PG Student Staff Meeting

PG Student Staff Meeting

PG Student Staff Meeting

semester 2, meeting 1 minutes

Michael responded to items brought up at the last meeting (below)

FIT5057 Semester 1

This unit was taught by two lecturers who did not seem to communicate with each other.

The lecture is large, there are so many students the lecturer cannot interact with them all

The tutorials are boring, the tutor talks to himself.

Michael Morgan explained that the lecture numbers have increased significantly with no large-enough teaching space available. This has resulted in requiring two lectures/lecturers, both of whom is new to this unit.

FIT5136 Semester 1

Tutor not prepared

Ya to send MM the tutor’s name.


Students feel they were not very well informed at the start of the semester/unit. Some students go home during the break, returning for week 1, and are not here for the briefing in O week.

Students have a week to decide on a topic and find a supervisor. They were told that the honours topic list was not up to date at the start of semester so students don’t know which were really available. Students who didn’t/couldn’t find a supervisor swapped to IE.

MM: We need to manage the process of finding supervisors/topics at the start of semester. MM will talk to Pari and David Albrecht.


Students would like more timely feedback from the tutor. It has been a two week wait.

Students would like some indication of what they need to improve rather than just a mark.

It was suggested that slides be available for the tutorials: students found it hard to write everything down before it is erased from the board.


Karan does an excellent job


Tutorial is a very good experience. There is discussion, debating, students are involved. Joshua A is the tutor.


Some of the students with no previous experience of finance are having difficulty with the finance aspects of the unit.

The moodle site is well organised but the lectures do not feel as organised.

Tutorials: students are given activities to do but there is not much discussion.

The lecturer tries to be interactive which is good

There is too much breadth, not enough focus.


Students are enjoying having small classes

Interaction is very good

Students do their own research on different topics related to the unit and share this information with each other.

PG Student Staff Meeting semester 1, meeting 2

Minutes, with responses in italics


-The lecturer is difficult to understand

-The content of the subject was interesting.

-The lecturer had problems explaining the material.

The lecturer was contacted. Students were reported to be happier.


-There is too much assumed knowledge (that has not been covered in required the pre-requisite subjects that the students have done) and therefore students are struggling with the unit.

-For the assignment 1 there was a lack of information about programming in Java.

The unit is going to be reviewed by Graduate programs committee. It is on unit watch alert.


-The tutor is unprofessional and unprepared.

-He is unable to answer questions about the tutorial exercises.

The lecturer has spoken with the tutor.


-According to the students, assignment 2 requires Visual Basic Studio and some students are not familiar with VB coding.

-The students report the VB code is not working.

-Business students in particular are struggling because they do not have the coding background.

Response from Lecturer: There is a small part (5 marks) of a 10 mark assignment. ie 10% of the subject marks.

VBA was used for this part and students did not have to write any code, they only had to run a module written for them. Monash has installed the virus checker Microsoft System Center End Point Protection in the labs. This virus checker deleted the vba code from the Excel files.

You can exclude files the important files from the virus checker, but the faculty refused to do that.

SamedinBalla set up a virtual machine running windows 8. The code works in this environment. Last week (Monday) I changed the assignment to eliminate any need for any VBA. I will not try to use it again.

The assignment has been redesigned.


-The tutor changed half way through the semester in the Friday 12 to 2pm class, but the new tutor is difficult to understand and has difficulty explaining concepts. It was requested that he write the comments of the board so it easier to follow.


-The assignments are very theoretical, students would appreciate having an assignment related to an industry project.

Response from Lecturer:

This has been an issue last year and guest speakers were used to give insights into field implications of EA. This year, I had:

·Included references to real life case studies, including videos, during lectures and tutorials to illustrate the application of theory/concepts in practice;

·A small task equivalent to actually writing an EA artefact for a case government agency, like in the fields

·A real industry case study was used in assignment 1 and 2, to further align theories with case applications of EA to answer Qs

·Introduced catering for varying learning styles when delivering the lectures, which about half to a third of students attending.

The calibre/competency of critical thinking and writing among students also contributes to the challenges of their learning through field case study methods, not mentioning normal ones.

The challenge I had in partially redesigning some aspects of the unit is limited by using associated hours. I spent over 50 hours redesigning the 2 assignments and exam paper, with Q&A guidelines and unable to claim, not mentioning many more unpaid additional hours to redesign the lecture slides to increase linkages to industry practice concepts. However, I don’t mind contributing in-kind effort as the goal is to deliver a unit well.

There are also expectation differences between a small handful of students with some industry experience, vs a larger group with no work experience and having critical thinking and writing challenges.

I am in for supporting increasing alignment of theories with field practice in unit redesign, but the above issues need to be considered to result in a balance unit that is doable and perhaps offer choice of theory oriented vs industry applied assessment in further assignments – just food for thought at this stage. RMIT is delivery industry like EA courses that are linked to some EA standard accreditation – the Q is whether Monash wants to go down that pathway.

If there are any other feedback, please share as I am all for supporting continuously improvement.

Also: Chris Gonsalvez is looking at engaging more speakers.

General issues

-Construction noise in K Building from jack hammers etc makes it difficult to work on group projects.

-There is a lack of space for students to work on group assignments outside class, many study areas are designated quiet spaces so they cannot discuss their work with each other.

Passed on to e-services.

-Group discussion rooms with computers need to be made available for group work assignments.

-For the Monash mobile application, iOS version, the map links display the incorrect campus maps.

-For lecture theatre B215? (for FIT5057 Project Management I think) the folding tables are not working properly and do not sit flat so student equipment rolls off.

A BEIMS has been raised for this issue.

-Students would like to have a seminar series on interesting topics that was open to all students (similar to what is covered in FIT5141 Advances Topics in IT).

The ADE will be increasing industry engagement.

Students’ request was brought up at the School Meeting