Document Number: 2014/0003776 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE REVIEWING THE SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Document Number: 2014/0003776 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE REVIEWING THE SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE 14 October 16 October 2014

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Review Committee thanks those who provided written submissions (3 students, 6 staff and 1 external stakeholder) and is grateful for the professionalism and candour of those who made the time to attend interviews. It particularly acknowledges the work of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (CCJ) in preparing for, and taking part, in this review, including the area s comprehensive Self Review Submission. The Review Committee thanks the University s senior officers for their guidance, suggestions and comments. Organisational Reviews Unit Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND... 1 1.1 THE REVIEW COMMITTEE... 1 1.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE REVIEW... 2 1.3 PROCEDURES... 3 2.0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS... 4 3.0 FINDINGS OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE... 9 3.1. THE SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE... 9 3.2. COMMENDATIONS & AFFIRMATIONS... 10 3.3. ENHANCING REPUTATION... 13 3.4. LEARNING & TEACHING... 14 3.5. RESEARCH & RESEARCH TRAINING... 17 3.6. ORGANISATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND RESOURCES... 20 4.0 FOLLOW UP... 24 5.0 APPENDIX I... 25 Organisational Reviews Unit Page iii

1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 THE REVIEW COMMITTEE The Review Committee is an independent committee responsible, under its terms of reference, for providing an objective assessment of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice s self review and future plans, and to make recommendations for future action and development. The Review Committee was appointed by the Vice Chancellor on the recommendation of the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic). This position is now superseded by the Academic Provost. In accordance with the University Reviews Policy, the Review Committee has comprised three external members with relevant expertise in the area to be reviewed, with one of these to Chair the review, and one senior staff member of the University with knowledge of the operations of the University. The Review Committee comprised the following members: Chair: Professor Julie Horney, Professor of Criminology, Pennsylvania State University External Committee Members: Professor Rick Sarre, School of Law, University of South Australia and President, Australia and New Zealand Society of Criminology (ANZSOC) Professor Friedrich Lösel, Institute of Criminology, Cambridge University (UK) & Institute of Psychology, University of Erlangen Nuremberg (Germany) Internal Committee Members: Professor Melanie Zimmer Gembeck, School of Psychology, Griffith University Secretary: Ms Amanda Clark, Senior Project Officer, Office of the Vice President (Corporate Services), Griffith University Organisational Reviews Unit Page 1

1.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE REVIEW The Terms of Reference for the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice were approved as follows: ToR 1: Previous Review Recommendations implementation of recommendations arising from the previous review (where appropriate) and the impact of that implementation ToR 2: Learning, Teaching and the Student Experience including the quality, scope, focus, direction, and balance of undergraduate and postgraduate curriculae, adequacy of program profile given the current and future discipline context; competition in south east Queensland and Australia; internationalisation strategies; approaches to supporting the engagement and success of a diverse student cohort; enrolment trends, retention, success rates, student and graduate satisfaction, graduate outcomes, quality of teaching, perceptions of key external stakeholders; and implementation of the University s strategic learning and teaching priorities ToR 3: Research and Research Training including research activity, research quality and impact, research outcomes and income, internationalisation strategies, and the quality of research training, in light of likely future developments in the field, and the University s strategic research priorities, and including the research performance of related Research Centres ToR 4: Partnerships and Community Contribution the element s development of partnerships with relevant local, national, and international communities, business, industry, government and the professions, as appropriate, and their future plans for such partnerships ToR 5: Equity and Diversity the element s performance in equity and diversity and future plans and strategies to give effect to the University s equity and diversity framework with respect to staff and students ToR 6: Organisation and Resources the element s organisational arrangements and management of its physical and staff resources (including workforce planning, staff retention and staff development) to meet core business needs and anticipated developments in the field Organisational Reviews Unit Page 2

1.3 PROCEDURES The Review Committee s procedures, following the University Reviews Policy and set of supporting guidelines included the following: Consideration of the self evaluation submission from the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice submitted in September 2014; Consideration of the range of written submissions to the Committee arising from a general invitation to the University and wider community to make such submissions; A 3 day visit to the University from 14 16 October 2014, during which a range of interviews and group sessions with senior University executives, key stakeholders, the Head of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice and relevant staff of the School were conducted (see Appendix 1); On the final day of the review, the Committee prepared a summary of foreshadowed broad findings and presented these to the University senior executives, the Head of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice and senior staff of the School; and Preparation of this written Report and recommendations. The findings of the Review Committee draw upon the full range of submissions, interviews and discussions generated through this process. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 3

2.0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS The Review Committee carefully evaluated the recent achievements and current state of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (CCJ) and developed a number of strategic recommendations to enable CCJ to build on its widely acknowledged strengths across its academic activities and to further enhance its performance particularly in areas of leadership and research. (Note, recommendations are listed in order of appearance in section 3.0) Recommendation 1: (ToR 2, 3, 4) The Committee recommends that the School actively collect and analyse annual data across a range of areas in order to document more effectively the strengths of the School as well as problems that may need attention. a. This effort may involve the collection of additional data, but may primarily consist of determining whether currently available university data can be used more strategically. It may also mean working with the University to improve some of its standard measures, such as having research productivity data include the quality as well as the quantity of publications. b. One important component of this effort will be to figure out how to document the contributions of the School s many collaborations with the wider community outside the University. c. School staff should be made aware of the importance of their being involved in the collection and analysis of data about the School. Timeline: 8 months and ongoing Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Recommendation 2: (ToR 2) The Committee recommends that any drive for new enrolments and growth be undertaken with careful consideration to the risks of bringing in students with lesser qualifications. However, it may be a mistake to concentrate solely on OP as a predictor of performance. A careful analysis of the impact of growth is called for. Additionally, increased enrolments do not necessarily lead to lower quality. In theory, growth could come from a new group of high performing students, although we realise that it is not easy for one School alone to have a large impact in this area. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 4

a. The Committee acknowledges the commitment of the School to work with OMC to develop a marketing plan for 2015, and we suggest that all the steps the School is taking to achieve international prominence have the potential to make the program more attractive to outstanding local students. b. Strategic international connections, such as CCJ is building with the Singapore police and UA justice, could be tied with attracting more international HDR students. c. Other, more local, efforts may be needed, such as working to have an active presence in local media representations of issues of crime and justice and visibility in the community beyond local criminal justice agencies. d. Consider the establishment of an Industry Advisory Board with a focus on learning and teaching matters and links to the profession. Timeline: 6 months and ongoing Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Recommendation 3: (ToR 3) The Committee supports the development of a Griffith Criminology Institute that builds on the School s current strengths. Bringing the activities of the School and the Institute together is important, and to this end the Committee recommends: a. That the University appoint a Director with strong leadership skills who can drive the approach necessary for establishing a research culture that will lead to world wide recognition. The Director will also need the personal skills to collaborate productively with the Head of School in creating a program with a unified vision. b. That School staff be involved in planning for an Institute that will support and facilitate their research. Specifically, it is important that all members (including those outside of CCJ) of CEPS and KELJAG be included in discussions during the decision making process. However, establishment of the Institute needs to move forward relatively quickly, so consultation should be organised so as not to cause undue delay. c. That the School and Institute not forget the importance of strategic collaborations across the University. d. That there be a space for a Centre of Excellence to be developed and that consideration be given to a multi level approach to crime and violence prevention (CVP) as an organising principle. A multi level CVP would include research at the individual, micro social, situational, and community (local, Organisational Reviews Unit Page 5

national, or world) levels and would thus be inclusive of the current range of School research. Timeline: 8 months Responsibility: Pro Vice Chancellor (Arts, Education, Law); Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Recommendation 4: (ToR 3) The Committee recommends that the School continue the tradition of engaging in both basic and applied research and research that is more local in scope as well as research that is national or international in scope, and we suggest a conversation around finding the appropriate balance between these interests, determining how resources and rewards should flow to both kinds of activity, while at the same time expecting the very highest quality in all research. Timeline: 8 months Responsibility: Pro Vice Chancellor (Arts, Education, Law); Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Recommendation 5: (ToR 2, 3) The Committee applauds the School s goal of developing one of the world s leading criminology/criminal justice programs. Many positive steps have been taken towards achieving this goal. We would recommend additional attention be paid to the following areas: a. The School has emphasised the need for publications to appear in the field s top journals and some particular journals have been recommended. The School might go farther by having an open discussion about what journals are the best and have the highest impact and by considering incentives for publications in those journals. b. A more formal mentoring program for early career staff may be useful in making program goals and expectations more explicit. At present staff seem to receive strong mentoring when they have a natural fit into a senior staff research program, but otherwise it is spotty. c. The School should consider various ways in which its programs can be marketed to the world audience, such as brochures included in conference materials, Ph.D. program advertisements in organisational newsletters, and reaching the international press with results of important research projects. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 6

d. Preparation of Ph.D. students for the job market is an important part of the visibility of the School. This includes having them in a strong position in terms of publications and also preparing them carefully for the actual job search process. Models used by other programs for professional socialisation seminars and job search preparation could be helpful in assessing what the School could do in these areas. The student group currently organises monthly meetings at which staff present their work, but the School may find it useful to take more control of this process. Timeline: 8 months Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice; HDR Convenor, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Recommendation 6: (ToR 6) The Committee recognises that the School has benefited from strong leadership over the years and judges that continued strong leadership will be critical if the School s ambitious goals are to be achieved. The Committee recommends that the School develop concrete plans regarding several leadership issues including: a. Investing substantially in the development of mid career and early career staff. The School should determine whether there are additional steps, such as release time from teaching, or a more formalized mentoring program, that could help prepare staff to be able, for example, to successfully lead a Centre of Excellence proposal. Consideration should also be given to the extent to which mid level staff should be assigned what are, in some cases, heavy administrative loads. b. Developing a plan for facilitating an effective working relationship between the Director of the School and the Director of the new Institute. c. Developing a plan for reducing problems of several locations, and, in particular, supporting leadership on the Gold Coast campus. Timeline: 8 months Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice; Pro Vice Chancellor (Arts, Education, Law) Recommendation 7: (ToR 6) The Committee recommends that the School develop a more formalised and futurefocused strategy for reaping the rewards of its entrepreneurial activity. The School has been using its funds in good, but until recently, ad hoc ways; even more formal planning Organisational Reviews Unit Page 7

would help the School reach its strategic goals and maximize the impact of any surpluses that arise. The Committee is aware of the School s hesitancy to commit to long term projects given the fact that surpluses may not continue. However we recommend that long term projects not be automatically ruled out, as they may be needed for achieving the School s ambitious goals. The Committee is not in a position to prioritise spending for the School, but we suggest some examples for the School s consideration: a. Support for quality unfunded applications submitted in the ARC rounds (given the current situation of funding levels of the ARC) b. Support for the development of early career staff through seed funding and a more formal staff development program. c. Support for professional development in new initiatives in pedagogy d. Publication scholarships to honours students e. Support for administrative assistance in School planning and marketing efforts. Timeline: 6 months and ongoing Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Organisational Reviews Unit Page 8

3.0 FINDINGS OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE 3.1. THE SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Queensland s Fitzgerald Inquiry in 1989 recommended that training programs for new police recruits include a university component. The School emerged in 1990 partly as a response to this challenge. The School commenced at the Mt Gravatt campus with 5 staff teaching a 1 year Advanced Certificate in Policing for police recruits and a 3 year Bachelor of Arts in Justice Administration program, including distance learning components. From these beginnings the School s rapid and large scale expansion has seen it become one of the more significant criminology groupings in Australia today, if not the world. 1 Over the past 6 years CCJ has experienced rapid, large scale growth. Total student load has nearly tripled since 2008 from 564 to 1613 EFTSL in 2014 and academic staff numbers have grown from 12 to 42 2. In 2012, the School expanded its presence to a second Griffith campus on the Gold Coast. Once the second smallest unit in the Arts Education and Law (AEL) Group (with respect to staff and student numbers), CCJ has grown to become the second largest of the seven academic elements within AEL that are in themselves of significant size, scope and prestige. The School offers a range of undergraduate and postgraduate programs via its Brisbane and Gold Coast campuses but approximately 34% of School s students study at least some courses online, a significant online presence through Open Universities Australia, and a growing higher degree by research student population. The University s commitment to the discipline and School has been supported over a long period having been successful in receiving funding in 2009 and again in 2013 as an Area of Strategic Investment (ASI). The 2007 Faculty of Arts Review Committee 3 acknowledged the excellent research leadership and strengths of the School The University s early commitment to multi disciplinarity continues today in the School where it is recognised as having research strength in crime and violence prevention; developmental and situational criminology; procedural, restorative, innovative and international justice; gender, race ethnicity; crime and justice; national and transnational policing and security. The School has been recognised and supported by the University 1 School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Review Portfolio (August 2015), p.6. 2 ibid 3 The School of CCJ was a School in the former Faculty until 1999 Organisational Reviews Unit Page 9

and externally. Its strengths lie in its achievements to date and its national and international reputation in the field. For the Review Committee, it is quite evident that the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice has been a notably positive and well recognised feature of Griffith University s history. There is much to be excited about in the School. It has developed a solid foundation on which to build for the future. The University and the Arts Education and Law Group have also been very supportive of the School and its goals, and the School has responded with ambitious plans. The Review Committee expresses concern that this distinctive part of Griffith s profile is vulnerable, particularly from Brisbane based competitors and its local reputation, but is convinced that, with such a strong history and such a sound base, there is an opportunity to refocus and move forward. The Review Committee is confident that, with a strategic rethink at and beyond the School level, there is a capacity to address the School s stated concerns, such as but not limited to: Increases in student numbers (while maintaining quality of in coming students) Student retention and graduate outcomes which are below national average Reliance on declining OUA income Concentration of grant income with small number of senior staff Establishment of the Griffith Criminology Institute Governance and cultural challenges across two campuses Challenges ahead include: the Griffith Online upgrade of core curriculum, trial of new teaching modes keeping learning and teaching engaged across the formats; communicating program strengths to local markets to improve intake quality; diversification reducing reliance on traditional sources industry partnered niche programs; and consolidating and showcasing the breadth and depth in the new Griffith Criminology Institute 3.2. COMMENDATIONS & AFFIRMATIONS In the following sections the Committee acknowledges the many strengths of the School and encourages it to continue to build on these. There are also a number of actions and proposed actions the Committee wishes to affirm, noting where appropriate the scope for further vigilance or improvement to said actions. 3.2.1 COMMENDATIONS Commendation 1: The Committee commends the entrepreneurial attitude of the School in identifying new opportunities, particularly those associated with distance and online learning. This has Organisational Reviews Unit Page 10

led to a very sound financial position for the School, which allows it to provide a broad range of supports to both staff and students. In embracing new methods as flexible approaches to student learning, the School has shown admirable concern for maintaining the quality of its offerings and has developed practical approaches for ensuring consistency across the different modes of learning. Commendation 2: The Committee commends the School s willingness to accommodate with generosity and resilience the University s goal of growth at the Gold Coast campus. Through the increased student intakes, the School has made a substantial contribution to the overall success of the Arts, Education and Law Group. We understand that the addition of the Gold Coast program to their profile is a challenge as well as an opportunity, and we are impressed with their timely and careful management of resources in order to provide sufficient numbers of teaching staff. They have also taken strong steps to develop a unified School and program across the two campuses. Space needs are still a major concern on the Gold Coast campus, but we understand that this is being addressed by the University. Commendation 3: The Committee commends the School for the positive and supportive culture evident across all levels of staff. This culture is reflected in student reports of their experiences in the program a. The School delivers a wide range of support programs for staff and student professional development, including financing for travel and conferences, writing retreats, and seed money for research projects. These supports are appreciated by staff and students. b. The School has an inclusive culture that is evidenced by the involvement of students, especially post graduate students, in the life of the School. The Committee acknowledges that this can be challenging at Mt Gravatt when the students are not on campus. Nevertheless, CCJ is taking positive steps to facilitate a sense of belonging among the students. Commendation 4: The Committee commends the School for continuing the long tradition of obtaining competitive research funding for both Centres and for individual staff projects. Commendation 5: The Committee commends the School for its ambition to achieve international recognition as one of the world s leading criminology programs. In support of this goal, the School has appropriately placed an emphasis on, and devoted resources to, publishing in internationally recognised journals, attending international conferences, hosting international visitors, hiring internationally visible staff, and developing research collaborations with international partners. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 11

Commendation 6: The Committee commends the School for its strong commitment to quality undergraduate education while simultaneously striving for international pre eminence in the research arena. 3.2.2 AFFIRMATIONS Affirmation 1: The Committee affirms the School s aim of being recognised as a leading criminology school. Affirmation 2: The Committee affirms the support and resourcing to date behind the building of a Secure Data Lab as an exciting and innovative collaboration that will reap rewards across Australia and internationally and that appropriate consideration is to be given to ongoing funding. Affirmation 3: The Committee affirms the development of online courses and the School s commitment to quality, but emphasises that the ownership of IP and courses must be a collaborative endeavour across the School. Affirmation 4: The Committee affirms the School s appointment of dedicated Open Universities Australia (OUA) staff and the pursuit of any opportunities to integrate them more fully into the life of the School. Affirmation 5: The Committee affirms the School s ability to attract quality domestic Higher Degree Research (HDR) students and acknowledges the need to ensure that the School is able to meet the recommended requirements for on time completions. Affirmation 6: The Committee affirms that the AEL Group and the School s development of an internationalisation agenda to expand its collaborations and global connections. Affirmation 7: The Committee affirms the School s desire to establish an Industry Advisory Board (IAB) and to work assiduously with the foreshadowed Griffith Criminology Institute (GCI) to determine and harmonise their requirements. The Committee suggests that a single board is most likely the best option but notes that the School and the Institute will need to make a joint decision around what works best for L&T and research. Establishment of an IAB must be worked on as the GCI is being developed. It must not wait until the GCI is established. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 12

Affirmation 8: The Committee strongly affirms the establishment of the Griffith Criminology Institute and recommends that its creation and development should be given a high priority (See Recommendation 7, section 3.5.1). The Committee acknowledges that it is important to have a number of research programs that reflect existing strengths and capacity such as the foundation laid by CEPS and KELJAG over many years. The Committee is encouraged by the proposed research themes developed thus far; however, the Institute must have the capacity and flexibility to embrace new and emerging areas of research strength. The Committee would also encourage these areas to be called programs or units rather than themes. In the Committee s view it is more appropriate to say a researcher is linked to a research program or unit than a theme. Affirmation 9: We affirm the development of the School Manager role. We acknowledge the difficulty associated with integrating the role across all aspects of the life of the School, but the School must support the development of the role in supporting its important activities. 3.3. ENHANCING REPUTATION Program reputation is important both inside and outside the University and at local, national, and international levels. Enhancing reputation at all of these levels involves both achieving the School s goals and then effectively publicizing those achievements, although the goals relevant to reputation at the various levels and the methods of communication appropriate to those levels are often quite different. The Committee recognises that there may even be tension resulting when the methods for accomplishing goals at different levels are in apparent conflict. This issue is discussed more fully in Section 3.5. Because suggestions for enhancing the School s international reputation relate primarily to staff research and publications, these are also addressed in Section 3.5. It is the Committee s considered opinion that while the School s reputation is the envy of many faculties (and Schools) both inside and outside the University, there is sometimes a lack of information to give support to the School s strengths. There is sometimes a mismatch between the School s accomplishments and its reputation within the university (as in research productivity rankings) or within the local student market (as indicated by OP scores) The Committee believes there is a need to articulate the School s strengths as backed up by evidence; this may involve collecting additional data as well as determining whether currently available University data can be used more strategically to build the School s reputation and provide opportunities to identify and address areas needing attention. It may also mean working with the University to improve some of its standard measures, such as having research productivity data include the quality as well as the quantity of publications. However, effectively documenting community engagement and collaborations is an important component, and the involvement of School staff is key to this. School staff should be reminded of the importance of how data represent the School; their involvement in the collection and analysis of data about the School would Organisational Reviews Unit Page 13

be valuable. The relationship between reputation and data will be further explored in section 3.5. as it is an important theme in the findings of this review. Recommendation 1: (ToR 2, 3, 4) The Committee recommends that the School actively collect and analyse annual data across a range of areas in order to document more effectively the strengths of the School as well as problems that may need attention. a. This effort may involve the collection of additional data, but may primarily consist of determining whether currently available university data can be used more strategically. It may also mean working with the University to improve some of its standard measures, such as having research productivity data include the quality as well as the quantity of publications. b. One important component of this effort will be to figure out how to document the contributions of the School s many collaborations with the wider community outside the University. c. School staff should be made aware of the importance of how data represent the School; their involvement in the collection and analysis of data about the School would be valuable. Timeline: 8 months and ongoing Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice 3.4. LEARNING & TEACHING As previously mentioned, the Committee commends the School for its contribution to the overall success of the Arts, Education and Law (AEL) Group through increased student intakes and their positive management to ensure sufficient numbers of teaching staff and adequate resources are available to support quality student outcomes. Its unwavering commitment to its staff and support of quality teaching has seen the School rate highly across a range of university and national student satisfaction measures, gaining 96% overall student satisfaction and 85% good teaching scores in the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ surveys) 4. The School continues to find ways to demonstrate its commitment to student engagement and success and has contributed to the establishment of student societies, developed key industry partnerships and expanded its alumni events and activities. The School has an inclusive culture which is evidenced by the inclusion of students, especially post graduate students, in the life of the School. The Committee acknowledges 4 School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Staircase Report as at July 2014. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 14

that this can be challenging at the Mount Gravatt campus when, as the staff report, the students are not on campus. CCJ, however, is taking positive steps to facilitate a sense of belonging among the students. The perceived (real or otherwise) consistent decline in student OP scores and academic ability within the undergraduate stream as undergraduate enrolments have increased is of significant concern to staff within the School. The Committee commends the School s willingness to examine available student data in its self review submission and has taken note of the various strategies put forward during the review process to address this. The Committee would caution against taking a simplistic approach to assessing applicant quality through the lens of the OP scores as the only predictor of student success. The Committee also understands that the University s catchment includes a broad range of socio economic strata. It is the Committee s view that the School should use the available data to understand better the range of students attracted to their degrees in order to continue to enhance the high quality of student support already provided by the School and the University. Increased enrolments do not necessarily lead to lower quality. In theory, growth could come from a new group of high performing students, although the Committee realizes that it is not easy for one School alone to have a large impact in this area. But if the School wants to attract higher quality applicants, it must take pro active steps in promoting its strengths, particularly those that might appeal to undergraduate applicants. We would, therefore, encourage the School to work with the Office for Marketing & Communications (OMC) to develop a marketing plan for 2015 and beyond, and we suggest that all the steps the School is taking to achieve international prominence have the potential to make the criminology program more attractive to outstanding local students. If a goal is to grow the enrolments at the Gold Coast campus, it may be appropriate to develop marketing activities especially for that catchment. For all campuses marketing should include data on employment chances and examples of outstanding careers of CCJ alumni. Additional local efforts may be needed, such as working to have an active presence in local media representations of issues of crime and justice in order to achieve greater visibility in the community beyond the local criminal justice agencies. 3.4.1 EXTENDING THE SCHOOL S REACH The Committee acknowledges that the addition of the Gold Coast campus to the School s profile is both a challenge and an opportunity and we are impressed with the School s timely and careful management of resources in order to provide sufficient numbers of teaching staff. The Committee also acknowledges the manner in which the School has embraced the development of a unified School and has taken strong steps to develop consistency in its programs across the Nathan and Gold Coast campuses. It also recommends in particular the incorporation of a wider, more international perspective on student recruitment and partnerships. This perspective should especially be able to draw upon and reflect Griffith University s profile and aspirations in relation to the study Organisational Reviews Unit Page 15

of criminology in the Asia Pacific region. At the postgraduate level, the School should build on the success of the Graduate Certificate in Forensic Mental Health through a broadening of the target student market. The strategic international connections, such as CCJ is building with the Singapore Police and United Arab Emirates justice, could also be linked with attracting more international HDR students. It is also important that the School puts in place an Industry Advisory Board (IAB). A number of views had been raised as to whether there was a need for a Learning and Teaching IAB and a research IAB or whether it was possible to combine the two. The key question that needed to be resolved was whether membership of a combined IAB would have sufficient interest in pursuing research and L&T matters. The Committee suggests that a single board is most likely the best option but the School and Institute will need to jointly make a decision around what works best for learning, teaching, research and engagement. Establishment of an Industry Advisory Board must be worked on as the Griffith Criminology Institute is also being developed it cannot wait until the Institute is established most particularly because it is a requirement that all Schools at least have an IAB with a focus on L&T matters. This issue will be further explored in relation to discussion about the development of the Griffith Criminology Institute. Recommendation 2: (ToR 2) The Committee recommends that any drive for new enrolments and growth be undertaken with careful consideration to the risks of bringing in students with lesser qualifications. However, it may be a mistake to concentrate solely on OP as a predictor of performance. A careful analysis of the impact of growth is called for. Additionally, increased enrolments do not necessarily lead to lower quality. In theory, growth could come from a new group of high performing students, although we realise that it is not easy for one School alone to have a large impact in this area. a. The Committee acknowledges the commitment of the School to work with OMC to develop a marketing plan for 2015, and we suggest that all the steps the School is taking to achieve international prominence have the potential to make the program more attractive to outstanding local students. b. Strategic international connections, such as CCJ is building with the Singapore police and UA justice, could be tied with attracting more international HDR students. c. Other, more local, efforts may be needed, such as working to have an active presence in local media representations of issues of crime and justice in order to achieve greater visibility in the community beyond local criminal justice agencies. d. Establish an Industry Advisory Board with a focus on learning and teaching matters. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 16

Timeline: 6 months and ongoing Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice 3.4.2. OPEN UNIVERSITIES AUSTRALIA & ONLINE DELIVERY The School has been highly successful in developing its online presence via Open Universities Australia (OUA). Based on comments to the Review Committee, it is in fact one of the success stories of the University in the OUA online space. As previously noted the Committee affirms the move to produce more online offerings. However, we would encourage to School to develop mechanisms that will not only review current and future online offerings but also ensure that offerings (particularly courses/subjects) are able to be changed based on course feedback. There is a sense that intellectual property considerations for OUA offerings may be an additional hurdle to developing courses that are up to date and responsive to student feedback. While the Committee has no specific recommendation in relation to online programs and courses, we would strongly encourage to School to seek further advice around this issue to ensure delivery and quality of online offerings reflect the pre eminence of the School in this field. 3.5. RESEARCH & RESEARCH TRAINING 3.5.1 CRIMINOLOGY UNDER ONE UMBRELLA The Committee supports the development of a Griffith Criminology Institute that builds on the School s current strengths. The Committee acknowledges that, within the Institute, it is important to have a number of research programs that reflect existing strengths and capacity such as those developed by CEPS and KELJAG over many years. The Committee is encouraged by the proposed research themes developed thus far; however, the Institute must have the capacity and flexibility to embrace new and emerging areas of research strength. The Committee would also encourage that these areas be called programs or units rather than themes. In the Committee s view it is more appropriate to say a researcher is linked to a research program or unit than a theme. The Committee s advice is that the sustainability of the School would be substantially enhanced by the creation of the Griffith Criminology Institute, and thus it is important that School staff be involved in the planning for the Institute. However, because establishment of the Institute needs to move forward relatively quickly, consultation should be organised so as not to cause undue delay. Organisational Reviews Unit Page 17

The Committee would also encourage accommodation of a Centre of Excellence within the Institute with an organising principle focussed around a multi level approach to crime and violence prevention (CVP). A multi level CVP would include research at the individual, micro social, situational, and community (local, national, or world) levels and would thus be inclusive of the current range of School research. Critical to the success of the Institute would be putting in place leadership and a structure that is able to bring the activities of the School and the Institute together. The Institute Director will need strong leadership skills and must be able to drive the approach necessary for establishing a research culture that will lead to world wide recognition. The Director will also need the personal skills to collaborate productively with the Head of School in creating programs with a unified vision. Developing an effective relationship between the School and the Institute will have benefits not only in research but also in learning and teaching and in creating and maintaining an effective Industry Advisory Board (as discussed in section 3.4.1). Recommendation 3: (ToR 3) The Committee supports the development of a Griffith Criminology Institute that builds on the School s current strengths. Bringing the activities of the School and the Institute together is important, and to this end the Committee recommends: a. That the University appoint a Director with strong leadership skills who can drive the approach necessary for establishing a research culture that will lead to worldwide recognition. The Director will also need the personal skills to collaborate productively with the Head of School in creating a program with a unified vision. b. That School staff be involved in planning for an Institute that will support and facilitate their research. Specifically, it is important that all members (including those outside of CCJ) of CEPS and KELJAG be included in discussions during the decision making process. However, establishment of the Institute needs to move forward relatively quickly, so consultation should be organised so as not to cause undue delay. c. That the School and Institute not forget the importance of strategic collaborations across the University. d. That there be a space for a Centre of Excellence to be developed and that, consideration be given to a multi level approach to crime and violence prevention (CVP) as an organising principle. Multi level CVP would include research at the situational, individual, and community (local, national, or world) levels and would thus be inclusive of the current range of School research. Timeline: 8 months Responsibility: Pro Vice Chancellor (Arts, Education, Law); Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Organisational Reviews Unit Page 18

3.5.2 SUPPORTING RESEARCH AND RESEARCH TRAINING The Committee recognises that there is often a tension between the goal of international recognition, which comes with staff publishing their research in high impact journals, and the goal of being responsive to real world criminal justice problems, especially in the local area. Publications focusing on local issues, for example, are sometimes not considered appropriate for national or international journals or those journals that are more theoretical in nature. The Griffith School of Criminology and Criminal Justice has a strong and admirable tradition of engaging in both basic and applied research and research that is more local in scope as well as research that is national or international in scope. The Committee recommends that the School continue that tradition, but we suggest a conversation around finding the appropriate balance between these interests, determining how resources and rewards should flow to both kinds of activity, while at the same time expecting the very highest quality in all research. Evaluating and rewarding high quality research are both obviously critical for the School. The Committee suggests that the School can build on steps it has already taken to articulate research goals and expectations through more explicit discussion about quality of publications and through more focused mentoring of early career staff. Publicizing the high quality research being conducted is also important to achieving international recognition. The School delivers a wide variety of support for the professional development and research activities of staff and HDR students, including funding research related travel and conference attendance, organizing writing retreats, and providing seed money for research projects. This support is greatly appreciated by staff and students alike. Additional support to HDR students for postdoctoral career success could have significant benefits. Such support should focus on having them in a strong position in terms of publications and also preparing them carefully for the actual job search process. Models used by other programs for professional socialisation seminars and job search preparation could be helpful in assessing what the School could do in these areas. The student group currently organises monthly meetings at which staff present their work, but the School may find it useful to take more control of this process. Recommendation 4: (ToR 3) The Committee recommends that the School continue the tradition of engaging in both basic and applied research and research that is more local in scope as well as research that is national or international in scope, and we suggest a conversation around finding the appropriate balance between these interests, determining how resources and rewards should flow to both kinds of activity, while at the same time expecting the very highest quality in all research. Timeline: 8 months Organisational Reviews Unit Page 19

Responsibility: Pro Vice Chancellor (Arts, Education, Law); Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Recommendation 5: (ToR 2, 3) The Committee applauds the School s goal of becoming one of the world s leading criminology/criminal justice programs. Many positive steps have been taken towards achieving this goal. We would recommend additional attention be paid to the following areas: a. The School has emphasised the need for publications to appear in the field s top journals and some particular journals have been recommended. The School might go farther by having an open discussion about what journals are the best and have the highest impact and by considering incentives, such as financial bonuses, for publications in those journals. b. A more formal mentoring program for early career staff may be useful in making program goals and expectations more explicit. At present staff seem to receive strong mentoring when they have a natural fit into a senior staff research program, but otherwise it is spotty. c. The School should consider various ways in which its program can be marketed to the world audience, such as brochures included in conference materials, Ph.D. program ads in organisational newsletters, and reaching the international press with results of important research projects. d. Preparation of Ph.D. students for the job market is an important part of the visibility of the School. This includes having them in a strong position in terms of publications and also preparing them carefully for the actual job search process. Models used by other programs for professional socialisation seminars and job search preparation could be helpful in assessing what the School could do in these areas. The student group currently organises monthly meetings at which staff present their work, but the School may find it useful to take more control of this process. Timeline: 8 months Responsibility: Head, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice; HDR Convenor, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice. 3.6. ORGANISATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND RESOURCES 3.6.1. LEADERSHIP The Committee recognises that the School has benefited from strong leadership over the years and judges that continued strong leadership will be critical if the School s ambitious goals are to be achieved. As previously discussed, that leadership would include the Director of the proposed Institute. However, this not only relates to current or formal Organisational Reviews Unit Page 20

leadership positions but also to ensuring leadership continuity through providing development opportunities for mid and early career staff in order to build capability. Generally speaking, there can be a tendency for academic schools to load up staff at these levels with teaching and administrative work as a stop gap measure to cover workloads without providing the necessary supports. This is not a reflection on the School, which has been very generous in support of its staff. As previously indicated, the School has already taken a number of steps in this direction, including providing seed grant funding for new research ideas an annual staff writing retreat, and annual professional development/conference funding. The Committee merely wishes to point out the importance of purposefully planning for leadership continuity and ensuring the balance is correct across its activities in order to deliver continued success. For example, it appears to the Review Committee that, currently, there is an imbalance between the Mount Gravatt and Gold Coast campuses. The School has an aspiration to expand its footprint at the Gold Coast campus particularly through growth of its student cohort. It is the Committee s view that in order to reach this goal it is important that the School s activities at the Gold Coast are supported by an adequate cadre of senior academics to provide strategic leadership and mentoring of staff in Learning and Teaching and Research. Running a program on two or more campuses is always challenging, and the leadership structure that is established will be one of the most important elements in determining the success of that effort. It will be essential to have someone in the Gold Coast leadership role who shares the vision for the future of the School and who has the social skills to foster in all staff on that campus a sense of belonging to one program. Recommendation 6: (ToR 6) The Committee recognises that the School has benefited from strong leadership over the years and judges that continued strong leadership will be critical if the School s ambitious goals are to be achieved. The committee recommends that the School develop concrete plans regarding several leadership issues including: a. Investing substantially in the development of mid career and early career staff. The School should determine whether there are additional steps, such as release time from teaching, or a more formalized mentoring program, that could help prepare staff to be able, for example, to successfully lead a Centre of Excellence proposal. Consideration should also be given to the extent to which mid level staff should be assigned what are, in some cases, heavy administrative loads. b. Developing a plan for facilitating an effective working relationship between the Director of the School and the Director of the new Institute. c. Developing a plan for reducing problems of several locations, and, in particular, supporting leadership on the Gold Coast campus. Timeline: 8 months Organisational Reviews Unit Page 21