the rules. I don't have them in front of me but I'm happy to
41:13 Speaker 8: I can confirm that for you, Julia, but that's my understanding. So if Cecilia's term was ending, then she wasn't able to be extended, then we would have to go out for another expression of interest. But at the moment, she is able to be extended for another term within the rules of
41:35 Speaker 8: Schedule
41:36 Speaker 8: 11 of the ETA. So normally,
41:40 Speaker 8: you're
41:41 Speaker 8: allowed
41:43 Speaker 8: So
41:44 Speaker 8: 12 years, I think, three terms, but because the Education and Training Act came in partway through Cecilia's term, she actually gets a little bit longer, which is also provided for in the ETA.
41:57 Speaker 8: So
41:58 Speaker 8: we're not looking for a new member, we're looking for an extension of her term.
42:07 Speaker 2: Gosh, I did read the council appointment statute and I read it as being that she could be re-elected.
42:13 Speaker 2: or reappointed.
42:16 Speaker 2: So
42:17 Speaker 2: it just says the council is to resolve to appoint one person being an alumnus of the University of Auckland following a call for expressions of interest from alumnus and then it goes on to say that you can have three periods of no more than, of four years, sorry.
42:33 Speaker 2: Well
42:34 Speaker 2: I don't know we're going to resolve
42:35 Speaker 8: it
42:36 Speaker 8: here
42:36 Speaker 8: are we? But she's able to have a little bit longer than that Julia because of the change in the
42:44 Speaker 8: which specifically provides for her if she was part way through a term that she can have another three terms so she's still within that clause sorry anyway I can draw the threads for you after the meeting.
43:00 Speaker 3: So fair enough to raise it Julia it does sound like we're able to vote on this matter now on the basis that she's been extended compared to if we're looking for a brand new alumnus but
43:13 Speaker 3: I'm
43:13 Speaker 3: happy for you to take that offline with Adrian afterwards and if we have an issue we can
43:18 Speaker 3: discuss
43:19 Speaker 3: it.
43:20 Speaker 3: So
43:21 Speaker 3: I was going to put that resolution, can I have a second?
43:30 Speaker 3: Oh
43:30 Speaker 3: thank you Candice, thank you Jonathan and can I have a show of hands for a vote of people in favour?
43:43 Speaker 3: It's very clear to me. Thank you. Can I also, as soon as we're doing it at the same time, deal with the appointment of Celia as Chancellor for another year? It's just a yearly appointment.
43:56 Speaker 8: Again... I think I need to call
43:58 for
44:00 Speaker 3: nominations. Oh, okay. Sorry.
44:04 Speaker 8: I'll call for nominations and can I assume that you will nominate? Yes, I will nominate Cecilia. Is there a seconder?
44:13 Speaker 8: Harla?
44:15 Speaker 8: Thank you. So there's only, are there any other nominations?
44:22 Speaker 9: No.
44:23 Speaker 8: So as there's only one nomination, then I declare Cecilia to be elected as Chancellor. Excellent.
44:30 Speaker 3: I'll text her to tell her to come back.
44:33 Speaker 3: Wait
44:34 Speaker 3: one second.
45:22 Speaker 3: I have texted Cecilia so hopefully she's on her way back. I'll hear you, Cecilia. Congratulations, you've been elected on both
45:30 Speaker 1: matters. Thank you very much.
45:32 Speaker 3: I will depart while you deal with my position and you can text me.
45:35 Speaker 1: Okay, great. Thank you. So we're now dealing with the election of the pro-chancellor.
45:43 Speaker 1: for 2025. The person currently holding this position is Kathy Quinn. And once again, this is an election for the pro-chancellor, the deputy chancellor for a year. So I'm going to move. Kathy is still willing to be in this position. And so I'm going to move that.
46:13 Speaker 1: that Cathy,
46:14 Speaker 1: I'm
46:15 Speaker 1: going to move her nomination for that position. And I'll seek a seconder for that nomination, please. Thank you very much, John. Okay, so John is seconding that. Thank you. Are there any other nominations for the position?
46:38 Speaker 1: Okay,
46:39 Speaker 1: with no other nominations for the position, I will declare
46:43 Speaker 1: Kathy elected and invite her to come back.
46:57 Speaker 1: All
46:58 Speaker 1: right.
47:00 Speaker 1: Okay, good.
47:02 Speaker 1: So then with that, I'm now going to go back to
47:08 Speaker 1: the
47:10 Speaker 1: report of Senate.
47:13 Speaker 1: in
47:13 Speaker 1: the Senate matters. Now, obviously, there is the curriculum framework. Congratulations, Cathy. You have been reelected as the pro-Chancellor. Great. There is the... I just want to interrupt and say thank you very much
47:29 Speaker 4: to both yourself and Cathy for being willing to stand again. Thank you.
47:36 Wouldn't
47:36 Speaker 1: miss it, Dawn. And so, anyway, thank you.
47:42 Speaker 1: So we've obviously got,
47:45 Speaker 1: we have the curriculum framework transformation paper in 8.2.
47:49 Speaker 1: We also have the report of Senate,
47:52 Speaker 1: the minutes from Senate of the 27th of August that deal with that same matter.
47:57 Speaker 1: And then there is the report of Senate from the 16th of September.
48:02 Speaker 1: Now, Julia, you had mentioned,
48:04 Speaker 1: and there obviously are other matters on the 16th of September minutes.
48:10 Speaker 1: So why don't we, if you think it would make it easier, why don't we deal with
48:14 Speaker 1: those
48:15 Speaker 1: matters in respect of the 16th of September now? And I don't know whether Dawn, there was anything you wanted to say about the 16th of September meeting
48:27 before?
48:31 Speaker 4: Well, we've got two separate things on the 16th of September. One does relate to the CFT that I wanted to speak to.
48:40 Speaker 4: which of course relates to the august meeting as well right so we'll deal with that and i was going to say let's separate those out i think they are
48:50 Speaker 4: all
48:51 Speaker 4: part of that same conversation but otherwise i think you've got the minutes of the 16th of september um we had
48:59 Speaker 4: um
49:00 Speaker 4: quite a long debate around the work that we've been doing on the
49:05 Speaker 4: uh
49:05 Speaker 4: free speech policy um council is very aware
49:10 Speaker 4: We've been working through a process over a number of years. In fact, prior to my appointment at the university on our stance on free speech. We did a lot of work on that through the working group that Sir Peter Hunter led. We also looked at that in the context of academic freedom. And we were then looking at it in the context of the broader statute and acts, as well as linking in with some of our
49:40 Speaker 4: other policies around HR and other areas where we have this
49:45 Speaker 4: in
49:46 Speaker 4: the collective. And so huge amount of work on behalf of the university community
49:52 Speaker 4: continues
49:53 Speaker 4: to go on. There's been lots of debates about this as council has been updated. And of course, the landscape is changing externally as well, not just in New Zealand in response to
50:03 Speaker 4: thoughts
50:04 Speaker 4: around things like institutional neutrality. And again, that's been contested again recently.
50:10 Speaker 4: but also a wide range of definitions on this particularly around the work of free speech academic freedom and where those two things sometimes get conflated
50:21 Speaker 4: so
50:22 Speaker 4: we haven't had a really good debate
50:24 Speaker 4: continues
50:25 Speaker 4: to be something that we're working on and we've taken away the feedback from senate we did go through a wide consultation
50:33 Speaker 4: on
50:35 Speaker 4: the policy and it was a policy that senate asked for
50:38 Speaker 4: And
50:39 Speaker 4: so we do continue to work with Senate on that and the broader community, of course, because free speech is more a broad perspective than the academic freedom one, which simply refers to our academics and students. So that work will continue. We'll come back to council again once we've worked through the next steps on that. And I think that's enough to say on that.
51:04 Speaker 4: And I'll leave the remainder of that report as read and we'll come back to the issues in relation to the CFT. Julia,
51:15 Speaker 2: was there something you wanted to raise?
51:17 Speaker 2: Yes,
51:18 Speaker 2: it wasn't actually about the academic freedom. It was about Andrew Jules
51:22 Speaker 2: asking
51:24 Speaker 2: for a notice of motion to be included in the agenda for the Senate meeting
51:29 Speaker 2: on
51:30 Speaker 2: ethical investment, which was not included.
51:34 Speaker 2: because it was considered not to be an academic matter and therefore not within the purview of
51:39 Speaker 2: or
51:40 Speaker 2: scope of Senate to consider. But what we've cited for that opinion is just one lawyer's opinion, so he hasn't given us a statutory definition or talked about any case law. And I think whether something is an academic matter is itself an academic question on which council should decide. And of course, would have to seek advice from Senate
52:04 Speaker 2: as to whether that's an academic matter. And I think there is an argument that it is an academic matter. Certainly the University of Canterbury thought it was. So I'm not expressing an opinion on whether it is. I'm just saying it's not an out there proposition. And there are other arguments as well. The ethical responsibilities of academic institutions, including our own responsibilities to serve our community and create globally,
52:35 Speaker 2: our values of manaakitanga and so on,
52:38 Speaker 2: our
52:38 Speaker 2: sustainability commitment, the educational impact that we can model basically aligning financial practices with our ethical values,
52:50 Speaker 2: and
52:51 Speaker 2: of course our reputation and credibility, which for academic institutions is based on integrity and ethical behaviour, so that goes to our social licence to operate.
53:01 Speaker 2: So
53:01 Speaker 2: it's really just a point that
53:03 Speaker 2: it
53:04 Speaker 2: It shouldn't be a decision for one lawyer. That's actually a decision. What an academic matter is, is a decision for Senate. So
53:11 Speaker 2: I
53:12 Speaker 2: would suggest that before Andrew Joel's motion goes to Senate, that
53:16 Speaker 2: the
53:17 Speaker 2: question goes to Senate as to whether that would be an academic matter.
53:21 So,
53:22 Speaker 4: Julie, thank you for that. Can I just be clear about what was decided at the Senate meeting? So our registrar, who is Adrian, of course,
53:34 Speaker 4: did make a communication on this around it not being a motion for Senate,
53:40 Speaker 4: but
53:41 Speaker 4: we didn't say that we haven't done that work. And so that work has been done and we have actually responded to requests for information, both in the foundation and the university about those particular questions of investment and ethical investment. We just, it was actually that the motion wasn't a motion for Senate.
54:02 Speaker 4: So I might just ask Adrian and Tim to comment on that because I think most people and I did raise this as an all staff zoom that work has been done and we have responded to those requests openly and responded to open letters so the so it's not that we haven't done that work that you've referred to
54:22 Speaker 4: it's
54:23 Speaker 4: that we didn't take the motion at Senate
54:25 Speaker 4: because
54:26 Speaker 4: it wasn't a place for that sort of motion but that doesn't mean the work hasn't been done and maybe Tim and I think that's a great question.
54:32 Speaker 4: And Adrian might want to just comment on either of those two things, Judah, and thank you for that.
54:41 So
54:41 Speaker 1: Tim or Adrian, who would like to start?
54:44 Speaker 1: Or
54:45 Speaker 1: I can start if you like. I am aware that the first thing I would say, Julia, is that
54:51 Speaker 1: the
54:52 Speaker 1: foundation is independent of the university. The university cannot direct, and as Andrew's motion quite rightly, you know, isn't asking us to direct.
55:02 Speaker 1: the foundation to do anything.
55:08 Speaker 1: I
55:08 Speaker 1: am aware though that the foundation has received letters asking for them, asking them to essentially identify
55:17 Speaker 1: whether
55:19 Speaker 1: they, you know,
55:20 Speaker 1: whether
55:21 Speaker 1: they have any financial products or companies that are involved with either A or B in that motion and that they have had, they are having that work done and are in the process of responding.
55:33 Speaker 1: to the letters that they have received. But Adrian and Tim, I don't know if you would like to comment.
55:38 Yeah,
55:39 Speaker 5: I just echo the fact that the foundation is independent and subject to its own governance. I do know they have been working through responses to the letters. I don't think I can speak on their behalf and I know they've been working through this and continue to work on addressing the concerns
56:03 Speaker 5: and the follow-on letters that have been submitted. So really, I think I can't really say much more than that other than I do know from speaking to some of the trustees that they are obviously taking this very seriously and working diligently to respond to the letters as they come through.
56:27 I
56:27 Speaker 2: just say, I guess my point is not a point about the substantive things.
56:31 Speaker 2: It's really a point about the process
56:34 Speaker 2: that, yes, you can't
56:35 Speaker 2: put Andrew, or maybe you don't
56:37 Speaker 2: want to put Andrew's
56:38 Speaker 2: motion
56:39 Speaker 2: to the
56:39 Speaker 2: Senate meeting, but whether or not it's an academic
56:41 Speaker 2: matter
56:42 Speaker 2: is
56:43 Speaker 2: a
56:43 Speaker 2: decision for Senate to advise Council
56:45 Speaker 2: on. Does that make sense?
56:48 Speaker 2: And if it advises
56:49 Speaker 2: Council on it being an
56:51 Speaker 2: academic matter, then Andrew would be
56:53 Speaker 2: able to put that motion, whether
56:56 Speaker 2: whatever one might think about the
56:57 Speaker 2: outcome of that.
57:00 Speaker 8: The advice I've received is that it's the Vice-Chancellor's decision whether or not to put a matter on the order paper and the Vice-Chancellor, if she decides not to, needs to put it as we have here on the next Council agenda. So for whatever reason, I think the Vice-Chancellor has that right. In terms of the statutory function,
57:28 Speaker 8: as well. The advice that I was given was that this was outside the statutory functions of Council and Senate. But that is the advice that I received from the General Council.
57:46 I
57:46 Speaker 2: think that
57:47 Speaker 2: that's
57:49 Speaker 2: the General Council's opinion, but really it's for
57:52 Speaker 2: our
57:53 Speaker 2: Council to decide whether or not it's an academic matter, if that makes sense.
57:57 Speaker 2: So
57:58 Speaker 2: you're saying it's for the Senate to
57:59 Speaker 1: decide it's an academic matter? No, it's for the Senate
58:01 Speaker 2: to advise council on academic matters and whether something is an academic matter is a decision for council, essentially.
58:09 I
58:09 Speaker 8: think the advice I received, Julia, though, went further than whether it was an academic matter or not. It goes to the point that it's outside the statutory functions. That's right. It's
58:19 Speaker 2: outside the statutory functions because it's not considered to be an academic matter.
58:25 Speaker 8: Not just because of that.
58:26 Speaker 8: because actually it was about advice for
58:30 Speaker 4: an independent legal entity.
58:32 Speaker 4: The
58:33 Speaker 4: foundation's independent, Julia.
58:35 Speaker 4: Right.
58:36 Speaker 4: That's the advice. It's not just outside because of that. It's actually because of what Tim said. They're an independent legal entity. Right.
58:49 But
58:50 Speaker 1: as I say, to give council some comfort in it.
58:57 Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the foundation are, as Tim said, you know, they are taking the matter seriously and are responding to the, you know, having their investment advisor do the work to find out what the answer is to the questions and
59:15 Speaker 1: taking
59:16 Speaker 1: it seriously. And in
59:20 Speaker 4: fact, even though it was,
59:22 Speaker 4: you
59:23 Speaker 4: know, outside the statutory requirements,
59:26 Speaker 4: I still felt it was important to put it to the council on the council agenda and for them to see that that was part of the discussion that was taking place Julia.
59:37 By
59:37 Speaker 10: the way as the council rep on the foundation I'm happy to answer any questions about the foundation's position on these issues
59:45 Speaker 10: but
59:47 Speaker 10: that wasn't Julia's original question. No no that's right and I
59:51 Speaker 1: don't think and I don't think that's appropriate necessarily it can
59:56 Speaker 1: Council, I think. Mine was really a question about process.
01:00:01 Speaker 4: Yeah.
01:00:03 Speaker 4: Hopefully
01:00:03 Speaker 4: that's clarified, Julia, given the nature of the foundation.
01:00:11 Okay.
01:00:12 Speaker 1: Are there any other questions other than relating to the curriculum framework transformation with respect to the minutes of the 16th of September?
01:00:56 Speaker 1: in
01:00:57 Speaker 1: terms of the,
01:00:59 Speaker 1: we
01:00:59 Speaker 1: have the,
01:01:01 Speaker 1: everything that we were asked to note,
01:01:03 Speaker 1: a resolution that we note,
01:01:06 Speaker 1: and that,
01:01:07 Speaker 1: and we have the various papers.
01:01:08 Speaker 1: We also have in 8.2,
01:01:11 Speaker 1: a,
01:01:12 Speaker 1: a paper taking us through the various matters around,
01:01:18 Speaker 1: you know,
01:01:19 Speaker 1: the curriculum framework transformation,
01:01:21 Speaker 1: all of which,
01:01:22 Speaker 1: you know,
01:01:22 Speaker 1: some of which we've been at,
01:01:23 Speaker 1: we've had the opportunity to have a good discussion about,
01:01:26 Speaker 1: in the briefing. So I think the question,
01:01:30 Speaker 1: I
01:01:31 Speaker 1: think there are two questions now. Dealing first, are there further matters that people would like to raise and discuss
01:01:42 Speaker 1: around
01:01:43 Speaker 1: this? I mean, essentially, if I could just summarize the discussion that we had,
01:01:49 Speaker 1: the
01:01:49 Speaker 1: discussion we had in the briefing was that there was concern expressed
01:01:56 Speaker 1: on the 27th of August at the special meeting around the
01:02:01 Speaker 1: course
01:02:02 Speaker 1: optimization process that was being run out of the PDDC. And as Julia has pointed out, there was general concern about some of the processes that have been taking place around the curriculum framework transformation. But subsequent to that meeting, the decision was made to halt the process that was being run
01:02:27 Speaker 1: through the PDDC office. And that's reflected in the minutes of the 16th of September, where it is acknowledged that that process was being done, and that the speed of the process and communications around it were poor and inconsistent, and that this raised concern with staff and students. And what we're being told is that
01:02:56 Speaker 1: has now, that works not, it's not going through the PDDC, it's now
01:03:02 Speaker 1: all
01:03:03 Speaker 1: of that's going through the normal faculty processes
01:03:06 Speaker 1: and
01:03:07 Speaker 1: the deans of the faculties at that second meeting confirmed the work was taking place within the faculties.
01:03:13 Speaker 1: So
01:03:14 Speaker 1: the, but as we discussed in the briefing, this is still a process I think that it is important that it takes place and I think everybody needs to be, I mean, we need to be making
01:03:26 Speaker 1: making sure that what we're offering are relevant that you know relevant for
01:03:32 Speaker 1: the
01:03:33 Speaker 1: the people that we're
01:03:35 Speaker 1: the
01:03:36 Speaker 1: students that we're educating
01:03:37 Speaker 1: we
01:03:38 Speaker 1: also you know in the in the paper in 8.2 there is discussion about the Waipapa Te Amatero courses and the transdisciplinary courses and we had a good discussion
01:03:52 Speaker 1: of
01:03:53 Speaker 1: those courses understanding really
01:03:56 Speaker 1: the content, how they were being delivered and what was going on with those courses
01:04:01 Speaker 1: and
01:04:02 Speaker 1: understand that with the Waipapa Tau Maturau course,
01:04:05 Speaker 1: there
01:04:06 Speaker 1: is a single course being piloted at the moment. It's going to be reviewed at the end of that course. And the intention is that there will be the Waipapa Tau Maturau courses. There will be one in every faculty
01:04:21 Speaker 1: except
01:04:22 Speaker 1: for the law faculty, I believe, where,
01:04:26 Speaker 1: you know most people will be doing
01:04:27 Speaker 1: or
01:04:28 Speaker 1: the people I guess coming into intermediate or into conjoint would do the course in there in the faculty they come in through
01:04:36 Speaker 1: and
01:04:37 Speaker 1: then with respect to the TD course the transdisciplinary course there are two being piloted at the moment
01:04:43 Speaker 1: there
01:04:44 Speaker 1: will be six being piloted next year and then once again there will be reviews of those done before they go into the curriculum in 2026.
01:04:54 Speaker 1: So
01:04:55 Speaker 1: I think that is a summary of the discussion that we had
01:04:58 Speaker 1: around
01:04:59 Speaker 1: those courses. And are there, so I'm looking for, are there any
01:05:04 Speaker 1: other
01:05:06 Speaker 1: questions or discussion that people wish to have around those matters?
01:05:15 Speaker 1: Any
01:05:15 Speaker 1: points that they'd like to make and make sure that are made in this part of the meeting?
01:05:24 Yeah,
01:05:25 Speaker 6: I guess something that we didn't quite discuss was the, there's obviously the pilots are happening now for Waipa-Pato-Motaro as well as the Transdisciplinary Course. Has there been any sort of positive feedback from the students? What have we been hearing from students who are actually undertaking this course? Do we have any of that data yet?
01:05:45 Speaker 1: Bridget, is that something that you can
01:05:47 Speaker 1: ask,
01:05:49 Speaker 1: Dawn or Bridget?
01:05:51 Yes,
01:05:52 Speaker 11: so sorry, from the Waipa-Pato-Motaro courses,
01:05:54 Speaker 11: We have had a couple of evaluations along the way and it's quite a structured process of how that information is going to get it. So, so far positive. The TV, the two TV pilots have also had an initial feedback, which has been quite interesting. Landing positive, the interesting thing is there's some stage three students doing it because you can do it as part of a general department. And the teaching staff feel that it was interesting that the stage three students have already kind of
01:06:24 Speaker 11: quite sort of fixed in their disciplinary way of thinking. So that was interesting. I think also some reflections on
01:06:31 Speaker 11: assessment
01:06:33 Speaker 11: activities. So, so far, actually the one of them has had a 90% attendance rate within the seminars, which was unheard of. The lecture attendance rate is about 40%, it's still farther than what we'd see ordinarily. So that's really encouraging. So they're thinking about what they can do with that and the wide
01:06:54 Speaker 11: getting such good attendance within that's a lot of good people. So definitely some good feedback, some good things to reflect on and also to carry forward.
01:07:06 Julia? Sorry,
01:07:11 Speaker 2: you alluded to this before, Cecilia, but I did want to put on the public record
01:07:15 Speaker 2: that
01:07:16 Speaker 2: I had made the point that we have some very well-developed top-down processes for strategies, developing strategies like this in this institution.
01:07:24 Speaker 2: but don't have the same robust ground-up processes,
01:07:28 Speaker 2: which
01:07:29 Speaker 2: means that we may not have the robust consultation processes that we think we've built into something when we consult with faculty heads or associate deans,
01:07:38 Speaker 2: and
01:07:40 Speaker 2: that to acknowledge that the way that the CFT has come through Senate has been challenging for some academics, and that it's come in pieces, sometimes hasn't been well signposted,
01:07:50 Speaker 2: and
01:07:51 Speaker 2: the full potential effects of the implementation on other courses,
01:07:55 Speaker 2: didn't really come into focus till the end of the process. So that has left some people feeling as though they haven't had the input that they would have liked
01:08:02 Speaker 2: into
01:08:03 Speaker 2: the CFT process.
01:08:09 Jonathan,
01:08:09 Speaker 1: okay, yeah. And I think it's important for us to remember that the CFT process, and we talked about course optimization, we talked about the Waipapa Tau Matarau and also the TD courses, but we
01:08:24 Speaker 1: We didn't talk in the briefing about the other elements of the curriculum framework transformation, which obviously include the graduate profile
01:08:38 Speaker 1: and
01:08:39 Speaker 1: also include the,
01:08:41 Speaker 1: I
01:08:43 Speaker 1: apologize, I'm having trouble reaching. Relational learning. Also the flexi, the flexi, what was that? The flexi.
01:08:56 Speaker 1: The flexi-choice thing. Apologies for calling it the flexi-choice thing.
01:09:06 Speaker 1: Yeah,
01:09:06 Speaker 1: flexi-choice. Flexi-choice. That was one part that we had not discussed in terms of flexi-choice and the expanded learnings. Bridget?
01:09:19 Speaker 11: Just in response to Julia's acknowledgement of that, we have had a grassroots approach in that. We've had huge teams working on this across the university and I think perhaps one of the most transformative parts about this whole process is that we have engaged and faculty has acknowledged that not everybody may have felt like they did that, but we have had faculty workshops, we've had specialist working groups, we had 80 people involved from across the university.
01:09:50 Speaker 11: So there have been lots of hundreds of staff have attended workshops. To your point, reflexi-choice, so that is something that we're still refining some thinking around that. Also the expanded learning. So they are pieces that still will have some decisions to be made and they will go through our processes, take on board the signaling. So thank you for that, Julia. So we're going to think about ways that we can
01:10:23 Speaker 11: I think that signposting might hopefully help and I know when there's pages and pages of me at Senate, I do try and draw things to our Senate's attention but I'll certainly make sure that it's more explicitly when it's in relation to CFT. So hopefully that will assist.
01:10:45 Speaker 7: Gemma.
01:10:49 Speaker 7: I wanted to reiterate Julia's point about the process being poor and acknowledge
01:10:56 Speaker 7: management's response that it was a poor process and that changes have been made since that time to
01:11:04 Speaker 7: take
01:11:05 Speaker 7: a different path and I also
01:11:07 Speaker 7: wanted
01:11:07 Speaker 7: to have in part a my support of CFT more widely we have come so far over the last three years and I really appreciate all the collaboration of academic and professional staff
01:11:19 Speaker 7: who have gone into making all the taumata happen. And as you said, Cecilia, there is many different parts to this framework. And it's really exciting that we're coming to this point of fruition and disappointing that we've had a sidetrack. But also it's a good opportunity for those who might not have been up with the play to come into the conversation too. Thank you.
01:11:43 Speaker 7: All
01:11:44 Speaker 7: right, Hala.
01:11:46 Yeah,
01:11:46 Speaker 6: I also, similarly to Gemma, I would just want to acknowledge
01:11:49 Speaker 6: sort of CFT, even in the Senate meeting, the students did really vouch for CFT just because of the students' engagement throughout the process. They have like a regular slot in the student council meeting, student consultative group as well. I think that there's been a lot of consultation with students and the fact that their pilot sessions are constantly being evaluated, I think is a very good reflection. And probably we're evaluating these courses more than we do our regular courses, which I think is a great stepping stone. So yeah, I just wanted to sort of say that publicly too.
01:12:20 Speaker 10: Cecilia, I just had a clarifying question. Is the new pilots limited to undergraduate or is it contemplated that that would also eventually include masters and PhD students?
01:12:38 Speaker 11: That's a really good question. I'm happy to answer that, Cecilia. So what we're looking at is so in respect to the Y Papa Tanaka Rho courses, is that your question, Jonathan?
01:12:49 Speaker 11: So we are looking at and the plans to develop some sort of module that could be used for so for doctoral students building on those those tomata also that could be used for staff coming to the university from outside New Zealand who it all might seem a little bit of a mystery and also to think about how postgraduate students what will be in a and not in the same way but they have access to that material to use because it's been so beautifully done and it's had so considered in the way it's been developed.
01:13:19 Speaker 11: So
01:13:20 Speaker 10: TBD is what I'm hearing to be determined, but
01:13:27 Speaker 10: certainly under consideration.
01:13:29 Speaker 10: Yeah. Thank you.
01:13:36 Speaker 1: Okay. So, so what we have here is we have in front of us a motion where Senate is asking that we have,
01:14:17 Speaker 1: As Julia said, you know, there has been some confusion and some concern about other elements. And but then we have the report of Senate of the 16th of September, where we have the various, you know, various components. We have the effectively the answer with management responding to the concern raised by Senate on the 26th of August saying, OK, we've gone back to the normal faculty process.
01:14:47 Speaker 1: So, you know, that we've halted, you know, running that, you know, being, you know, generating that process, if you like. And then we have the discussion and we have the, you know, the Senate recommending to council that it receive and note the papers regarding the curriculum transformation. And those papers relate to, you know, the program overview and how it's going to operate,
01:15:17 Speaker 1: the pilot courses are going to be reviewed
01:15:22 Speaker 1: and talks about in more detail about the transdisciplinary paper as well.
01:15:29 Speaker 1: So what I would intend to do is to, first of all, with everybody understanding that history,
01:15:42 Speaker 1: I would be moving
01:15:45 Speaker 1: to
01:15:46 Speaker 1: my, what I would be moving is to say that the implementation of the curriculum framework transformation not be paused, but I think that as part of the resolution that we pass, we should note the concerns that have been raised and we should note the management response, particularly around the
01:16:06 Speaker 1: course
01:16:07 Speaker 1: optimization process.
01:16:09 Speaker 1: And then we should note
01:16:11 Speaker 1: that
01:16:12 Speaker 1: other concerns have been raised. And also, I think that one of the things that we can do
01:16:16 Speaker 1: to
01:16:17 Speaker 1: give ourselves future comfort is that we can, and it does, there is part of this already in the
01:16:25 Speaker 1: resolution
01:16:28 Speaker 1: that's in the Curriculum Framework Transformation paper.
01:16:32 Speaker 1: It
01:16:32 Speaker 1: talks about the further advice, things coming to the March 2020.
01:16:40 Speaker 1: meeting, but I think we can perhaps put more detail around that and ask not only that, you know, that these, that the, around the, particularly around the elements, I think we can specifically say we want to get a report on the review of the Waipapa Taumata Road course that's been piloted this year.
01:17:03 Speaker 1: Then
01:17:03 Speaker 1: I think we can ask that we get a report on the review of the transdisciplinary courses.
01:17:09 Speaker 1: Now, I don't know whether that's taking place this year or next year, and then we can ask that there be a review be done
01:17:20 Speaker 1: at
01:17:21 Speaker 1: the end of 2025 of all of the courses, the Waipapa Tau Maturau and the TD courses that have been presented, and ask that for a report on that to come back to council.
01:17:33 Speaker 1: So that's
01:17:35 Speaker 1: my suggestion as to how we handle this. Now, Julia.
01:17:38 I
01:17:39 Speaker 2: just wanted a couple of points of clarification. So just to confirm, we have stopped our urgent course optimisation process. That's just gone back into the normal thing. But the second question is, on my reading of the papers, we're bringing the transdisciplinary courses back through Senate before?
01:18:00 Speaker 2: Is
01:18:01 Speaker 2: that correct?
01:18:02 The
01:18:03 Speaker 11: regulations. Yeah. So we haven't, the regulations are under the balance.
01:18:08 Speaker 11: They haven't been
01:18:13 Speaker 4: through Senate yet, Julia.
01:18:14 Okay.
01:18:18 Speaker 1: Cecilia, I'm happy to second your motion.
01:18:20 Speaker 1: So
01:18:21 Speaker 1: that's the motion I'm proposing to put. And is there any commentary on that motion?
01:18:31 Just
01:18:32 Speaker 8: to clarify, Chancellor, so you're not putting the motion on the order paper? You're wanting to change that?
01:18:38 Speaker 1: Yes, that's correct. I am changing the motion on the order. Well, to be fair, the motion related to 27.8 says to be determined following council discussion.
01:18:53 Speaker 8: 8.2, we've got the motion. Oh, yes,
01:18:56 Speaker 1: 8.2, yes. I guess I'm going to put 8.2. I guess I'm expanding 8.2, if you like, and I apologise.
01:19:08 Speaker 1: I lost my page.
01:19:10 Speaker 8: Yeah. Maybe we could we go through 8.2 until and just so we down which ones are wanting to change. Yes exactly.
01:19:18 Speaker 1: Yeah absolutely. So so I so what I'm proposing to to do right is I am proposing to start by and I'm
01:19:33 Speaker 1: may
01:19:34 Speaker 1: we put we'll put 6.1 and 8.2 together.
01:19:37 Speaker 1: What I'm proposing to do is start by noting the motion passed by Senate at their meeting of August 27th. Noting that the curriculum framework transformation has been discussed with Council in the briefings. Noting that as confirmed at the Senate meeting on September the 16th, the course optimization process
01:20:07 Speaker 1: As you described it, Julia, the urgent course optimisation process run by the PDDC has been stopped
01:20:14 Speaker 1: and
01:20:15 Speaker 1: the decisions about courses and programmes are now continuing through the normal faculty process. Acknowledge the concerns raised by Senate and encourage management to continue to engage
01:20:36 Speaker 1: with
01:20:37 Speaker 1: all
01:20:37 Speaker 1: areas of the university on the CFT.
01:20:46 Speaker 1: I would, in addition, I would consider, this is up to people whether they want this or not, noting however that it is important that the courses and programs at the university be reviewed regularly to maintain a contemporary suite of offerings for students
01:21:06 Speaker 1: and
01:21:07 Speaker 1: to ensure coherence and relevance of the qualifications being offered by the university and to ensure the continued financial viability of the university.
01:21:17 Speaker 1: And
01:21:18 Speaker 1: then I would be requesting that the council receive at its March 2025 meeting a report on the reviews of the pilot WTR and TD courses around this semester.
01:21:36 Speaker 1: Request that a review be conducted on the WTR courses at the end of 2025 and a report on that review be presented to Council at its March 2026 meeting.
01:21:48 Speaker 1: And
01:21:49 Speaker 1: then on that basis resolve that following the discussion the implementation of the CFT should continue
01:21:59 Speaker 1: in
01:22:00 Speaker 1: the manner set out in the paper presented to Council on the CFT at Item 8.
01:22:35 Speaker 1: on that resolution. Is there any concern from management that we are asking for reports? Is that going to, I don't like to put an additional burden, but I would have expected that what we're asking for is reports of reviews that I'm expecting are already taking place.
01:22:53 No,
01:22:53 Speaker 4: I think it's important that we document that request, Cecilia.
01:22:59 Speaker 4: Just
01:22:59 Speaker 4: to
01:22:59 Speaker 9: say yes, I agree.
01:23:02 Okay,
01:23:03 Speaker 1: and Bridget's nodding because I think she's running the
01:23:07 Speaker 1: Okay,
01:23:08 Speaker 1: so could I have a show of hands to show if people are in favor of that resolution?
01:23:22 Speaker 1: Okay,
01:23:23 Speaker 1: that's passed. Thank you very much. Okay, now I'll move to the resolutions that are in 8.2.
01:23:31 Speaker 1: And
01:23:31 Speaker 1: this is moving that we note that the CFT
01:23:35 Speaker 1: program is a framework comprising a number of elements. Note that Senate and Council have already endorsed policies and regulations relating to elements of CFT including the Graduate Profile, the Waipapa Tau Matarau course and program regulations which are now in effect for the 2025 academic year.
01:23:56 Speaker 1: Note
01:23:56 Speaker 1: that other elements of the CFT are yet to be finalized and considered by Senate and Council including the Transdisciplinary Course Regulation
01:24:06 Speaker 1: and there's a dot dot dot there but it's just the regulations
01:24:16 Speaker 1: and approved continuation of work for the approved CFT elements coming into effect in 2025
01:24:23 Speaker 1: and request that management and senate and the faculty subcommittees to provide further advice on the direction and benefits of the CFT program
01:24:31 Speaker 1: at its March 2025 meeting
01:24:33 Speaker 1: through
01:24:33 Speaker 1: the normal channels and that whilst preparatory work will need to continue in the meantime, such advice is to be received prior to further policy and regulatory decisions being made. So Valerie, you had a quick, yeah?
01:24:46 Speaker 1: I
01:24:47 Speaker 1: just have a,
01:24:47 Speaker 9: it's a very tiny detail. I just want to point out that
01:24:50 Speaker 9: just
01:24:51 Speaker 9: because I was tracking them both as you read them out, as written in the agenda, what you read out is broadly similar but not exactly.
01:25:00 Speaker 9: the same wording is at the top of the 8.2 paper.
01:25:06 Speaker 9: Oh,
01:25:07 Speaker 1: I'm sorry.
01:25:07 Speaker 1: What I read out was on the agenda and I should have been reading out what was on the paper.
01:25:11 Speaker 1: Yes.
01:25:12 Speaker 9: So I'm just saying is that the two are not somewhere on the way.
01:25:16 Speaker 9: The wording is not quite the same, but they're broadly similar.
01:25:21 Speaker 1: Right.
01:25:22 Speaker 1: Okay.
01:25:22 Speaker 1: Let me go back to the paper.
01:25:25 Speaker 1: Okay.
01:25:25 Speaker 1: So we've got, so where does it differ?
01:25:29 Speaker 1: Help me.
01:25:31 Speaker 9: The paper does not, so on the agenda there's a bullet point that starts with approves
01:25:36 Speaker 9: and
01:25:37 Speaker 9: that is not in the. Oh right, yeah, yeah, no, no. But instead there's a note that implementation will continue. Yeah, yeah. So it changes it from an approves to a notes essentially. Right. I just don't want this to be a thing afterwards when people go ahead. Yeah, yeah,
01:25:50 Speaker 1: no, no, no, that's a good point. Okay, so essentially what we're looking at is what's on page 76 of diligent,
01:25:57 Speaker 1: not
01:25:58 Speaker 1: what's in the agenda.
01:26:04 Speaker 1: But
01:26:05 Speaker 1: I think I would
01:26:10 Speaker 1: I would want to change
01:26:11 Speaker 1: I mean obviously I've made
01:26:12 Speaker 1: that second note
01:26:15 Speaker 1: I would alter
01:26:16 Speaker 1: I would alter slightly
01:26:17 Speaker 1: in the way I'd altered it on the first one
01:26:22 Speaker 1: Happy
01:26:23 Speaker 1: to support your motion
01:26:26 Speaker 1: Okay
01:26:27 Speaker 1: so this is the second motion
01:27:00 Speaker 1: Thank
01:27:00 Speaker 1: you very much everybody. I appreciate that and I appreciate that it has taken some time to get through the meeting.
01:27:09 Speaker 1: Okay,
01:27:11 Speaker 1: now we're, and also I thank management for all the work that is going into this and I also thank particularly our academic and professional and student reps for their feedback to the council because I think that's really important.
01:27:28 Speaker 1: and good feedback for management to get as well. So thank you for expressing that. So now we're at, does anybody have any general business for part A of the meeting?
01:27:41 Speaker 1: No?
01:27:42 Speaker 1: Okay. Then we'll go to, does anybody require a leave of absence for the 9th of December?
01:27:49 Speaker 2: Julia?
01:27:51 Speaker 2: Yes,
01:27:52 Speaker 2: I won't be in town for the 9th of December. Okay. Okay.
01:27:57 Speaker 2: Okay.
01:27:58 Speaker 2: Anybody else?
01:27:59 Speaker 1: And Wendy, you'll be able to check with Julia, Anot Nene and Rob McDonough.
01:28:07 Speaker 1: Okay.
01:28:08 Speaker 1: All right. Thank you very much. I am going to then move
01:28:13 Speaker 1: that
01:28:14 Speaker 1: the public be excluded from Part B of this meeting, given the subject matter to be considered and the need for confidentiality for certain of these matters for the operation of the university. And more specifically,
01:28:28 Speaker 1: the resolution that is set out there in the agenda. And that Adrian Clannan, Professors Linton and Bloomfield, Andrew Phipps, Tim Blewett, Pamela Moss, Helen Katanach, Anthony Brandom and Wendy Vesherin and I would think Andrew Rose and need to, no we don't need media, okay Andrew, do I need media? And media productions be allowed to remain for part B of the meeting to the extent that they wish to.
01:28:58 Speaker 1: are required to do so. And I'm going to move that. And could I ask, could I ask Carla to second that, please?
01:29:09 Speaker 1: Thank
01:29:09 Speaker 1: you very much. We stay on this link, Cecilia, but the live stream's finished. Yes, so we're now, we're now waiting for the live stream to close. Is that right, Wendy? Or we can ask,
01:29:19 Anthony,
01:29:20 Speaker 3: can you?