FAQ – Academic Progress

Under Academic Board Regulations (section 32), students who do not respond to the My Academic Progress Response tool (i.e. submission status is 'not started' or 'draft') are still entitled to be notified of, submit evidence to and attend an Academic Progress Committee (APC) hearing.

However, a student who wishes to attend must give notice to this effect within three working days. Students who do not are not be entitled to attend and is at the discretion of the APC Chair.

Following the three working-day rule, the faculty (e.g. the Chair) has the discretion to allow students to attend, particularly where reasonable circumstances delayed their response. However, the faculty must be consistent in exercising this discretion.

APC hearings commonly need to be rescheduled at the student's request or by the faculty. Although faculties will likely want to reschedule the hearing to take place as soon after the original as possible, it can only be less than ten working days when the student has provided a written agreement. 

Where the student under review requests the date change:

• If there are exceptional reasons that are accepted at face value, a new hearing can take place in less than ten working days unless a date cannot be agreed with the student. If the student does not respond to the proposed new date within a reasonable time (e.g. 2-3 working days) then the faculty can proceed in absentia either on the original date or a new date. For example, a student has a hearing at 11am on Monday 11 March but notifies the faculty the week before that they cannot attend. The faculty informs the student that they can be heard at 11am on Thursday 14 March, and requests confirmation. If the faculty does not hear back from the student by 11am on Monday 11 March, then they may proceed with the hearing at that time or hold it at 11am on Thursday.
• Where the faculty requests evidence of the reasons for the date change request, this must be submitted at least three working days before the hearing. If the student requests a date change less than three working days before the hearing, the faculty has the right to dismiss the request and continue in absentia.
• If the student requests a date change less than three working days before the hearing and the faculty believes the circumstances could be exceptional but requests evidence, this must be submitted no more than three working days after the original hearing date.
  • Where evidence is or is not submitted by the deadline, the new hearing date can only be less than ten working days if the student agrees to it.

In all cases, APC hearings cannot be brought forward to a date different to the one stipulated in the Notice of Hearing without notifying the student and inviting them to attend. This includes a student who has not engaged with the academic progress process or does not wish to attend.

As long as an APC receives documentary evidence from a student prior to the hearing or at the start of the hearing, it should consider it as it could help inform the panel’s decision, subject to practical considerations regarding the volume of material and the time needed to consider it.

Not doing so may give the student grounds to appeal any decision of an APC on the basis that it failed to consider relevant material and has been denied procedural fairness.

However, draft evidence should not be considered.

A student who submits evidence at any point before the hearing commences is entitled to appeal an exclusion even if that evidence has not been considered by the APC.

Students who do not respond to the Notice of Hearing within three working days lose their entitlement to attend the APC (but can do so at the discretion of the APC Chair). However, if a student submits evidence (e.g., via their response tool or a medical certificate) between day four and the commencement of the hearing, they can appeal an exclusion irrespective of whether the APC considered the evidence.

An application to the dean is only for students who did not attend their hearing or provide any documentary evidence by the time of the hearing.

If a student is unhappy with the dean’s review decision they should make a complaint to the Victorian Ombudsman. The Student Complaints Procedure and University Student Ombudsman Procedure do not cover any matters under part 4 of the Academic Board Regulations.

Students who participate in the APC process and are excluded have the right to appeal through the Exclusion Appeals Panel (EAP). The appeal must be submitted to the Exclusion Appeals Panel executive officer within 20 working days of the Notice of Decision being sent to the student; the executive officer will then contact the faculty. 

Appeals will be made on up to two grounds:

• New evidence has emerged that was not reasonably available at the time of hearing; 
• A procedural irregularity occured that has the ability to affect the decision of the Academic Progress Committee.

Faculties will be asked to supply relevant records within five working days of the student’s appeal. While most documentation should already exist, like the student’s evidence and the Record of Hearing, the Chair of the APC will be asked to respond to the appeal and make a comment as to whether the new evidence presented, or the procedural irregularity, may have affected the APC decision. This response is not binding, but will be considered by the Exclusion Appeals Panel.

Intermission cannot be an enrolment condition only a recommendation. See OGC's advice on enrolment conditions for more information.

The risk level remains in place for when the student re-enrols after intermission.

It is permissible to hold the APC hearing during or after the period of intermission. However, if the hearing is in a later review period clearly outline to the student which period the hearing relates to. You may even wish to send the notice of hearing well in advance if appropriate to do so.

Yes. It doesn't count towards a student's maximum intermission allowance but the maximum course duration still remains.

Yes, provided the Chair considers themselves not be have any bias with that student. A student can also object if they wish to as per the Procedure.

There is flexibility for faculties to determine who will be referring students to an APC as long as appropriate delegations are in place. The referrer (or anyone in the group of referrers) cannot then be on the APC panel so faculties will need to determine whether a senior academic is better placed at the referral meeting or on the panel. A decision of the APC is challengeable if the person making a decision doesn't have the appropriate delegations.

Documents can be sent electronically (e.g. to the chair) and encrypted (with a password provided to the intended recipient).

Students should ask permission if they would like to keep their phone on and if permitted, considerations must be given by the student e.g. turn to silent.

Students must also request permission from the Chair if they wish to record the hearing.

Yes, a student can bring a support person if they wish.

The maximum course duration is recorded in the Handbook for the year the student began their course. For academic progress purposes, any credit received for previous study is taken into consideration and a new maximum course duration is calculated.

For most courses, the maximum course duration is calculated as the number of years to complete the degree x2 +2.

If a student transfers from Course A to Course B, the commencement date of Course B is used to maximum course duration.

If a student is admitted to the same course, the new commencement date is used to calculate maximum course duration.

My Progress and Support and My Academic Progress Response tools do not close immediately after the deadline however their status in UniCRM will be as 'submitted late'. Faculties must take this into consideration when determining whether an intervention is to be applied.

Students at risk level 1 and 2 may complete My Progress and Support and access their recommendations until the beginning of the following review period. Students at risk level 3 may submit their My Academic Progress Response up until the beginning of the next round e.g. students in the main round will have until the beginning of the deferred and supplementary round.

Faculties must manage the discontinuation for risk level 3 as per their usual internal processes and students should not be directed to Monash Connect.

Only My Academic Progress Response tool permits documentary evidence to be submitted. The purpose of My Progress and Support is for students to reflect on the areas in which they have struggled during the review period and receive customised recommendations rather than as a tool for providing documentary evidence. It does includes free text fields but with limited space.

If a student has submitted a response to either tool, it cannot be edited later. If a risk level 3 student wishes to provide additional evidence after submission, ask them to submit this to academicprogress@monash.edu.

The definition of ‘working day’ in the Regulations is as follows:

working day means a day other than:

(a) a day that is a University holiday under Part 8 of the Monash University (Vice-Chancellor) Regulations; or

(b) in relation to an Australian campus, a Saturday or a Sunday or a day appointed as a public holiday in the whole of Victoria under the Public Holidays Act 1993; or

(c) in relation to an international campus, a day that is a public holiday in the place where that campus is located;

The mid-semester break would be ‘working days’ (excluding the weekend and public holidays)

Yes, risk levels do transfer to the new course so that the faculty can determine if further steps need to be taken, depending on the student circumstances eg a course progression meeting or APC hearing.

The only exception is where a student's only risk level criteria is failing to meet a compulsory course requirements and this does not apply to the new course.

You can allow the student to have a translator (in addition to a support person), but the chair at the start of the hearing must clarify to the translator what their role is (e.g., not to change any of the content or express their own opinions). The chair should also double check at the beginning what language limitations they have. For example, if the student understands everything but just has some issues with expressing specific things, there would be no expectation for the entire proceeding to be translated.