This Rule sets ANU’s academic‑progress mechanics for coursework and medical students: it sets failure thresholds that trigger probation, gives Delegated Authorities power to exclude students (for up to five years), and creates internal appeal and review routes (Academic Progress Committee; Deputy Vice‑Chancellor). It applies to undergraduate, postgraduate and medical programs, repeals earlier academic‑progress rules, and includes transitional rules for past results and student requests to modify how the new provisions apply to their record.
This rule, the Academic Progress Rule 2019, sets out the University’s administrative framework for monitoring and responding to unsatisfactory academic progress by students enrolled in undergraduate coursework award programs, postgraduate coursework award programs and the ANU medical program. It commences 1 January 2020 and is made under the Vice-Chancellorship Statute 2013, s 9.5 (see s 2 and s 3). The instrument replaces earlier instruments by repeal (s 41) and applies both to programs that commence after the rule and, subject to transitional limits, to programs that commenced before (s 42).
Mechanically the rule does four principal things. First, it defines quantitative and categorical triggers for formal “probation” and for potential exclusion from enrolment. For undergraduate coursework, failing 4 courses triggers probation and failing 8 courses triggers the Delegated Authority’s discretion to exclude for up to 5 years (s 10). For postgraduate coursework, the thresholds are 3 and 5 courses respectively (s 12). For medical programs, any failure in a year triggers probation for the remainder of the program and certain repeat or final-year failures expose a student to potential exclusion (s 21).
Second, it sets discrete remedial pathways and restoration conditions. A student on undergraduate probation can be restored to good standing if they subsequently complete 8 consecutive teaching-period courses without failing (s 11). For postgraduate students the parallel threshold is 6 consecutive successfully completed courses (s 13). The rule also treats repeated failures of the same course as separate counting events (s 10(6), s 12(6)), and provides separate rules for second and third failures of the same course (s 14, s 15).
Third, the rule allocates decision-making authority to named institutional actors and committees. The Associate Dean may appoint Delegated Authorities for programs, and Delegated Authorities have the power to exclude students (s 34, s 35). The Registrar has a central operational role: required to notify students, to chair the Academic Progress Committee and to refer exclusion decisions to that committee where no appeal is made (s 10(2), s 12(2), s 23, s 28(2)). Appeals and reviews are handled by an Academic Progress Committee established by s 23, with procedural appeals to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor available on limited grounds (s 24-27).
Current sections
Direct links to the current provisions in Academic Progress Rule 2019.
1
1
Academic Progress Rule 2019
meta-content-style-type: text/css
meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8
meta-generator: Aspose.Words for .NET 20.2
This instrument is made under the Vice-Chancellorship Statute 2013, section 9.5.
4 Definitions
In this instrument:
Academic Progress Committee means the committee established under section 23 (Establishment of Academic Progress Committee etc.) or, if 2 committees are established under that section, the relevant committee.
Associate Dean, in relation to an ANU College, means a person who is appointed as an Associate Dean of the college.
[Note: For double degree programs, see section 36 (Associate Deans: double degree programs).]
award means a degree, diploma or certificate offered by the University.
committee means the Academic Progress Committee.
course means a subject of scholarly study, whether it is taught:
(a) in a connected series of classes or demonstrations; or
(b) by means of practical work, including, for example, the production by students of essays, theses or case studies or the attendance and participation by students in seminars or workshops; or
(c) by clinical or professional practice; or
(d) in another way or in a combination of ways.
coursework means the courses, and other written or oral work (if any), undertaken by a student for a coursework award program, but does not include any thesis component of the program of at least 24 units duration.
coursework award has the meaning given by the Coursework Awards Rule, section 7 (Coursework awards).
[Note: Under the Coursework Awards Rule, section 7, a ‘coursework award’ is a coursework degree, Diploma, Graduate Diploma or Graduate Certificate that may be conferred by the University. Coursework degree is defined in that section to cover any degree that is not a research degree to which the Research Awards Rule applies e.g. any Bachelor or Bachelor Honours degree and any Master degree (other than a Master of Philosophy).]
coursework award program means a program for a coursework award and, to remove any doubt, includes a coursework program for a double degree.
Delegated Authority, in relation to a program offered by an ANU College for a coursework award, means a person who is appointed under section 34 (Appointment of Delegated Authorities) as a Delegated Authority for the program.
[Note: For double degree programs, see section 35 (Delegated Authorities: double degree programs).]
double degree: a coursework program is a coursework program for a double degree if a student undertaking the program may qualify for 2 undergraduate coursework awards or 2 postgraduate coursework awards.
enrol includes re-enrol.
exclusion decision: see section 22 (Application of Division 4.1).
exercise a function includes perform the function.
fail a course: to remove any doubt, a student fails a course if the student is awarded any of the following grades for the course:
(a) N (fail);
(b) NCN (not completed/fail);
(c) WN (withdrawn with failure).
function includes authority, duty and power.
medical program means a program for the Medicinae ac Chirurgiae Doctoranda (Doctor of Medicine and Surgery) (MChD) degree.
medical student means a student who is or has been enrolled, at any level, in a medical program.
postgraduate coursework means coursework undertaken by a student for a postgraduate coursework award program.
postgraduate coursework award means any of the following coursework awards:
(a) a Graduate Diploma;
(b) a Graduate Certificate;
(c) a Master’s degree (other than the Master of Philosophy);
(d) the Juris Doctor degree;
(e) the Doctoranda Medicinae ac Chirurgiae (Doctor of Medicine and Surgery) degree;
(f) a professional doctorate (other than the Doctor of Juridical Science or Doctor of Psychology (Clinical)).
[Note: The Research Awards Rule applies to programs for the degrees of Doctor of Philosophy, Doctor of Juridical Science, Doctor of Psychology (Clinical) and Master of Philosophy.]
postgraduate coursework award program means a program for a postgraduate coursework award and, to remove any doubt, includes a program for a double degree if a student undertaking the program may qualify for 2 postgraduate coursework awards.
semester means first semester or second semester.
session means summer session, autumn session, winter session or spring session.
student means a person who is, or has been, enrolled in a coursework award program.
teaching period means a semester or session.
undergraduate coursework means coursework undertaken by a student for an undergraduate coursework award program.
undergraduate coursework award means a coursework award that is not a postgraduate coursework award.
undergraduate coursework award program means a program for an undergraduate coursework award and, to remove any doubt, includes a program for a double degree if a student undertaking the program may qualify for 2 undergraduate coursework awards.
working day means a day that is not a Saturday, a Sunday, a public holiday in the Australian Capital Territory, or a University holiday.
5 Application of instrument
This instrument applies in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs and postgraduate coursework award programs (including medical programs).
6 Equivalent courses
(1) A reference to a course includes in this instrument a reference to an equivalent course.
(2) For this instrument, a course of a program is equivalent to another course if it is declared, in writing, to be an equivalent course by a Delegated Authority for the program.
(3) The Delegated Authority may make a declaration under subsection (2) if the Delegated Authority considers that the courses have a sufficient similarity of content, despite the courses having a different title or different course code.
(4) In this section:
course code means the unique alphanumeric code used within the University to identify a particular course.
7 Joint, double or dual programs with other institutions etc.
(1) A provision of this instrument has no effect to the extent to which it is inconsistent with an agreement between the University and another university or institution that makes provision for or in relation to joint, double or dual programs offered by them (including cotutelle), or the joint, double or dual conferral of degrees or other awards by them, for students or a particular student.
(2) For subsection (1), a provision of this instrument is not inconsistent with a provision of an agreement mentioned in that subsection to the extent to which both provisions can operate concurrently.
8 Consistent and fair application of instrument
A Delegated Authority for a program must take reasonable steps to ensure that this instrument is applied consistently and fairly within the program.
Part 2—Academic progress rules: programs other than medical programs
Division 2.1—Application
9 Application of Part 2
(1) This Part applies in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs and postgraduate coursework award programs.
(2) However, this Part does not apply in relation to medical programs.
[Note: Part 3 (Academic progress rules: medical programs) applies in relation to medical programs.]
(3) To remove any doubt, Part 3 (and not this Part) applies exclusively to a medical student in relation to the medical program undertaken by the student, but this Part applies in relation to any other coursework award program undertaken by the student.
(4) Also, to remove any doubt, if a student fails a course in any undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program to which this Part applies, nothing in this Part prevents 2 or more provisions of this Part from applying to the student in accordance with their terms in relation to the failure.
Division 2.2—Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress
10 Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress: undergraduate coursework
(1) If a student fails a total of 4 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs), the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in undergraduate coursework, and is regarded as being on probation.
(2) If subsection (1) applies to a student, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing, that:
(a) the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in undergraduate coursework, and is regarded as being on probation; and
(b) the student may be excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs if the student fails a total of 8 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs).
(3) If a student fails a total of 8 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs), the Delegated Authority for the undergraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled may exclude the student from undergraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(4) If:
(a) under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and reviews), the Academic Progress Committee permits a student to continue to undertake undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the student subsequently fails a total of 2 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs);
the Delegated Authority for the undergraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled may exclude the student from undergraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(5) If the Delegated Authority excludes the student from undergraduate coursework award programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
(6) To remove any doubt, if a student fails the same course 2 or more times, each failure counts, for this section, as a failure of a course by the student.
(7) This section is subject to section 11 (Restoration of good standing: undergraduate coursework).
11 Restoration of good standing: undergraduate coursework
(1) This section applies to a student if:
(a) the student is regarded, under section 10(1) (Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress: undergraduate coursework), as being on probation; and
(b) in the teaching periods after the teaching period in which the student last failed a course in which the student was enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program, the student successfully completes 8 (or more) courses in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs) without failing a course; and
(c) the 8 (or more) courses successfully completed are completed in consecutive teaching periods.
(2) However, this section does not apply to the student if, under section 10(3), the student has been excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs for a period, but, under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and reviews), the Academic Progress Committee has permitted the student to continue to undertake undergraduate coursework award programs.
(3) In working out for subsection (1)(c) whether teaching periods are consecutive:
(a) teaching periods are taken to follow the following order:
(i) summer session;
(ii) first semester;
(iii) autumn session;
(iv) winter session;
(v) second semester;
(vi) spring session; and
(b) any teaching period in which the student is not enrolled in a course for an undergraduate coursework award program is to be disregarded.
(4) If this section applies to the student:
(a) the student is no longer regarded as being on probation in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs and is taken to have been restored to good standing in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) all courses previously failed by the student in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs) in which the student is, or has been, enrolled are to be disregarded for section 10.
(5) If the student subsequently fails a course (or courses) in which the student is enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program, this section does not prevent section 10 applying to the student in relation to the course (or courses). However, to remove any doubt, section 10 does not apply again to any course that, under subsection (4)(b), is to be disregarded for that section.
12 Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress: postgraduate coursework
(1) If a student fails a total of 3 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any postgraduate coursework award program (or programs), the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in postgraduate coursework, and is regarded as being on probation.
(2) If subsection (1) applies to a student, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing, that:
(a) the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in postgraduate coursework, and is regarded as being on probation; and
(b) the student may be excluded from postgraduate coursework award programs if the student fails a total of 5 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any postgraduate coursework award program (or programs).
(3) If a student fails a total of 5 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any postgraduate coursework award program (or programs), the Delegated Authority for the postgraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled may exclude the student from postgraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(4) If:
(a) under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and reviews), the Academic Progress Committee permits a student to continue to undertake postgraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the student subsequently fails a total of 2 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any postgraduate coursework award program (or programs);
the Delegated Authority for the postgraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled may exclude the student from postgraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(5) If the Delegated Authority excludes the student from postgraduate coursework award programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from postgraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
(6) To remove any doubt, if a student fails the same course 2 or more times, each failure counts, for this section, as a failure of a course by the student.
(7) This section is subject to section 13 (Restoration of good standing: postgraduate coursework).
13 Restoration of good standing: postgraduate coursework
(1) This section applies to a student if:
(a) the student is regarded, under section 12(1) (Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress: postgraduate coursework), as being on probation; and
(b) in the teaching periods after the teaching period in which the student last failed a course in which the student was enrolled in any postgraduate coursework award program, the student successfully completes 6 (or more) courses in any postgraduate coursework award program (or programs) without failing a course; and
(c) the 6 (or more) courses successfully completed are completed in consecutive teaching periods.
(2) However, this section does not apply to the student if, under section 12(3), the student has been excluded from postgraduate coursework award programs for a period, but, under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and reviews), the Academic Progress Committee has permitted the student to continue to undertake postgraduate coursework award programs.
(3) In working out for subsection (1)(c) whether teaching periods are consecutive:
(a) teaching periods are taken to follow the following order:
(i) summer session;
(ii) first semester;
(iii) autumn session;
(iv) winter session;
(v) second semester;
(vi) spring session; and
(b) any teaching period in which the student is not enrolled in a course for a postgraduate coursework award program is to be disregarded.
(4) If this section applies to the student:
(a) the student is no longer regarded as being on probation in relation to postgraduate coursework award programs and is taken to have been restored to good standing in relation to postgraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) all courses previously failed by the student in any postgraduate coursework award program (or programs) in which the student is, or has been, enrolled are to be disregarded for section 12.
(5) If the student subsequently fails a course (or courses) in which the student is enrolled in any postgraduate coursework award program, this section does not prevent section 12 applying to the student in relation to the course (or courses). However, to remove any doubt, section 12 does not apply again to any course that, under subsection (4)(b), is to be disregarded for that section.
Division 2.3—Repeated failures in same course
14 Repeated failures in same course: undergraduate coursework
(1) If a student fails a course in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program for a second time, the student is regarded as being on probation.
(2) If subsection (1) applies to the student, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing, that the student:
(a) is on probation for the repeated failure; or
(b) may be excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs if the student fails the course for a third time.
(3) If the student fails the course for a third time, the Delegated Authority for the undergraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled in the course may exclude the student from undergraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(4) If the Delegated Authority excludes the student from undergraduate coursework award programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
15 Repeated failures in same course: postgraduate coursework
(1) If a student fails a course in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any postgraduate coursework award program for a second time, the student is regarded as being on probation.
(2) If subsection (1) applies to the student, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing, that the student:
(a) is on probation for the repeated failure; or
(b) may be excluded from postgraduate coursework award programs if the student fails the course for a third time.
(3) If the student fails the course for a third time, the Delegated Authority for the postgraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled in the course may exclude the student from postgraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(4) If the Delegated Authority excludes the student from postgraduate coursework award programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from postgraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
Division 2.4—Failure to achieve results at required level
16 Failure to achieve results at required level: undergraduate coursework
(1) If a student fails to achieve results in the courses for which the student has enrolled in an undergraduate coursework award program at the level required by the University for continuation in the program, the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in the program and the Delegated Authority for program may require the student to transfer to another award program.
(2) If the Delegated Authority requires the student to transfer to another award program, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student is required to transfer to another award program; and
(b) that the student may apply for review of the decision.
[Note: Division 4.2 (Transfer decisions) applies to an application for review.]
17 Failure to achieve results at required level: postgraduate coursework
(1) If a fails to achieve results in the courses for which the student has enrolled in a postgraduate student coursework award program at the level required by the University for continuation in the program, the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in the program and the Delegated Authority for program may require the student to transfer to another award program.
(2) If the Delegated Authority requires the student to transfer to another award program, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student is required to transfer to another award program; and
(b) that the student may apply for review of the decision.
[Note: Division 4.2 (Transfer decisions) applies to an application for review.]
Division 2.5—Contravention of Academic Progress Committee conditions
18 Contravention of committee conditions: undergraduate coursework
(1) This section applies to a student if, under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and review):
(a) the Academic Progress Committee permits the student to continue to undertake undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the committee imposes conditions on the permission.
(2) If the Delegated Authority for the undergraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled is satisfied that the student has contravened a condition imposed by the committee, the Delegated Authority may exclude the student from undergraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(3) If the Delegated Authority excludes the student from undergraduate coursework award programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) the reasons for the exclusion; and
(d) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
19 Contravention of committee conditions: postgraduate coursework
(1) This section applies to a student if, under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and review):
(a) the Academic Progress Committee permits the student to continue to undertake postgraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the committee imposes conditions on the permission.
(2) If the Delegated Authority for the postgraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled is satisfied that the student has contravened a condition imposed by the committee, the Delegated Authority may exclude the student from postgraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(3) If the Delegated Authority excludes the student from postgraduate coursework award programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from postgraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) the reasons for the exclusion; and
(d) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
Part 3—Academic progress rules: medical programs
20 Application of Part 3
(1) This Part applies in relation to medical programs.
(2) However, this Part does not apply to a medical student in relation to any other undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program (a non-medical program) undertaken by the student.
(3) To remove any doubt, Part 2 (and not this Part) applies to a medical student in relation to a non-medical program undertaken by the student, but this Part applies exclusively in relation to the medical program undertaken by the student.
21 Academic progress required for medical programs
(1) If a medical student fails 1 or more courses in the student’s medical program in any year of enrolment in the program, the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in the student’s medical program, and is regarded as on probation for the remainder of the program.
(2) If a medical student is regarded as being on probation, the student must be notified by the Registrar, in writing, as soon as practicable after the relevant failure happens.
(3) On notification of being on probation, the medical student must meet with the Delegated Authority and the Delegated Authority may direct the student, in writing, to undertake remediation activities.
(4) If a medical student to whom subsection (1) applies fails, for a second or subsequent time, any course in the student’s medical program in any year of enrolment in the program, the Delegated Authority may exclude the student from medical programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(5) Subsection (6) applies to a medical student if:
(a) the student is directed under subsection (3) to undertake remediation activities; or
(b) under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and review):
(i) the Academic Progress Committee permits the student to continue to undertake medical programs; and
(ii) the committee imposes conditions on the permission.
(6) If this subsection applies to a medical student and the Delegated authority is satisfied that the student has contravened the direction to undertake remediation activities or a condition imposed by the Academic Progress Committee, the Delegated Authority may exclude the student from medical programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(7) If a medical student fails any course in the final year of the student’s medical program, the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in the student’s medical program and the Delegated Authority may exclude the student from medical programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(8) If a medical student fails a second or later year ANU Medical School professional practice course, the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in the student’s medical program and the Delegated Authority may exclude the student from medical programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(9) To remove any doubt, subsections (7) and (8) are additional to, and are not limited by, subsections (1) and (4).
(10) If the Delegated Authority excludes a medical student from medical programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from medical programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) for an exclusion under subsection (6)—the reasons for the exclusion; and
(d) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
(11) In this section:
remediation activities may include, for example, undertaking a targeted academic revision program or satisfying a specific requirement from the ANU Medical School Professional Behaviours Committee.
Part 4—Academic progress appeals and reviews
Division 4.1—Exclusion decisions
22 Application of Division 4.1
This Division applies in relation to a decision under this instrument to exclude a student from undergraduate coursework award programs, postgraduate coursework award programs or medical programs (an exclusion decision).
23 Establishment of Academic Progress Committee etc.
(1) There is to be an Academic Progress Committee for the University. The committee is to hear and decide appeals, and conduct reviews, of exclusion decisions under this instrument in relation to both undergraduate and postgraduate coursework award programs (including medical programs).
(2) However, the Registrar may, in writing, direct that there are to be 2 Academic Progress Committees for the University. If the Registrar gives that direction, one of the committees is to hear and decide appeals, and conduct reviews, of exclusion decisions under this instrument in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs and the other is to hear and decide appeals, and conduct reviews, of exclusion decisions under this instrument in relation to postgraduate coursework award programs (including medical programs).
(3) The Academic Progress Committee is to consist of the following members:
(a) the Registrar;
(b) a staff of member of the University appointed, in writing, by the College Dean of each ANU College;
(c) a member of staff of the University appointed, in writing, by the Dean of the ANU Medical School.
(4) However, if there are 2 Academic Progress Committees:
(a) the committee hearing and deciding appeals, and conducting reviews, of exclusion decisions in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs is to consist of the following members:
(i) the Registrar;
(ii) a member of staff of the University appointed, in writing, by the College Dean of each ANU College; and
(b) the committee hearing and deciding appeals, and conducting reviews, of exclusion decisions in relation to postgraduate coursework award programs (including medical programs) is to consist of the following members:
(i) the Registrar;
(ii) a member of staff of the University appointed, in writing, by the College Dean of each ANU College;
(iii) a member of staff of the University appointed, in writing, by the Dean of the ANU Medical School.
(5) The Registrar is the chair of the Academic Progress Committee or, if there are 2 Academic Progress Committees, each of the committees.
(6) If a member of the Academic Progress Committee ceases to be a member of staff of the University, the person ceases to be a member of the committee.
(7) If a member of the Academic Progress Committee is aware, or becomes aware, that the member has a material interest that could conflict, or reasonably be seen to conflict, with the proper exercise of the member’s functions in relation to an appeal or review under this instrument, the member must immediately disclose the nature of the interest to the committee.
(8) If a member of the Academic Progress Committee makes a disclosure under subsection (7), the member must not exercise, or continue to exercise, any of the member’s functions as a member of the committee in relation to the relevant appeal or review unless the committee agrees to the member continuing to be a member of the committee for that appeal or review.
(9) The Registrar may appoint a person (other than a member of the Academic Progress Committee) to assist the committee.
(10) The quorum for a meeting of the Academic Progress Committee (including a hearing) is the Registrar and 4 other members.
(11) However, if the Registrar makes a disclosure under subsection (7) for an appeal or review and the committee does not agree to the Registrar continuing to be a member of the committee for that appeal or review, the quorum for the review or appeal is 4 members other than the Registrar.
(12) A question arising at a committee meeting (including a hearing) is to be decided by a majority of the members present and voting. The members present each have a single vote on each question to be decided by the committee. If the votes on a question are equal, the question is decided in the negative.
24 Exclusion decision: appeal to Academic Progress Committee
(1) This section applies if a student is excluded under this instrument from undergraduate coursework award programs, postgraduate coursework award programs or medical programs.
(2) The student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the decision to exclude the student.
(3) The appeal must:
(a) be in writing; and
(b) set out reasons why the student should be permitted to continue to undertake undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs or medical programs, as the case requires; and
(c) include, or be accompanied by, any evidence in support of the reasons; and
(d) be given to the Registrar within 20 working days after the day the student is given written notice of the student’s exclusion.
(4) If the student appeals to the Academic Progress Committee under this section, the student is entitled to be continue to be enrolled in any coursework award program in which the student was enrolled until the appeal is finally decided.
25 Exclusion appeal: hearing and decision
(1) This section applies if a student is excluded under this instrument from undergraduate coursework award programs, postgraduate coursework award programs, or medical programs, for a specified period (the exclusion decision), and the student appeals to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion decision.
(2) The committee may decide the appeal solely on the basis of the student’s academic record, the length of the program in which the student was enrolled, and the notice of appeal and any material accompanying it. However, the committee may make the inquiries, and have regard to anything else, that the committee considers appropriate.
(3) If the appeal is not against exclusion from medical programs, the committee may take account of any non-award enrolment completed by the student.
(4) However, success in passing a course as part of a non-award enrolment, even if credit is later granted in connection with an award program being undertaken by the student, is not to be regarded as conclusive evidence of the ability of the student to meet the remaining academic requirements of an award program.
(5) The committee may:
(a) confirm the exclusion decision; or
(b) confirm the decision to exclude the student from undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs or from medical programs, as the case requires, but reduce the period of the exclusion; or
(c) set aside the exclusion decision and permit the student to continue to undertake undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs or medical programs, as the case requires; or
(d) set aside the exclusion decision if satisfied that the decision was, or has become, inappropriate or incorrect because, for example, the student’s result for coursework has been amended on review or appeal.
(6) If the committee permits the student to undertake undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs or medical programs, the committee may impose conditions on the permission.
(7) Without limiting subsection (6), the conditions that may be imposed under that subsection include all or any of the following:
(a) requiring the student to transfer to another award program;
(b) requiring the student to vary student’s load to take account of the impact of external pressures on the student’s academic studies;
(c) requiring the student to take leave of absence from the student’s award program for a specified period;
(d) requiring the student to undertake specified clinical or professional practice;
(e) requiring the student to consult with specified academic or professional staff for advice and support.
(8) If the committee imposes conditions on the student’s permission to undertake undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs or medical programs, it is the student’s responsibility to comply with the conditions if the student wishes to continue to undertake undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs or medical programs, as the case requires.
(9) The committee must endeavour to make a decision on the appeal within 20 working days after the day the appeal is made to the committee.
(10) If the committee is unable to make a decision on the appeal within the 20-day period mentioned in subsection (9), the Registrar must tell the student and give the student a date by which the appeal will be decided.
(11) Within 14 working days after the day the committee makes a decision on the appeal, the Registrar must:
(a) by written notice given to the student, tell the student about the decision made on the appeal; and
(b) give the student a statement of reasons for the decision.
(12) Subject to the outcome of any appeal made to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor under section 26 (Exclusion appeal decision: procedural appeal to Deputy Vice-Chancellor), the decision of the committee is final.
26 Exclusion appeal decision: procedural appeal to Deputy Vice-Chancellor
(1) This section applies if:
(a) a student appealed to the Academic Progress Committee against a decision under this instrument to exclude the student from undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs or from medical programs; and
(b) the student is dissatisfied with the decision made by the committee on the appeal because procedures that were required to be observed by this instrument in connection with the appeal were not observed.
(2) The student may appeal to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor against the Academic Progress Committee’s decision, but only on the ground that procedures that were required to be observed by this instrument in connection with the appeal were not observed.
(3) The appeal must:
(a) be in writing; and
(b) state clearly the procedures required by this instrument that were not observed in connection with the appeal; and
(c) include, or be accompanied by, any evidence in support of the appeal; and
(d) be given to the Registrar within 20 working days after the day the student is given written notice of, and a statement of reasons for, the Academic Progress Committee’s decision.
27 Exclusion appeal decision: procedural appeal: hearing and decision
(1) This section applies if a student appeals to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor under section 26 (Exclusion decision: procedural appeal to Deputy Vice-Chancellor) against a decision of the Academic Progress Committee.
(2) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor may decide the appeal solely on the basis of the notice of appeal and any material accompanying it. However, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor may make the inquiries, and have regard to anything else, that the Deputy Vice-Chancellor considers appropriate.
(3) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor must:
(a) confirm the Academic Progress Committee’s decision; or
(b) set aside the committee’s decision, and:
(i) confirm the original decision of the Delegated Authority; or
(ii) refer the matter back to the committee to further consider its decision, taking into account the directions (if any) of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, and to make a new decision; or
(iii) dismiss or uphold the original appeal to the committee and, in doing so, take any action that the committee could have taken.
(4) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor must endeavour to make a decision on the appeal within 20 working days after the day the appeal is made.
(5) If the Deputy Vice-Chancellor is unable to make a decision on the appeal within the 20-day period mentioned in subsection (4), the Deputy Vice-Chancellor must tell the student and give the student a date by which the appeal will be decided.
(6) Within 7 working days after the day the Deputy Vice-Chancellor makes a decision on the appeal, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor must:
(a) by written notice given to the student, tell the student about the decision made on the appeal; and
(b) give the student a statement of reasons for the decision.
(7) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s decision is final.
28 Review of exclusion decisions
(1) This section applies if a student is excluded under this instrument from undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award programs, or from medical programs, for a specified period, but the student does not appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
(2) The Registrar must refer the decision to exclude the student to the committee for review.
(3) The committee may conduct the review solely on the basis of the student’s academic record and the length of the program in which the student was enrolled. However, the committee may make the inquiries, and have regard to anything else, that the committee considers appropriate.
(4) The committee may:
(a) confirm the decision to exclude the student; or
(b) confirm the decision to exclude the student, but reduce the period of the exclusion; or
(c) set aside the decision to exclude the student if satisfied that the decision was, or has become, inappropriate or incorrect because, for example, the student’s result for coursework has been amended on review or appeal.
(5) The committee must endeavour make a decision on the review within 20 working days after the day the decision to exclude the student is referred to the committee.
(6) Within 14 working days after the day the committee makes a decision on the review, the Registrar must tell the student that the decision to exclude the student has been reviewed by the committee and about the decision made on the review.
Division 4.2—Transfer decisions
29 Transfer decision: application for review by Associate Dean
(1) This section applies if, under Division 2.4 (Failure to achieve results at required level), a student is required to transfer to another award program.
(2) The student may apply to the Associate Dean for review of the decision.
(3) The application must:
(a) be in writing; and
(b) set out the student’s reasons for making the application; and
(c) include, or be accompanied by, any evidence in support of the reasons; and
(d) be given to the Registrar within 20 working days after the day the student is given written notice of the decision.
(4) If the student applies under this section for review of the decision, the student is entitled to be continue to be enrolled in any coursework award program in which the student was enrolled until the review is finally decided.
30 Transfer decision: review by Associate Dean
(1) This section applies if a student applies under section 29 (Transfer decision: application for review by Associate Dean) for review of a decision to require the student to transfer to another award program.
(2) The Associate Dean must review the decision.
(3) The Associate Dean may conduct the review solely on the basis of the student’s academic record, the length of the program in which the student was enrolled, and the application for review and any material accompanying it. However, the Associate Dean may make the inquiries, and have regard to anything else, that the Associate Dean considers appropriate.
(4) The Associate Dean may:
(a) confirm the decision; or
(b) set aside the decision if satisfied that the decision was, or has become, inappropriate or incorrect because, for example, the student’s result for coursework has been amended on review or appeal.
(5) The Associate Dean must endeavour to make a decision on the review within 20 working days after the day the application for review is made.
(6) If the Associate Dean is unable to make a decision on the review within the 20-day period mentioned in subsection (5), the Registrar must tell the student and give the student a date by which the review will be decided.
(7) Within 14 working days after the day the Associate Dean makes a decision on the review, the Registrar must:
(a) by written notice given to the student, tell the student about the decision made on the review; and
(b) give the student a statement of reasons for the decision.
(8) Subject to the outcome of any application for review made to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor under section 31 (Transfer decision: application for procedural review by Deputy Vice-Chancellor), the decision of the committee is final.
31 Transfer decision: application for procedural review by Deputy Vice-Chancellor
(1) This section applies if:
(a) a student applied under section 29 (Transfer decision: application for review by Associate Dean) for review of a decision to require the student to transfer to another award program; and
(b) the student is dissatisfied with the decision made by the Associate Dean on the review because procedures that were required to be observed by this instrument in connection with the review were not observed.
(2) The student may apply to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor for review of the Associate Dean’s decision made on the review, but only on the ground that procedures that were required to be observed by this instrument in connection with the review were not observed.
(3) The application must:
(a) be in writing; and
(b) state clearly the procedures required by this instrument that were not observed in connection with the review; and
(c) include, or be accompanied by, any evidence in support of the application; and
(d) be given to the Registrar within 20 working days after the day the student is given written notice of, and a statement of reasons for, the Associate Dean’s decision.
32 Transfer decision: procedural review by Deputy Vice-Chancellor
(1) This section applies if a student applies to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor under section 31 (Transfer decision: application for procedural review by Deputy Vice-Chancellor) for review of the decision made the Associate Dean under this Division.
(2) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor may decide the review solely on the basis of the application for review and any material accompanying it. However, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor may make the inquiries, and have regard to anything else, that the Deputy Vice-Chancellor considers appropriate.
(3) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor must:
(a) confirm the Associate Dean’s decision; or
(b) set aside the Associate Dean’s decision, and:
(i) confirm the original decision of the Delegated Authority to require the student to transfer to another award program; or
(ii) refer the matter back to the Associate Dean for the Associate Dean to further consider the Associate Dean’s decision, taking into account the directions (if any) of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, and to make a new decision.
(4) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor must endeavour to make a decision on the review within 20 working days after the day the application for review is made.
(5) If the Deputy Vice-Chancellor is unable to make a decision on the review within the 20-day period mentioned in subsection (4), the Deputy Vice-Chancellor must tell the student and give the student a date by which the application for review will be decided.
(6) Within 7 working days after the day the Deputy Vice-Chancellor makes a decision on the review, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor must:
(a) by written notice given to the student, tell the student about the decision made on the review; and
(b) give the student a statement of reasons for the decision.
(7) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s decision is final.
Part 5—Miscellaneous
33 Effect of exclusion
(1) This section applies to a person if the person is excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs, postgraduate coursework award programs, or medical programs, under this instrument for a period.
(2) The person ceases to be enrolled in any undergraduate or postgraduate coursework program or medical program, as the case requires, in which the student was enrolled.
(3) The person may not enrol, or apply to enrol, in any undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program or a medical program, as the case requires, until after the end of the exclusion period and may enrol in such a program only if the person has applied to be admitted to the program after the end of the exclusion period and been admitted to the program on that application.
(4) To remove any doubt, the admission criteria applying to any admission application mentioned in subsection (3) are the admission criteria applying to such an admission application at the time the application is made.
34 Appointment of Delegated Authorities
The Associate Dean for an ANU College may, in writing, appoint a member of staff of the college, or another member of staff of the University, to be a Delegated Authority for a program offered by the college for an award.
35 Delegated Authorities: double degree programs
(1) This section applies to a double degree program if a student undertaking the program may qualify for a coursework award in 2 ANU Colleges.
(2) The Associate Dean for each college may, in writing, appoint a member of the staff of the college, or another member of the staff of the University, to be a Delegated Authority for the part of the program offered by the college.
(3) If the Associate Deans for the colleges each make appointments under subsection (2), then, for this instrument:
(a) the part of the program offered by each college is taken to be a separate program offered by the college; and
(b) the person appointed under that subsection by the Associate Dean of a college is taken to have been appointed under section 34 (Appointment of Delegated Authorities) as a Delegated Authority for the separate program taken to be offered by that college.
36 Associate Deans: double degree programs
(1) This section applies to a double degree program if a student undertaking the program may qualify for a coursework award in 2 ANU Colleges.
(2) The Registrar may, in writing, nominate an Associate Dean of one of the colleges, or another member of the staff of the University, to be the Associate Dean in relation to the student for the purposes of this instrument or a provision of this instrument.
(3) If the Registrar nominates a person under subsection (2), the person is taken to be the Associate Dean in relation to the student for those purposes.
37 Approved forms
(1) The Vice-Chancellor may, in writing, approve forms for this instrument.
(2) If the Vice-Chancellor approves a form for a particular purpose, the form must be used for that purpose.
(3) The Vice-Chancellor must ensure that approved forms are publicly available on the University’s website or any other way that the Vice-Chancellor considers appropriate.
38 Delegation by Vice-Chancellor
The Vice-Chancellor may, in writing, delegate all or any of the Vice-Chancellor’s functions under this instrument (other than the power to make orders) to a member of staff of the University.
39 Delegation by Registrar
The Registrar may, in writing, delegate all or any of the Registrar’s functions under this instrument to a member of staff of the University.
40 Service of notices etc.
(1) This section applies to a notice or other document that is required or permitted to be served on an individual under this instrument (whether the word ‘give’, ‘notify’, ‘send’, ‘tell’ or another word is used).
(2) The document may be served on an individual:
(a) by giving it to the individual; or
(b) by sending it by prepaid post, addressed to the individual, to an address shown in the University’s records as an address of the individual (including, for example, any semester, work or permanent home address); or
(c) by emailing it to:
(i) if the individual has an email address provided by the University—that email address; or
(ii) in any case—an email address otherwise recorded by the University as an email address of the individual (including, for example, any personal or work email address).
(3) A document served by post on an individual under subsection (2)(b) is taken to have been served on the day it would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post.
(4) A document served by email on an individual under subsection (2)(c) is taken to have been served on the day it would have been received in the ordinary course of email transmission.
(5) This section does not affect the operation of any other University legislation or any other law that authorises or requires service of a document otherwise than as provided under this section.
[Note: See e.g. Acts Interpretation Act 1901, section 28A (Service of documents).]
Part 6—Repeals and transitional
41 Repeals
(1) The Academic Progress Rule 2015 is repealed.
(2) The Academic Progress (ANU Medical School) Order 2015 is repealed.
42 Transitional: application of instrument to existing programs etc.
(1) This instrument applies in relation to an undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program (including a medical program) that commenced before the commencement of this instrument, including a program that had ended before the commencement, as if the program had commenced after the commencement of this instrument.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1):
(a) if, before the commencement of this instrument, a student had failed a course in which the student was enrolled in any undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program (including a medical program), this instrument applies in relation to the failure in the same way in which it would have applied in relation to the failure if it had happened after the commencement; and
(b) if, before the commencement of this instrument, a student had successfully completed a course in which the student was enrolled in any undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program (including a medical program), this instrument applies in relation to the successful completion of the course in the same way in which it would have applied in relation to the successful completion of the course if it had happened after the commencement.
(3) However, this instrument does not apply in relation to a failure of a course, or the successful completion of a course, if the failure or successful completion happened more than 10 years before the commencement of this instrument.
(4) An order made under or for this instrument may make provision for or in relation to determining, for subsection (3), when a course is failed or successfully completed.
43 Transitional modifications on student application
(1) In this section:
cut-off means:
(a) in relation to a student who was enrolled in an undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program (including a medical program) at the commencement of this instrument—31 March 2020; and
(b) in relation to a student who was not enrolled in an undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program (including a medical program) at the commencement of this instrument—not later than 6 weeks after the day (if any) that the student next becomes enrolled in an undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program after the commencement.
previous instrument means the Academic Progress Rule 2015, the Academic Progress (ANU Medical School) Order 2015, the Academic Progress Rules 2014, the ANU Medical School Academic Progress Order 2014, or any earlier rule or order applying in relation to academic progress.
(2) This section applies to a student if:
(a) the student was enrolled in an undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program (including a medical program) that commenced before the commencement of this instrument, including a program that had ended before the commencement; and
(b) a provision of this instrument (the current provision) applies, or may apply, to the student; and
(c) one of the following provisions applies to the student:
(i) a previous instrument (or previous instruments) applied to the student and the previous instrument (or the most recent previous instrument that applied to the student) included a provision corresponding to the current provision, but the current provision is different to the corresponding provision;
(ii) a previous instrument (or previous instruments) applied to the student, but the previous instrument (or the most recent of the previous instruments that applied to the student) did not include a provision corresponding to the current provision;
(iii) none of the previous instruments applied to the student; and
(d) the student considers that the application of the current provision to the student is, or would be, unfair or unreasonable.
(3) The student may, by written notice given to the Delegated Authority before the cut-off applying to the student, apply for a modification of this instrument in relation to the application of the current provision to the student.
(4) The Delegated Authority must:
(a) decide the application; and
(b) by written notice given to the student, tell the student the decision made on the application.
(5) The Delegated Authority may grant the modification sought if satisfied that the application of the current provision to the student is unfair or unreasonable.
(6) If the Delegated Authority refuses to grant the modification sought, the notice must include, or be accompanied by, a statement of reasons for the decision.
(7) If the Delegated Authority refuses to grant the modification sought (the reviewable decision), then, subject to subsection (8), the student may apply to the Associate Dean for review of the decision.
(8) Division 4.2 (Transfer decisions) applies in relation to the reviewable decision, with any modification prescribed by order under section 44 (Transitional orders) and any other necessary modifications, as if it were a decision to require the student to transfer to another award program.
(9) This instrument applies to the student subject to any modification in force under this section in relation to the student.
44 Transitional orders
(1) The Vice-Chancellor may, by legislative instrument, make orders prescribing matters of a transitional nature (including prescribing any savings or application provisions) relating to the making of this instrument.
(2) This instrument (other than this Part) does not limit the matters that may be prescribed by orders made for the purposes of subsection (1).
(3) Orders made for the purposes of subsection (1) have effect despite anything in this instrument (other than this Part).
45 Transitional provisions additional etc.
This Part is additional to, and does not limit:
(a) the Australian National University (Interpretation) Statute 2017, section 9 (Amendment of statutes); or
(a) the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, section 7 (Effect of repeal or amendment of Act).
Source text: opening excerpt
Sourced from the Federal Register of Legislation (legislation.gov.au), CC BY 4.0.
meta-content-style-type: text/css
meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8
meta-generator: Aspose.Words for .NET 20.2
Fourth, the rule sets procedural detail and time limits. Appeals to the Academic Progress Committee must be filed within 20 working days of notice of exclusion, in writing, and the student is entitled to remain enrolled while an appeal is finally decided (s 24(3)-(4)). The committee must endeavour to make decisions within 20 working days of appeal and give written notice and a statement of reasons within 14 working days of its decision (s 25(9), s 25(11)). Procedural appeals to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor are likewise time-limited and are confined to failures to observe required procedures (s 26-27).
The instrument also contains ancillary rules that affect implementation: rules on equivalent courses and how equivalence is declared (s 6); provision for joint, double or dual programs superseding inconsistent provisions of the Rule (s 7); service of notices (s 40); delegation powers (s 38-39); approved forms and public availability (s 37); and transitional modification powers for individual students who consider the new provision unfair or unreasonable (s 43). The effect of exclusion is specific: a person ceased to be enrolled and may not apply to enrol in the relevant category of programs until after the end of the exclusion period, subject to normal admission criteria at the time of any later application (s 33).
This section describes the mechanical changes the instrument makes. The later sections test the institutional incentives, costs, implementation complexity, and compliance implications that follow directly from the text.
Main concepts
The rule is built around a set of discrete, textually specified concepts designed to operationalise “academic progress” as an administrative trigger for remediation and exclusion. Key defined terms include student, course, fail a course, coursework award program, Delegated Authority, Associate Dean, Academic Progress Committee and medical student (see s 4). The rule distinguishes undergraduate coursework, postgraduate coursework and medical programs and allocates different quantitative thresholds and process rules to each category (Part 2 and Part 3).
Probation and exclusion are central administrative outcomes. The rule defines being “on probation” as a status that follows specific failure thresholds: for undergraduates failing 4 courses (s 10(1)), for postgraduates failing 3 courses (s 12(1)), and for medical students failing any course in a year (s 21(1)). Exclusion is a discretionary outcome that may be imposed by a Delegated Authority after higher failure counts or contraventions of imposed conditions. Exclusion is time-limited, subject to a maximum period of no more than 5 years (see s 10(3), s 12(3), s 14(3), s 15(3), s 18(2), s 19(2), s 21(4), s 21(6), s 21(7), and elsewhere). The instrument prescribes the Registrar’s role in giving written notice of probation and exclusion (s 10(2), s 12(2), s 21(2), s 33).
Restoration mechanisms are specified quantitatively, not by discretionary assessment alone. Restoration of good standing for undergraduate students requires successful completion of 8 or more courses in consecutive teaching periods without failing (s 11(1)(b)-(c)). For postgraduate students, the parallel requirement is 6 or more courses in consecutive teaching periods (s 13(1)(b)-(c)). The rule specifies how to count consecutive teaching periods, including a prescribed order of teaching periods (summer session; first semester; autumn session; winter session; second semester; spring session) and the rule to disregard any teaching period in which the student is not enrolled in a course for the relevant award program (s 11(3), s 13(3)). When restoration applies, previous failed courses are disregarded for the purpose of triggering exclusion (s 11(4)(b), s 13(4)(b)).
Repeated failure of the same course is treated as cumulatively counting toward exclusion thresholds, and has its own pathway: a second failure of the same course puts the student on probation and the third failure opens the door to exclusion (s 14 and s 15). The text expressly clarifies that multiple failures of the same course each count (s 10(6), s 12(6)).
Decision-making structures and procedural safeguards are specified. The Academic Progress Committee is established by s 23; composition is defined, the Registrar chairs, quorum rules and conflict disclosure obligations are set out (s 23(3)-(12)). Appeals against exclusion decisions go first to the Academic Progress Committee (s 24); the committee’s decision is final except for a procedural appeal to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor on the narrow ground that procedures required by the instrument were not observed (s 26). The rule gives the committee power to impose conditions on a permitted continuation, lists example conditions (s 25(7)), and makes non-compliance with committee conditions a ground for later exclusion by the Delegated Authority (s 18 and s 19).
Delegations and appointments are practical concepts with operational effect. An Associate Dean may appoint Delegated Authorities for programs (s 34), and the Vice-Chancellor and Registrar may delegate functions under the instrument in writing (s 38-39), subject to a textual prohibition on delegating the power to make orders (s 38). For double degree programs the rule provides mechanisms to treat each college’s part of the program as a separate program and allows appointment of different Delegated Authorities and nomination of Associate Deans (s 35-36).
Procedural detail on notification and service is included: service of notices may be by personal delivery, prepaid post to an address in University records, or by email to a University-provided or other email recorded by the University, with deemed service timings specified (s 40). The rule also authorises the Vice-Chancellor to approve and require use of particular forms and to make them publicly available (s 37).
Finally, the instrument includes transitional and savings provisions, including application to earlier course failures or completions that occurred within 10 years of commencement (s 42(3)), the ability for students to apply for modifications on fairness grounds within specified cut-off dates (s 43), and a power for the Vice-Chancellor to make transitional orders by legislative instrument (s 44).
Those concepts together structure the institution’s response to poor academic performance as a mix of automatic counting rules, defined restoration targets, delegated administrative discretion, and layered internal review rights.
Who it affects
The primary persons affected by the Rule are students enrolled, or who have been enrolled, in coursework award programs at the University. The instrument uses a wide definition of “student” to include persons who are, or have been, enrolled in a coursework award program (s 4). The rule applies to both undergraduate coursework award programs and postgraduate coursework award programs (s 5), and contains a separate Part 3 that applies exclusively to medical programs and medical students (s 20).
For academic and administrative staff the instrument affects those appointed to roles within its decision-making architecture. The Associate Dean for an ANU College has power to appoint Delegated Authorities for programs (s 34). Delegated Authorities carry substantial operational powers, including the power to exclude students from the relevant category of programs (see s 10(3), s 12(3), s 14(3), s 15(3), s 18(2), s 19(2), s 21). The Registrar is centrally affected; the Registrar must issue required notifications to students about probation and exclusion (s 10(2), s 12(2), s 21(2)), chairs the Academic Progress Committee (s 23(5)), receives appeals and procedural appeals (s 24(3), s 26(3)), and is empowered to refer exclusion decisions to the committee when no appeal is lodged (s 28). The Vice-Chancellor is given administrative powers to approve forms and to delegate functions (s 37, s 38).
Members of the Academic Progress Committee are staff members appointed by College Deans and the Dean of the Medical School (s 23(3)-(4)). The rule therefore creates roles for college-level decision-makers and central staff. The Registrar remains a voting member and the committee chair, with quorum rules that assume Registrar participation unless a conflict is disclosed (s 23(10)-(11)).
People involved in joint, double or dual degree arrangements with other universities or institutions are affected indirectly by s 7. That provision states that any inconsistent provision of the Rule has no effect to the extent of inconsistency with an agreement between the University and another institution that makes provision for joint, double or dual programs. In practice that means students enrolled in formal joint arrangements (including cotutelle arrangements) may be subject to the partner institution’s academic progress arrangements where the agreement so provides.
The instrument also affects applicants seeking re-admission after exclusion. Section 33 spells out the practical effect of exclusion: a person ceases to be enrolled, may not enrol or apply to enrol in the same category of award programs until after the end of the exclusion period, and must apply for admission after the exclusion period and satisfy the admission criteria in place at that later time. This creates a direct effect on future admissions prospects and the costs of re-entry.
Administrative staff are affected by the notification, record-keeping and appeal-handling duties created by the Rule. The Registrar and any delegates will face statutory time frames for decision-making and notification: appeals must be decided within 20 working days where possible and notices of decisions and statements of reasons must be provided within specified time windows (s 25(9)-(11), s 27(4)-(6), s 30(5)-(7)). The Rule creates ongoing operational responsibilities for maintaining records of addresses and email addresses used for service (s 40).
Finally, the Rule affects students in double degree programs in which two colleges are involved. Sections 35 and 36 create mechanisms for dividing program responsibility between colleges, appointing different Delegated Authorities for each college’s component, and nominating an Associate Dean for the student. Those arrangements can result in a student being subject to separate processes depending on which college’s component is in issue.
In sum, the text primarily affects students and University staff involved in program administration and decision-making, and it has specific consequences for joint or double-degree arrangements and for future admission prospects of excluded students.
Key duties and rights
The rule imposes duties on University officers and rights on students in clear, textually set ways.
Duties on the University and its officers
Notification duties: The Registrar is required to tell a student, as soon as practicable, when the student is considered to have failed to maintain satisfactory progress and is regarded as being on probation (s 10(2), s 12(2), s 21(2)); and must notify students of exclusions and the period of exclusion and the right to appeal (s 10(5), s 12(5), s 21(10)). Associated notices must include a statement of reasons where required by the instrument (s 18(3)(c), s 19(3)(c), s 25(11)(b), s 27(6)(b), s 30(7)(b), s 32(6)(b)).
Procedural timeframes: The Academic Progress Committee must endeavour to make a decision on an appeal within 20 working days (s 25(9)). When unable to meet that timeframe, the Registrar must tell the student and give a date by which the appeal will be decided (s 25(10)). Similar timeframes apply to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor on procedural appeals (s 27(4)-(6)), and to Associate Deans hearing transfer reviews (s 30(5)-(7)).
Record and service duties: Section 40 prescribes how notices may be served and the deemed timing; the University must therefore maintain accurate records of student addresses and email addresses to effect service (s 40(2)). The Registrar must refer exclusion decisions to the committee for review where no appeal is lodged (s 28(2)).
Duties on Delegated Authorities and Associate Deans
Delegated Authorities may exclude students from programs when prescribed thresholds or contraventions are met (s 10(3), s 12(3), s 14(3), s 15(3), s 18(2), s 19(2), s 21(4), s 21(6), s 21(7)). They are charged with making written declarations of course equivalence (s 6(2)-(3)) and must take reasonable steps to ensure consistent and fair application of the instrument within a program (s 8).
Associate Deans must appoint Delegated Authorities in writing to be responsible for programs (s 34) and may review transfer decisions (s 29-30).
Rights of students
Appeal rights: A student excluded under the instrument may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against exclusion (s 24). Appeals must be in writing and filed within 20 working days of notification (s 24(3)). While the appeal is pending the student is entitled to remain enrolled in any coursework award program in which they were enrolled (s 24(4)). If dissatisfied on procedural grounds the student may appeal to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, but only on the narrow ground that required procedures were not observed (s 26(2)). For transfer decisions under ss 16-17 a student may apply for review to the Associate Dean and then on procedural grounds to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (ss 29-32).
Review rights where no appeal is lodged: If a student does not appeal an exclusion decision, the Registrar must still refer the decision to the Academic Progress Committee for review (s 28(2)). The committee is then required to review and notify the student of the review outcome within specified time periods (s 28(5)-(6)).
Conditional continuation rights: If the Academic Progress Committee permits a student to continue, the student may be permitted to do so subject to conditions, and it is explicitly the student’s responsibility to comply with those conditions (s 25(6)-(8)). Contravention of committee-imposed conditions is a ground for exclusion by the Delegated Authority (s 18, s 19).
Constraints on student rights
Time limits for appeal and review are strict: appeals and procedural appeals must be filed within 20 working days after notice (s 24(3)(d), s 26(3)(d), s 29(3)(d), s 31(3)(d)), and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s decision on procedural appeal is final (s 27(7)). The scope of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s review is limited in exclusion appeals to procedural compliance with the instrument (s 26(2)).
Students excluded must reapply for admission after the exclusion period and meet whatever admission criteria apply at the time of the later application; the Rule explicitly disclaims any guarantee of re-admission on previous terms (s 33(3)-(4)).
Other duties and rights
The Vice-Chancellor may approve forms for, and require the use of, specific forms for processes under the instrument and must ensure approved forms are publicly available (s 37). That establishes a duty to use prescribed forms when the Vice-Chancellor has approved them (s 37(2)).
Delegation duties: the Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar may delegate functions in writing (s 38-39), which creates obligations to make delegations visible and in writing as required.
In short, the rule sets a structured set of duties for University officers to notify, adjudicate and document academic progress matters, provides students with defined appeal and review rights subject to time limits and procedural constraints, and gives Delegated Authorities and the Academic Progress Committee clear operational powers to exclude, impose conditions and require transfers.
Penalties and enforcement
The instrument’s principal sanction is exclusion from categories of award programs. The Delegated Authority has the power to exclude a student from undergraduate coursework award programs, postgraduate coursework award programs, or medical programs for a specified period not exceeding 5 years in a range of circumstances expressly identified in the text.
Triggers for exclusion and maximum periods
Quantitative triggers: An undergraduate student who has failed a total of 8 or more courses may be excluded (s 10(3)). A postgraduate student who has failed a total of 5 or more courses may be excluded (s 12(3)). In each case the maximum exclusion period is no longer than 5 years (s 10(3), s 12(3)). For repeated failures of the same course, a third failure gives the Delegated Authority discretion to exclude for up to 5 years (s 14(3), s 15(3)).
Medical program-specific penalties: For medical students the rules are tighter. A failure of one or more courses in any year leads to probation for the remainder of the program (s 21(1)). A second or subsequent failure in any year may result in exclusion (s 21(4)). Failure in the final year or failing a second or later year professional practice course permits the Delegated Authority to exclude for up to 5 years (s 21(7)-(8)). Contravention of remediation directions or committee conditions may also attract exclusion (s 21(5)-(6)).
Contravention-based exclusion: If a student permitted to continue by the Academic Progress Committee fails to comply with conditions imposed by the committee, a Delegated Authority may exclude the student (s 18(2), s 19(2)). The Registrar must give written notice and reasons for exclusion in these cases (s 18(3)(a)-(c), s 19(3)(a)-(d)).
Procedural enforcement
Notice and reasons: After exclusion the Registrar must notify the student as soon as practicable of the exclusion, the period, and the right to appeal to the Academic Progress Committee (s 10(5)(a)-(c), s 12(5)(a)-(c), s 21(10)(a)-(d)). For contraventions of committee conditions the Registrar must also provide the reasons for exclusion (s 18(3)(c), s 19(3)(c)).
Effect of exclusion: The excluded person ceases to be enrolled in any relevant programs (s 33(2)), may not enrol or apply to enrol in the same category of programs until after the exclusion period ends (s 33(3)), and may only enrol later if they apply for admission and are admitted under the admission criteria in place at that later time (s 33(3)-(4)).
Appeals and review as enforcement limits
Appeals to the Academic Progress Committee can result in confirming exclusion, reducing the period of exclusion, setting aside exclusion and permitting continuation, or setting aside the decision if the committee considers the decision inappropriate because, for example, coursework results were amended (s 25(5)). The Committee can impose conditions on any permission to continue, and those conditions are enforceable via subsequent Delegated Authority action (s 25(6)-(8), and s 18-19).
The Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s role is limited to procedural appeals on the ground that required procedures were not observed (s 26(2)); the Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s decision is final (s 27(7)). For transfer decisions, the review path is to the Associate Dean and then, on procedural grounds only, to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (ss 29-32).
Operational enforcement mechanisms
The Registrar must refer exclusion decisions not appealed to the Committee for review (s 28(2)). The Committee must endeavour to make decisions on such reviews within 20 working days and notify students within 14 working days (s 28(5)-(6)). That review process acts as an internal check where a student does not appeal.
Service rules ensure notices are treated as given when delivered in ordinary course of post or email (s 40(3)-(4)), which affects when time limits for appeals begin to run.
Limits on penalties
The Rule caps exclusion periods at no longer than 5 years in the textually specified circumstances (multiple sections). It does not authorise permanent exclusion or indefinite de-registration by the University under these provisions. The Rule also provides restoration routes that, if satisfied, remove probation and disregard prior fails for the purpose of future exclusions (s 11(4), s 13(4)), thereby offering a route to reverse the effect of earlier poor performance.
In short, the enforcement framework is a combination of numerical counting rules and discretionary powers vested in Delegated Authorities, subject to internal appeal and review processes, with material administrative consequences for enrolment and future admission prospects. The Registrar, Delegated Authorities and the Academic Progress Committee are the operational players charged with implementing and enforcing these penalties within the procedural safeguards and timelines set out in the instrument.
How it interacts with other laws
The instrument situates itself within the University’s statutory environment and interacts with several identified internal and external legal instruments.
Source of authority and internal instruments
The rule is made under the Vice-Chancellorship Statute 2013, s 9.5 (s 3). That links the Rule to the University’s statute-based governance framework and constrains what the Rule can do by the limits of statutory delegation.
The instrument cross-references and relies on other University rules. For example, it adopts definitions and concepts from the Coursework Awards Rule and the Research Awards Rule, notably the definitions of coursework award and research degree types (s 4 notes). The instrument makes clear which awards are “postgraduate coursework awards” and which are governed by the Research Awards Rule (s 4).
Inter-instrument priority and joint programs
Section 7 governs inconsistency between this instrument and agreements with other institutions for joint, double or dual programs, stating that a provision of this instrument has no effect to the extent it is inconsistent with such agreements (s 7(1)). That means externally negotiated program agreements may supersede or modify the Rule’s effect for students in those arrangements; the Rule will not have effect where inconsistent subject to concurrent operation where possible (s 7(2)). This interaction recognises the primacy of negotiated program agreements over this internal rule.
Acts Interpretation and service
Section 40 includes a note referring to the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, s 28A on service of documents, and Part 6, s 45 references Acts Interpretation Act 1901, s 7 regarding effect of repeal or amendment of Acts (s 40 note; s 45). Those references indicate the University intends that service and transitional effects be read in light of Commonwealth statutory interpretation principles where applicable. The instrument nevertheless sets out specific service rules for its own notices (s 40(2)-(4)).
Delegation limits and legislative instrument requirements
The Vice-Chancellor may make orders by legislative instrument under s 44 for transitional matters. That creates an interaction with the University’s internal legislative instrument-making processes.
Delegation rules are internal: the Vice-Chancellor may delegate functions other than the power to make orders (s 38), and the Registrar may delegate functions under this instrument (s 39). The practical effect is that duties and decision-making powers may be allocated within the University subject to the prescribed requirement that delegations be in writing, which should align with governance principles in the Statute.
Interaction with admission criteria and re-admission rules
Section 33(4) explicitly ties re-admission after exclusion to whatever admission criteria apply at the time of new application. That means external rules and practices governing admissions,whether other University rules, Statutes, or Government requirements for particular professional or international students,will govern re-admission prospects.
Limitation of judicial or external review not stated
The instrument itself does not address external judicial review or appeal beyond the internal University hierarchy. It provides internal procedural avenues,Academic Progress Committee and Deputy Vice-Chancellor,but does not preclude external legal remedies under administrative law. The Rule’s silence on external remedies should be read with the statutory context and any applicable external judicial review principles, noting the Rule is an internal instrument authorised by statute.
Transitional and repeals
The Rule repeals the Academic Progress Rule 2015 and the Academic Progress (ANU Medical School) Order 2015 (s 41). Section 42 contains transitional savings and limits application of the Rule to course results up to 10 years prior to commencement unless otherwise ordered (s 42(3)-(4)). Section 43 permits students to apply for transitional modifications where application of the new provision would be unfair or unreasonable, triggering interoperation with the previous instruments for specific students (s 43).
In practical terms the Rule is designed to sit inside the University’s internal governance framework, to defer to negotiated inter-institutional program agreements where they conflict, to rely on statutory interpretation principles for matters of service, and to defer to other award rules for definitions and award-type distinctions. Users should map the rule against the Vice-Chancellorship Statute, any program-specific agreements, Coursework or Research Award Rules and the University’s admissions rules to understand full legal effect for particular students.
Amendment history
The instrument contains a self-contained repeal and transitional regime but, taken alone, does not include a history of prior amendments beyond the specific repeals. The text explicitly repeals the Academic Progress Rule 2015 and the Academic Progress (ANU Medical School) Order 2015 (s 41). It also refers in the transitional prescription (s 43) to a range of previous instruments that might have applied to a student, including the Academic Progress Rules 2014, the ANU Medical School Academic Progress Order 2014, or any earlier rule or order applying in relation to academic progress.
Commencement and prior instruments
Commencement is set at 1 January 2020 (s 2). The transitional provisions in Part 6 provide the mechanism for applying this new Rule to failures and completions that pre-date the Rule (s 42). Section 42(1) states the instrument applies as if a pre-existing program had commenced after commencement of this instrument. That has the effect of bringing earlier events into the new counting and threshold regime where they fall within the 10-year lookback window set by s 42(3).
Transitional modifications and student remediation of transitional unfairness
Section 43 creates a mechanism for individual students to apply, before a cut-off date, for a modification of the instrument’s application to them on fairness grounds. The definition of cut-off varies depending on whether the student was enrolled at commencement or not, and the deadlines are tightly prescribed (s 43(1)-(3)). The Delegated Authority must decide the application and may grant the modification if satisfied that the application of the current provision is unfair or unreasonable (s 43(4)-(5)). A refusal gives the student an internal review route through the Associate Dean and the transfer-review pathway (s 43(7)-(8)). This structure is effectively an amendment-by-exemption process on an individual basis.
Vice-Chancellor transitional orders
Section 44 authorises the Vice-Chancellor to make transitional orders by legislative instrument prescribing savings, application provisions and other transitional matters. Those orders have effect despite anything in the Rule other than Part 6 (s 44(1)-(3)). The Rule therefore envisages post‑commencement transitional amendments that may be made by the Vice-Chancellor to clarify or tailor the Rule’s application to existing situations.
No recorded amendment chronology in the text
The instrument itself does not record any subsequent amendments after its making, nor does it include an amendment schedule. Practitioners should check University legislative registers and the University website for any Vice‑Chancellor transitional orders (s 44), approved forms (s 37), or later amendments made under authority of the Statute in line with s 3.
Constraints on delegations and amendments
Delegation powers are expressed in writing (s 38-39) and the Vice‑Chancellor may not delegate power to make orders under the Rule (s 38). That constraint preserves the Vice‑Chancellor’s exclusive authority to make transitional legislative instruments under s 44.
In practice, the effective amendment history will be the combination of: the repeal of the 2015 instruments (s 41), any transitional orders made under s 44 after commencement, any modifications granted under s 43 on a student-by-student basis, and any written delegations that reallocate functions under s 38-39. To find changes since 5 December 2019, check the University’s legislative instrument register and any Vice‑Chancellor orders made under s 44.
Litigation history
The instrument itself does not record any cases or litigation concerning its interpretation or application. The text names no court decisions and provides no account of judicial treatment or external review outcomes. The instrument does, however, create internal review avenues and final decision points with limited external procedural review rights, which means the likely loci of any external litigation would be judicial review of administrative action, but the instrument does not address external judicial review remedies.
What the instrument provides internally
Internal appeal and review avenues are the Academic Progress Committee and, on procedural grounds only, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (s 24-27). For transfer decisions there is review by the Associate Dean and a procedural review by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (ss 29-32). Where a student does not appeal an exclusion, the Registrar must refer the decision to the Committee for review (s 28). These internal pathways and time limits may affect the availability and timing of allegations that administrative procedures were inadequate, which are the kinds of grounds that could otherwise be taken to external administrative review.
Absence of named cases in the text
The Rule contains no references to case law, no illustrative decisions and no examples of prior disciplinary or exclusion outcomes. The Rule’s approach to procedural fairness rests on internal mechanisms and specified timelines rather than expressly invoking common law procedural fairness expectations.
Implications for practitioners
Because the instrument is an internal rule authorised by a University Statute, external litigation, if any, would normally engage general administrative law principles rather than any special statutory privative clause found in the Rule. The Rule does not attempt to fetter external review rights. Practitioners considering external remedies will need to map the internal appeal exhaustion requirements and time limits set by the Rule, and consider whether judicial review of a Delegated Authority’s decision remains available where required procedures in this instrument were not followed. Section 26 provides an internal procedural appeal to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor on the precise ground that required procedures were not observed, which may affect the timing and content of any external review application.
Absent recorded litigation, this section is limited to noting that the Rule itself makes no express reference to litigation and contains internal mechanisms that would typically be engaged prior to any external proceedings. To establish whether cases have been brought that interpret or challenge the Rule since its commencement, check external judicial databases and the University’s published decisions. The Rule’s text alone contains no litigation history.
Gotchas
The Rule contains numerous detailed procedural and definitional provisions that create practical pitfalls for students and administrators if not carefully followed.
Counting of failures and repeats
Failures of the same course count multiple times. The Rule explicitly states that if a student fails the same course 2 or more times, each failure counts as a failure for the purposes of the counting thresholds in s 10 and s 12 (s 10(6), s 12(6)). That converts what might be seen as a single academic deficiency into a cumulative numerical trigger for probation and potential exclusion.
Consecutive teaching-period counting for restoration
Restoration of good standing requires completion of 8 (undergraduate) or 6 (postgraduate) courses in consecutive teaching periods, and the instrument sets out a fixed order of teaching periods (summer, first semester, autumn, winter, second semester, spring) and requires disregard of teaching periods where the student is not enrolled (s 11(3), s 13(3)). The administrative implication is that intermittent study patterns, leave of absence, or out-of-cycle enrolment can affect whether a student meets the “consecutive” requirement. Students who change enrolment intensity or take leave must carefully track how those gaps will be treated.
Notification and service effects
Notices are deemed served when delivered in the ordinary course of post or email (s 40(3)-(4)). If the University has an out-of-date address or the student fails to check their email, appeals timeframes may run and rights to appeal may be lost. The Registrar’s notification obligations are described as “as soon as practicable” (s 10(2), s 12(2)); that language creates an administrative obligation but is not a precise deadline, making timeliness disputes possible.
Narrow scope of procedural appeal to Deputy Vice-Chancellor
The Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s appeal jurisdiction is confined to procedural noncompliance with the instrument in connection with the Academic Progress Committee’s decision. That limits the content of further internal review to procedural grounds and not to substantive reconsideration except to the extent the Deputy Vice-Chancellor remits matters back to the Committee (s 26 and s 27). Students seeking extensive substantive re-evaluation may be constrained to the Committee stage rather than the Deputy Vice-Chancellor stage.
Non-award enrolment is not conclusive
The Committee may take account of non-award enrolments for non-medical exclusion appeals, but the Rule explicitly states that success in passing a course as part of a non-award enrolment, even if credit is later granted, is not to be regarded as conclusive evidence of the ability to meet remaining academic requirements (s 25(3)-(4)). Students who hope to use short-term non-award units as a decisive remedy will find that the Committee treats such evidence as non-determinative.
Delegated Authority discretion and potential for variable application
The Rule vests exclusion power in Delegated Authorities appointed at college level by Associate Deans, and requires Delegated Authorities to take reasonable steps to apply the instrument consistently and fairly within the program (s 8, s 34). The practical risk is variation across colleges where different Delegated Authorities take different approaches, particularly in double-degree situations where parts of a single student’s program might be treated as separate programs (s 35). Delegations in writing are permitted (s 38-39), which can shift decision-making to other staff and create operational complexity.
Effect of exclusion on re-admission prospects
An excluded person may not enrol or apply to enrol in the relevant category of programs until the exclusion period ends, and later admission is subject to the admission criteria in force at the time of the later application (s 33(3)-(4)). If admission criteria change, or competition for places tightens, an excluded student may face higher hurdles on return. That is an explicit, binding administrative consequence.
Transitional cut-offs and modification windows
Section 43 permits students to apply for modification of the instrument’s application to them, but only before a cut-off date which varies depending on whether the student was enrolled at commencement or becomes enrolled later (s 43(1)-(3)). Missing the cut-off forfeits that route. The Delegated Authority must decide such applications and can grant modifications if satisfied the application of the current provision would be unfair or unreasonable (s 43(4)-(6)). Practitioners must note these strict timing and procedural rules.
Condition compliance and subsequent exclusion
If the Academic Progress Committee permits continuation subject to conditions, compliance is the student’s responsibility and contravention is an express ground for subsequent exclusion by a Delegated Authority (s 25(6)-(8), s 18-19). Students must take care to understand and comply with any conditions imposed by the Committee.
Forms and mandatory use
The Vice-Chancellor may approve forms and require their use for particular purposes (s 37(1)-(2)). Failure to use required forms could affect procedural compliance in appeals and reviews. The Rule obliges the Vice‑Chancellor to ensure approved forms are publicly available (s 37(3)), but failure to locate or use them can be costly.
Joint-program exceptions
Section 7 disapplies inconsistent adverse provisions where there is a university-level agreement on joint programs. That can create situations where a student in a joint program is not governed by these exact thresholds or processes; practitioners should check program-specific agreements.
In sum, the main practical "gotchas" are the counting rules for failures including repeats, the strict time limits for appeals and cut-offs for transitional relief, the dependence on accurate service addresses for timing, the constrained scope of procedural appeals, and the potentially variable operational application arising from delegated college-level decision-making.
How to comply
Compliance responsibilities fall to University officers, Delegated Authorities, and to students who wish to preserve their procedural rights. The instrument contains precise procedural requirements and timeframes; compliance requires accurate record-keeping, timely notifications, appropriate use of approved forms, and adherence to appeal windows.
For University administrators and Delegated Authorities
Maintain accurate enrolment and contact records. Section 40 permits service by post to addresses in University records and by email to University-provided or other recorded email addresses (s 40(2)). To ensure appeal time limits are measured correctly and notices reach students, the Registrar’s office and college administrators should maintain up-to-date postal and email records and log all outputs with timestamps.
Follow notification timings “as soon as practicable”. Where the instrument requires the Registrar to tell a student they are on probation or excluded as soon as practicable (s 10(2), s 12(2), s 21(2), s 10(5), s 12(5), s 21(10)), administrators should document the factual basis for timing decisions to demonstrate compliance if a procedural challenge is made.
Use approved forms where required. The Vice-Chancellor may approve mandatory forms and require their use for particular purposes (s 37(2)). Retain and publish current versions of forms as required by s 37(3).
Apply the counting rules strictly and document each failure. The Rule counts each fail and repeats separately (s 10(6), s 12(6)). Maintain a clear audit trail of course attempts and grades so Delegated Authorities and committees can demonstrate the factual basis for probation and exclusion decisions.
Exercise and record Delegated Authority decisions in writing. Associate Deans appoint Delegated Authorities in writing (s 34), and those Delegated Authorities’ decisions to exclude should be recorded with reasons and service evidence (s 18(3)(c), s 19(3)(c)).
Ensure consistent application across programs. Section 8 requires Delegated Authorities to take reasonable steps to ensure consistent and fair application within the program. Implement consistent guidance, templates and decision matrices across colleges to reduce variation and to provide a defensible basis for decisions.
Observe committee composition, quorum and conflict rules. The Academic Progress Committee’s composition and quorum are prescribed (s 23(3)-(11)). Members must disclose material conflicts as soon as they become aware (s 23(7)-(8)) and recuse or obtain agreement for continued participation where appropriate. Document disclosures and recusals.
For students
Monitor notifications and university email carefully. Notices are validly served by email or post to records held by the University and are taken as served on the day delivered in the ordinary course (s 40(3)-(4)). Students must regularly check University email and ensure personal contact details are up to date in University records.
Track fail counts and appeals windows. Appeal rights to the Academic Progress Committee must be exercised in writing within 20 working days after written notice of exclusion (s 24(3)). For transfer reviews the same 20 working day period applies (s 29(3)). Students should file appeals or requests for review promptly and use the required forms if the Vice-Chancellor has mandated them (s 37).
Use non-award enrolment carefully. Success in non-award enrolments is not conclusive proof of capacity to meet award requirements and the Committee may treat it as not dispositive (s 25(3)-(4)). Students contemplating non-award enrolment to improve their position should present supporting evidence and address the Committee’s concerns about transferability and sustained performance.
Comply with Committee conditions if permitted to continue. If the Academic Progress Committee permits continuation with conditions, the student must perform the required actions; contravention is a ground for exclusion (s 18, s 19, s 25(6)-(8)). Keep records of compliance with any imposed academic counselling, remediation or changes to study load.
Consider transitional modification applications if appropriate. If a student believes the new provision would be unfair or unreasonable in their specific circumstances and is within the cut-off window, they can apply to the Delegated Authority for a modification under s 43. Make the application in writing before the relevant cut-off and include evidence and reasons to enable the Delegated Authority to assess fairness.
For Associate Deans and Delegated Authorities in double degree settings
Clarify program boundaries and nomination of Associate Dean. Sections 35 and 36 allow Associate Deans to appoint Delegated Authorities for parts of double degree programs and for the Registrar to nominate an Associate Dean for the student. Ensure nominees and appointments are recorded in writing and communicated to the student to avoid uncertainty about which Delegated Authority or Associate Dean has responsibility in the event of probation, transfer or exclusion decisions.
For the Academic Progress Committee
Keep written reasons and meet statutory timeframes. The Committee must endeavour to decide appeals within 20 working days and the Registrar must provide written notice and a statement of reasons within 14 working days of a decision (s 25(9)-(11)). Similarly, reviews where no appeal is lodged must be concluded within 20 working days and notified within 14 working days (s 28(5)-(6)). Record decisions and reasons to meet the textual requirements and to enable procedural appeals.
Operational checklist summary
Update and maintain University records for mailing and email.
Deploy standardised forms approved by the Vice-Chancellor and ensure public availability.
Put in place a tracking system for failures by student and by course, including repeat attempts.
Log all notices served and the chosen method of service with date-time stamps.
Provide written, reasoned decisions when excluding or requiring transfer; include information about appeal rights and time limits.
Offer clear written condition schedules and monitor compliance.
Publish guidance for students on appeal steps and timelines, and for staff on consistent application.
Use s 43 transitional modification procedures where appropriate and record decisions.
Following these steps aligns the operational practices to the instrument’s specified duties, preserves students’ appeal rights, and reduces the risk of procedural non-compliance that could be the ground for internal or external challenge.
This instrument is made under the Vice-Chancellorship Statute 2013, section 9.5.
4 Definitions
In this instrument:
Academic Progress Committee means the committee established under section 23 (Establishment of Academic Progress Committee etc.) or, if 2 committees are established under that section, the relevant committee.
Associate Dean, in relation to an ANU College, means a person who is appointed as an Associate Dean of the college.
[Note: For double degree programs, see section 36 (Associate Deans: double degree programs).]
award means a degree, diploma or certificate offered by the University.
committee means the Academic Progress Committee.
course means a subject of scholarly study, whether it is taught:
(a) in a connected series of classes or demonstrations; or
(b) by means of practical work, including, for example, the production by students of essays, theses or case studies or the attendance and participation by students in seminars or workshops; or
(c) by clinical or professional practice; or
(d) in another way or in a combination of ways.
coursework means the courses, and other written or oral work (if any), undertaken by a student for a coursework award program, but does not include any thesis component of the program of at least 24 units duration.
coursework award has the meaning given by the Coursework Awards Rule, section 7 (Coursework awards).
[Note: Under the Coursework Awards Rule, section 7, a ‘coursework award’ is a coursework degree, Diploma, Graduate Diploma or Graduate Certificate that may be conferred by the University. Coursework degree is defined in that section to cover any degree that is not a research degree to which the Research Awards Rule applies e.g. any Bachelor or Bachelor Honours degree and any Master degree (other than a Master of Philosophy).]
coursework award program means a program for a coursework award and, to remove any doubt, includes a coursework program for a double degree.
Delegated Authority, in relation to a program offered by an ANU College for a coursework award, means a person who is appointed under section 34 (Appointment of Delegated Authorities) as a Delegated Authority for the program.
[Note: For double degree programs, see section 35 (Delegated Authorities: double degree programs).]
double degree: a coursework program is a coursework program for a double degree if a student undertaking the program may qualify for 2 undergraduate coursework awards or 2 postgraduate coursework awards.
enrol includes re-enrol.
exclusion decision: see section 22 (Application of Division 4.1).
exercise a function includes perform the function.
fail a course: to remove any doubt, a student fails a course if the student is awarded any of the following grades for the course:
(a) N (fail);
(b) NCN (not completed/fail);
(c) WN (withdrawn with failure).
function includes authority, duty and power.
medical program means a program for the Medicinae ac Chirurgiae Doctoranda (Doctor of Medicine and Surgery) (MChD) degree.
medical student means a student who is or has been enrolled, at any level, in a medical program.
postgraduate coursework means coursework undertaken by a student for a postgraduate coursework award program.
postgraduate coursework award means any of the following coursework awards:
(a) a Graduate Diploma;
(b) a Graduate Certificate;
(c) a Master’s degree (other than the Master of Philosophy);
(d) the Juris Doctor degree;
(e) the Doctoranda Medicinae ac Chirurgiae (Doctor of Medicine and Surgery) degree;
(f) a professional doctorate (other than the Doctor of Juridical Science or Doctor of Psychology (Clinical)).
[Note: The Research Awards Rule applies to programs for the degrees of Doctor of Philosophy, Doctor of Juridical Science, Doctor of Psychology (Clinical) and Master of Philosophy.]
postgraduate coursework award program means a program for a postgraduate coursework award and, to remove any doubt, includes a program for a double degree if a student undertaking the program may qualify for 2 postgraduate coursework awards.
semester means first semester or second semester.
session means summer session, autumn session, winter session or spring session.
student means a person who is, or has been, enrolled in a coursework award program.
teaching period means a semester or session.
undergraduate coursework means coursework undertaken by a student for an undergraduate coursework award program.
undergraduate coursework award means a coursework award that is not a postgraduate coursework award.
undergraduate coursework award program means a program for an undergraduate coursework award and, to remove any doubt, includes a program for a double degree if a student undertaking the program may qualify for 2 undergraduate coursework awards.
working day means a day that is not a Saturday, a Sunday, a public holiday in the Australian Capital Territory, or a University holiday.
5 Application of instrument
This instrument applies in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs and postgraduate coursework award programs (including medical programs).
6 Equivalent courses
(1) A reference to a course includes in this instrument a reference to an equivalent course.
(2) For this instrument, a course of a program is equivalent to another course if it is declared, in writing, to be an equivalent course by a Delegated Authority for the program.
(3) The Delegated Authority may make a declaration under subsection (2) if the Delegated Authority considers that the courses have a sufficient similarity of content, despite the courses having a different title or different course code.
(4) In this section:
course code means the unique alphanumeric code used within the University to identify a particular course.
7 Joint, double or dual programs with other institutions etc.
(1) A provision of this instrument has no effect to the extent to which it is inconsistent with an agreement between the University and another university or institution that makes provision for or in relation to joint, double or dual programs offered by them (including cotutelle), or the joint, double or dual conferral of degrees or other awards by them, for students or a particular student.
(2) For subsection (1), a provision of this instrument is not inconsistent with a provision of an agreement mentioned in that subsection to the extent to which both provisions can operate concurrently.
8 Consistent and fair application of instrument
A Delegated Authority for a program must take reasonable steps to ensure that this instrument is applied consistently and fairly within the program.
Part 2—Academic progress rules: programs other than medical programs
Division 2.1—Application
9 Application of Part 2
(1) This Part applies in relation to undergraduate coursework award programs and postgraduate coursework award programs.
(2) However, this Part does not apply in relation to medical programs.
[Note: Part 3 (Academic progress rules: medical programs) applies in relation to medical programs.]
(3) To remove any doubt, Part 3 (and not this Part) applies exclusively to a medical student in relation to the medical program undertaken by the student, but this Part applies in relation to any other coursework award program undertaken by the student.
(4) Also, to remove any doubt, if a student fails a course in any undergraduate or postgraduate coursework award program to which this Part applies, nothing in this Part prevents 2 or more provisions of this Part from applying to the student in accordance with their terms in relation to the failure.
Division 2.2—Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress
10 Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress: undergraduate coursework
(1) If a student fails a total of 4 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs), the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in undergraduate coursework, and is regarded as being on probation.
(2) If subsection (1) applies to a student, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing, that:
(a) the student is considered to have failed to maintain a satisfactory standard of academic progress in undergraduate coursework, and is regarded as being on probation; and
(b) the student may be excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs if the student fails a total of 8 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs).
(3) If a student fails a total of 8 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs), the Delegated Authority for the undergraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled may exclude the student from undergraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(4) If:
(a) under Part 4 (Academic progress appeals and reviews), the Academic Progress Committee permits a student to continue to undertake undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the student subsequently fails a total of 2 (or more) courses in which the student is, or has at any time been, enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs);
the Delegated Authority for the undergraduate coursework award program in which the student is, or was last, enrolled may exclude the student from undergraduate coursework award programs for a specified period of no longer than 5 years.
(5) If the Delegated Authority excludes the student from undergraduate coursework award programs under this section, the Registrar must, as soon as practicable, tell the student, in writing:
(a) that the student has been excluded from undergraduate coursework award programs; and
(b) the period that the student has been excluded; and
(c) that the student may appeal to the Academic Progress Committee against the exclusion.
[Note: Division 4.1 (Exclusion decisions) applies to an appeal.]
(6) To remove any doubt, if a student fails the same course 2 or more times, each failure counts, for this section, as a failure of a course by the student.
(7) This section is subject to section 11 (Restoration of good standing: undergraduate coursework).
11 Restoration of good standing: undergraduate coursework
(1) This section applies to a student if:
(a) the student is regarded, under section 10(1) (Failure to maintain satisfactory academic progress: undergraduate coursework), as being on probation; and
(b) in the teaching periods after the teaching period in which the student last failed a course in which the student was enrolled in any undergraduate coursework award program, the student successfully completes 8 (or more) courses in any undergraduate coursework award program (or programs) without failing a course; and
(c) the 8 (or more) courses successfully completed are completed in consecutive teaching periods.
(2) However, this section does not apply to the student if, under section 10(3),
This is an opening excerpt, not the complete document.