Professor Victoria Burbank, UWAASA Staff Writer and Senior Honorary Research Fellow, offers this thought-provoking piece to initiate debate about UWA now, and in the future.
The Academic Staff Association Governing Committee sent an Open letter to the Vice-Chancellor in February 2016, signed by concerned academics at UWA. His response can be found in an earlier post.
Only one change was made to the original process following the consultation, and UWAASA urges continued feedback and engagement from all academics to ensure that the outcome is positive for the University and its staff.
This is the full letter from a UWAASA member that was published in The Post in March 2016
Following a resolution passed at the UWAASA Forum on methods used at UWA to evaluate academic staff, I have requested a copy of the model used in each Faculty from the Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor. Request for Academic Faculty Evaluation Models. As noted in the letter, those at the meeting believed it would be useful to review and compare the approaches.
In summary, I have come to the conclusion that because of the history of Arts as a foundation faculty of the University, the overwhelming use of Arts in their nomenclature amongst 131 universities in Australia and overseas, the value of the Arts brand to students and alumni and the origin of disciplines and professions likely to be considering joining the new college, the proposed College must include ‘Arts’ in the title.
I have a specific question that I would like addressed because it is a fundamental premise in the Vice Chancellor’s very useful review document (Securing Success) that preceded the current recommendations. My question concerns the level of optimum subsidy to be paid from teaching to research in a University as outlined by the Vice Chancellor: