• TEQSA Conference 2017

    The Second Annual TEQSA Conference (TEQSA) conference ran from 29 November until 1 December in 2017. It featured 70 presentations, keynote addresses and panel discussions. In only its second year, the conference attracted 800 delegates including almost 100 higher education students. 

    Delegates heard from thought leaders, policy makers and students on a range of issues facing the sector, including what’s in store for the future both here in Australia and internationally. 

    Keynote presenters included Professor Marnie Hughes-Warrington, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic, of the Australian National University; Emeritus Professor Kwong Lee Dow, Patron of the Higher Education Quality Network; Andrew Norton, Higher Education Program Director at the Grattan Institute; Professor Peter Shergold, Chair of the Higher Education Standards Panel; and Professor Nick Saunders, Chief Commissioner of TEQSA.

    Presentations over the three days covered everything from the financial realities of the higher education sector, to whether higher education is meeting industry challenges. Students also featured prominently in the conference sessions with representatives from higher education providers offering unique input to discussions.

    The third and final day of the conference featured almost 50 concurrent sessions in line with the conference’s themes of students, quality and success. Winners were chosen from fully submitted papers in line with these themes and announced at the conference dinner.

    Winners included:

    • Dr Sara Booth, University of Tasmania: A cost-effective solution for external referencing of accredited courses of study (Quality)
    • Assistant Professor Gesa Ruge and Associate Professor Corolie McCormack, University of Canberra: Understanding how students develop their skills for employability (Students)
    • Maria Spies and Dr Margot McNeill, Navitas: Holistic curriculum transformation: A scalable model for student success (Success).

    Presentation materials

    Keynote and concurrent session presentations from the 2017 conference are available from Higher Ed Services' website.

    For content regarding the individual streams, see the links below:

    Conference presentation videos

    Conference photos (2017)

    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Conference attendee winning prize at welcome reception
    Last updated:
  • Admissions Transparency Forums - April 2018

    Timeline

    Q. Why is May 2018 the due date when advertising for potential applicants for the following year does not commence until August?

    The Phase Two Common Terminology and Information Sets document is for ‘adoption by end May 2018’. This means the information should be ready for transfer to the TACs, but providers need not publish the information (on websites or in reports) by May unless it is a publication that will be used by applicants considering study in 2019. Providers should publish, on their websites and in other documents, information for applicants considering study in 2019 at the very least, by the time the provider holds an Open Day, and for many providers this is August 2018.

    Q. Does the information for courses with a midyear intake in 2018 need to comply with the criteria for 2019 entry?

    No. For the 2018 midyear entry the old admissions information is acceptable, but for the 2019 cycle it needs to comply with the new admissions information requirements.

    Q. We are a member of a TAC but we also receive direct applications, so the data that TAC has is not complete.

    The data that you provide in your student and ATAR profiles should include students that applied via the TAC plus students that applied directly. In the main, though, it seems likely that ATAR-based applications would generally be included in TAC data.

    Q. If a provider does not supply their data to the TAC by the due date, what will happen?

    The data will not be included in the TAC’s publication.

    Information about the background of applicant grouping

    Q. Why is the cut off for recent secondary education in the last two years?

    The basis of admissions transparency is to provide information that is most relevant to applicants of different backgrounds. A person who has left school more than two years ago may have study, work or other experience that could contribute to their chance of admission in addition to evidence that a person who just finished secondary school may have to offer. Past school results may be relevant to an applicant of any age. But guidance on including information about other work and life experience is more likely to be relevant to an applicant who completed their secondary education some time ago. If a mature age applicant has recently completed secondary subjects through a TAFE or other education provider and was using those results to apply, they would likely fit into the recent secondary education group.

    Q. If a provider uses secondary education results as the basis of admission for applicants that finished school more than two years ago, how should they be reported?

    The evidence and process through which a provider assesses and determines admission for each course is a decision for the provider and may not be directly related to the applicant groupings in the information sets.

    If the admission of all students is based on their secondary education results (and neither subsequent study or work experience are taken into account) then the provider could choose either to describe those requirements under the heading of “essential requirements for admission” or repeat the information under each student background heading.

    Note: The ATAR profile should only include data for applicants that finished school in the two years prior to their application.

    Q. How is this information transparent if we select applicants one way but report them in another category?

    The purpose of the student profile is to provide applicants with information about the background of their potential student colleagues, regardless of the basis on which they were admitted.

    Q. Is there a hierarchy for the background groups? 

    All applicant groupings are equally valid. Providers are free to order their admissions information in the way that best meets the needs of their stakeholders. For some that may mean listing work and life experience first, for others it may mean highlighting the requirements for school leavers more prominently.

    In a strict logical sense, though, there is an implicit decision-making hierarchy as to which grouping an applicant would fall into. Students who have undertaken any higher education since leaving school are reported in the higher education category. If they don’t have higher education but they have undertaken VET study since leaving school they are reported in the VET category. If they don’t have higher education or VET study and have never completed year 12 or completed their secondary education more than two years ago they are reported in the work and life experience category. All students who completed their secondary education within the last two years (including, for example, mature age students who studied at TAFE) are reported in the recent secondary education category.

    Q. What if an applicant falls under more than one category?

    An applicant can only be reported in one category and that category is the first one they fit into according to the logical hierarchy explained above. The provider may wish to indicate to potential applicants which qualifications and experience will form the basis of their admission.

    Data and data quality

    Q. Can we modify the format or add additional information to the student profile and ATAR tables (for example, can it be shown as a graph)?

    The ATAR table and the student profile are templates and should not be modified. Providers may choose to present the information in a graph or graphically in addition to the template, but the templates should be shown as per the implementation plan so that students can easily compare across providers.

    Q. Does there need to be a correlation between the HEIMS data and the admissions transparency data?

    The data that is requested for the purposes of admissions transparency should be in line with data provided for HEIMS.

    Q. We have a minimum ATAR/OP across all our courses in our institution and do not collect the applicants’ actual ATAR. Should we still report this in the ATAR/OP table?

    In order to determine whether an applicant has the minimum ATAR/OP you would need to collect the applicant’s ATAR/OP. If that is not currently recorded and some of your applicants fall into the recent secondary education applicant group, then it should be going forward so that meaningful data can be entered into the ATAR/OP profile. If you use the TAC, then the TAC is likely to have that data.

    Q. Can we report data from the last complete year (for example, 2017 instead of 2018 which is still in progress)?

    The student profile should indicate the most representative cohort. The provider can decide whether to update the profile for the second semester or not. The recommendation is to use the most recent period for which a complete data set exists. Data for semester 1, 2018 or the full 2018 calendar year (if available) is likely to be the most relevant for applicants to be admitted in semester one 2019. Please ensure that the table shows which time period the data is from.

    Q. How can applicants compare student profile data from different providers if they are from different years?

    Student profiles are representative of the typical cohort which is unlikely to change much from year to year. Further, the difference in student profiles from adjacent time periods would seem unlikely to invalidate a potential applicant’s decision. Providers who have a large intake of one particular cohort in second semester (for example, international students) may wish to consider using profiles that cover a full calendar year to ensure the data are fully representative.

    Q. Will the selection rank always be higher than the ATAR?

    In some courses, the person who gained entry with the lowest ATAR may not have had an adjustment so their selection rank will be equal to their ATAR. Further, some providers use selection ranks that are quite different to the ATAR.

    Q. Some providers have selection ranks that represent a combination of ATAR and other admission criteria. For example, the resulting ranks might be numbers from 0 to 356. Should these be reported?

    Reporting of the selection rank is optional. However if admission to the course is based on a selection rank that includes admission criteria in addition to the ATAR it would be useful to present the selection rank data. An explanation of how the selection rank is prepared should be included so the potential applicant can understand the reported data.

    Q. How can we represent the number of international students when the majority of them commence in semester 2?

    Consideration should be given to using full calendar year student data in the student profile to ensure it is fully representative of the likely student cohort. If necessary, the provider could update the student profile prior to applications for second semester.

    Q. How do we deal with changing course information in general?

    Changes in course information that are required during the application and offer period should be updated on provider websites and any changes identified.

    Q. Can providers revise the minimum ATAR and publish it?

    Yes. However, it is important that applicants be able to have confidence in such a threshold if a provider chooses to set one. Once a minimum ATAR is set, it should not be revised within the relevant intake or offer period. That is, a potential applicant who has decided to change their preferences because their ATAR was below the minimum should not later find out that the Lowest ATAR to which an offer was made was below the published minimum that they relied on to make their decision.

    Course information

    Q. We have small numbers of students in our courses, so our student profiles will have ‘less than 5’ or ‘N/A’ in most categories. How should we manage this?

    If your courses have small numbers and there are a number of courses within the same faculty you could aggregate the courses in order to provide a student profile that is useful to potential applicants. That is, provide the total number of students in each course but provide a student profile for the faculty. If all the figures presented are ‘N/A’ they would be of little use from either perspective.

    Q. Some providers offer the same course in a number of states and the admissions information set differs. How should the information be presented?

    TEQSA can provide assistance in working out the best way to present admissions information when courses are provided in different locations. If the same course is delivered in a number of states the course information is likely to be similar and could be shown in one information set. If the ATAR profile is different for each campus it may be useful to show them separately or as a table with a column for each campus. Depending on how many students take the course in each state it may be useful to aggregate the data and provide a student profile for the course as a whole. Please ensure that it is clear which campuses are included in the data presented. Please contact TEQSA if you require further advice.

    Q. We have small numbers of domestic students (and in some courses we have none) but we would like to increase the numbers of domestic students. We are concerned that presenting the student profile will dissuade domestic students from applying.

    You will need to present the data as it stands in your student profile. There are likely to be a number of reasons the cohort of domestic students is small and the presentation of a student profile will not change the fact that you do have a small cohort of domestic students.

    Q. We run courses for another provider and admissions information for these courses is shown on our website. Do we need to report the admissions information set including the Student and the ATAR profiles?

    If a potential applicant can access admissions information on your website this should be the same as the admissions information available on the other provider’s website. If you do not include the full admissions information set then you should include a link to the other provider’s website where the full admissions information set should be available.

    Q. Are the new terms expected to be included in the provider’s information that is delivered to the TACs?

    Yes, the new terminology needs to be included in the TACs’ publications as it pertains to the 2019 entry cohort.

    Q. We have enabling courses that do not quite match the definition of enabling courses or bridging courses. How do we report on those?

    The definitions of enabling courses and bridging courses are provided in the common terms. A bridging course provides specific knowledge (for example, calculus mathematics) that will be needed to successfully undertake a particular course. An enabling course develops study-related skills (such as study techniques or English language proficiency). Please contact TEQSA if you are unsure whether a course should be described as a bridging course or an enabling course.

    The scope of Admissions Transparency

    Q. What is the definition of ‘undergraduate’?

    As per the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) ‘undergraduate’ includes AQF levels 5 (diploma), 6 (advanced diploma, associate degree), 7 (bachelor) and bachelor honours degrees (which are designated AQF level 8) qualifications.

    Q. Should information for admission to Bachelor Honours courses be included?

    As an undergraduate award, Bachelor Honours is in scope for admissions transparency. However, information on Bachelor Honours courses is only required if it is already being provided to your TAC for inclusion in its information products.

    Q. If we have low numbers of domestic students, do we need to provide the information?

    If a provider does not accept applications from domestic students, the implementation of admissions transparency at this point is not required. If you do accept applications from domestic students you would be expected to have admissions information available in the new formats.

    TEQSA’s formative evaluation

    Q. Can TEQSA please give insight to providers of the evaluations that were done in 2017?

    TEQSA conducted a formative evaluation of provider websites at a point in time which is not representative of where providers are at this point in time. The formative evaluation was conducted so that the Admissions Transparency Implementation Working Group and TEQSA could identify the challenges the providers were having in implementing the requirements. That information fed into the development of TEQSA’s Advice on Admissions Transparency.

    TEQSA welcomes enquiries from providers and is happy to answer questions and provide verbal feedback on provider publications and website in relation to admissions transparency. TEQSA used an excel spreadsheet which lists the requirements of the admissions transparency implementation plan. Based on this spreadsheet, upon request, TEQSA has developed a checklist (PDF, 128 KB) (DOCX, 146 KB) which may help providers to implement the requirements of admissions transparency.

    The Higher Education Admissions Information Platform (HEAIP)

    Information about the HEAIP will shortly be sent to all providers by the Department of Education and Training (Department). If you have any questions about the HEAIP please email AdmissionsInformationPlatform@education.gov.au

    Further questions about admissions transparency

    If you have a question that has not been answered please email the TEQSA Admissions Transparency team at admissions@teqsa.gov.au.
     

    Last updated:
  • Rosary Tertiary Institute Australia Pty Ltd

    Application for registration and course accreditation

    Decision:

    Rejected

    Date of decision:

    28 March 2018

    Main reasons for decision:

    The decisions were made on the basis that TEQSA was not satisfied that Rosary Tertiary Institute Australia Pty Ltd (RTI) meets the following provisions of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2015:  

    • Standards 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 in relation to staffing, academic leadership and learning environment
    • Standard 6.2.1 in relation to corporate monitoring and accountability, including risk identification, management and mitigation, and academic governance and quality assurance
    • Standards 6.2.1 and 3.3.2 in relation to financial viability and infrastructure, and provision of learning resources
    • Criteria B1.1 (Higher Education Provider Category) in relation to the scholarship activity of academic staff, and the delivery of teaching and learning that engage with advanced knowledge and inquiry.
    Review stage:  
    Last updated:
  • National Business and Technology Institute Pty Ltd

    Application for registration and course accreditation

    Decision:

    Rejected

    Date of decision:

    8 February 2018

    Main reasons for decision:

    The decisions were made on the basis that TEQSA was not satisfied that National Business and Technology Institute Pty Ltd (NBTI) meets the following provisions of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2011:  

    • Provider Registration Standards (PRS) 3.4, 3.8 and 6.4, in relation to corporate and academic governance
    • PRS 5.1 and 5.2, Provider Course Accreditation Standards (PCAS) 4.1 and Provider Category Standard 1.4  in relation to NBTI’s staffing, including academic leadership, management and staff scholarship
    • PCAS 1.1, 1.2, 1.7 and 5.1, in relation to the quality of NBTI’s proposed courses
    • PRS 1.5, in relation to NBTI’s history and the history of its related entities.
    Review stage:  
    Last updated:
  • Copyright

    Creative Commons logo

    With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, and where otherwise noted, all material presented on this website is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence.

    The details of the licence conditions and the full legal code for the CC BY 3.0 licence are available on the Creative Commons website.

    NOTE: The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency must be acknowledged as the author of copyright material.

    Last updated:
  • Acts and standards

    The following acts and standards govern Australian higher education.

    Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Act 2011

    The TEQSA Act established us as Australia’s national quality assurance and regulatory agency for higher education. It applies for regulation of higher education through a standards-based quality framework with principles relating to regulatory necessity, risk and proportionality.

    Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (HES Framework)

    The Threshold Standards apply to all higher education providers. Set by the Minister for Education on the advice of a panel with expertise in the delivery of higher education, they are the minimum level of achievement that a provider must meet and maintain to be registered to deliver higher education courses of study.

    Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 (ESOS Act)

    The ESOS Act applies to providers offering courses to students in Australia on student visas. These include higher education courses, Foundation Programs (except those delivered by schools), and ELICOS programs delivered by higher education providers.

    National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students 2018 (National Code 2018)

    The National Code 2018 is a set of nationally consistent standards that protect international students. The National Code governs courses registered on the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS). Only CRICOS courses can be offered to international students studying in Australia on a student visa.

    Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF)

    The AQF is the national policy for regulated qualifications in Australian education and training. It is delivered through the Australian Government Department of Education in consultation with the states and territories.

    Last updated:
  • Student wellbeing

  • TEQSA stakeholder survey report and response 2021

    Body

    TEQSA has undertaken a formal stakeholder consultation on an annual basis since 2015-16 to gain insights into views on the agency, its regulatory output and approach to risk. The feedback received also informs strategic initiatives in relation to continuous improvement, sector-wide risk management and stakeholder engagement. 

    Consultations this year were conducted via a general survey of providers. In order to maintain independence of the feedback received, TEQSA engaged JWS Research to conduct the survey and analysis on TEQSA’s behalf. The findings of the survey, together with TEQSA’s response, can be found below.

    TEQSA wishes to acknowledge JWS Research, together with all providers, for their contributions to this year’s stakeholder consultations.

    Stakeholder
    Publication type
  • TEQSA's approach to changes of control or ownership of a higher education provider

    Body

    Purpose

    The purpose of this policy is to describe the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency’s (TEQSA’s) approach in responding to a change of control or ownership of a higher education provider (HEP), and describe the reasons for its interest following such an event. 

    A change of control or ownership occurs when a new entity obtains substantial ownership of a registered HEP (whether or not that is a majority stake in a provider). A change in control or ownership of a HEP has the potential to significantly impact a provider’s ability to meet the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (HES Framework), noting the effect that a change in control or ownership can have on a provider’s governance arrangements and management. 

    TEQSA’s interest following a change in control or ownership of a HEP will focus primarily on potential risks to the quality of students’ educational experience, and a provider’s financial viability and sustainability. Examples of events that impact students following a change in control or ownership that would concern TEQSA, while not exhaustive, include:

    • a rapid increase in student enrolments in the absence of a planned and managed approach, particularly where there is reliance on growth in single source markets
    • course closures in the absence of adequate teach out arrangements
    • reductions in staffing (academic and support services) to lower expenses
    • reductions in investment in facilities and infrastructure and the financial capacity of the HEP
    • reductions in the quality of the learning environment through for example, reductions in senior academic leaders, increases in student to staff ratios, increased rates of academic staff casualisation, or an overreliance on third party teaching/delivery arrangements. 

    Scope

    This policy relates to providers that have been subject to a change of control or ownership in recent history. 

    Principles

    1. Before a change of ownership or control of a registered HEP event takes place , TEQSA expects to be provided with notification in accordance with section 29(1)(a) of the TEQSA Act (for further detail, refer to TEQSA’s Material Change Notification Policy). It is not necessary for an acquirer to take a majority ownership stake (i.e. greater than 50 per cent) in a provider in order to exercise effective control.
    2. TEQSA’s approach in responding to a change in control or ownership of a HEP will be guided by its regulatory principles of reflecting risk, proportionality and necessity. TEQSA’s investigations and regulatory intervention will be focussed on key risks arising from the change of control or ownership to the quality of students’ educational experience, and the provider’s financial viability and sustainability.
    3. Where there is a change of control or ownership of a HEP, TEQSA will seek early engagement with the affected provider (and its new owners). The objective of this engagement is to ensure that the provider can continue to meet the requirements of the HES Framework, to address any concerns TEQSA holds with aspects of the provider’s operations under its previous control and to confirm the future strategic directions of the HEP.
    4. At a minimum, HEPs should expect that TEQSA will request documentation on the nature of the transaction, run a background check on any new shareholders and/or directors, and consider the history of prior tertiary education provision by the acquiring entity or its personnel. TEQSA may also request details of changes to key personnel, governance committees, financial statements, and fit and proper person declarations. Examples of sources TEQSA may refer to in its background checks include Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s (ASIC) current and historical company exacts, Equifax’s corporate scorecards and company/director credit reports, and the Australian Financial Security Authority’s National Personal Insolvency Index.
    5. HEPs should also be aware that a change of control or ownership may trigger a compliance assessment if appropriate in the circumstances. A compliance assessment can be initiated at any time before or after the change of control or ownership has taken place.
    6. If TEQSA’s concerns are not resolved by the provider’s response, TEQSA can take other regulatory steps to mitigate the risk that the provider will not meet the HESF. This includes placing conditions on courses and/or registration, or in serious cases shortening or cancelling a provider’s registration.
    7. TEQSA recognises that it is part of a broader regulatory community and will work with other relevant Commonwealth and/or State and Territory agencies to acquire and share regulatory information, for intelligence purposes and to minimise regulatory burden on providers where they have already submitted information to other agencies. 

    Further information

    Further information about TEQSA’s approach following a change in provider control can be obtained by directing an email enquiry to: enquiries@teqsa.gov.au

    Subtitle
    Version 1.0
    Stakeholder
    Publication type