Prepared in accordance with the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2013 (PGPA Rule), TEQSA’s Corporate Plan sets out our priorities for the four reporting periods from 2025-26 to 2028-29.

• TEQSA Corporate Plan 2025-29 (PDF, 14 MB)

The PDF version of the document is available above. An HTML version is available on request.

Scope and intent of the Domain

This Domain (Sections 3.1-3.3) of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (HES Framework) encompasses:

• specific requirements for the specification of the course design and requirements for engagement with advanced knowledge and inquiry, current knowledge, theoretical frameworks and concepts, related scholarship and emerging ideas
• coherent achievement of learning outcomes and professional accreditation of a course of study if applicable
• sufficiency of staffing, capability of teaching staff, student access to staff
• the nature, appropriateness, quality and level of access to learning resources that are specific to the course of study. 

Our commentary

3.1 Course Design

TEQSA expects not only that the provider’s specification of a course design (and its documentation) will comply with the requirements of Standard 3.1.1 (see also Public accessibility in Section 7.2), but also that sufficient detail of the conceptual underpinning of the course design (Standards 3.1.2–3.1.4) will be available for an expert in a relevant subject area to form a view on whether these Standards are met. We expect these requirements would be evident in the course proposal approved by the provider’s internal academic governance body/processes. In relation to Standard 3.1.5, we will require evidence from the relevant professional accrediting body where applicable and where available. This may involve some coordination with the professional body in relation to new providers/courses of study, where a provider may not be eligible to attain professional accreditation at the outset.

3.2 Staffing

This Section requires, and TEQSA will expect, a provider to demonstrate sufficient staffing to meet the educational, academic support, administrative and access needs of the student cohorts undertaking a course of study. This includes an overall staffing profile sufficient to provide collective academic leadership necessary to lead intellectual enquiry at the level required by the course of study. In particular, the Standards specify that academic teaching staff must be qualified to at least one level of qualification (Australian Qualifications Framework [AQF] level or equivalent) higher than the course of study being taught, or have equivalent relevant academic or professional or practice-based experience and expertise, except for staff who are supervising doctoral degrees who must themselves have a doctoral degree or equivalent research experience (see Standard 3.2.3). The Standards for research (Section 4.1) and research training (Section 4.2) also require staff to have relevant qualifications and experience. Staff who have leadership/oversight roles or teach significant components of a course of study must meet certain specified capabilities and qualifications as outlined in the Standards, including requirements for continuing scholarship that informs their teaching.

These requirements include knowledge of contemporary developments in the field they are teaching (which is informed by continuing scholarly activity), skills in teaching, learning and assessment relevant to the needs of the student cohorts involved, and a qualification at least one level higher than is awarded for the course of study, or equivalent experience.

Exceptions to these requirements are possible (Standard 3.2.4) in certain circumstances, such as teaching a specialised component of a course of study, provided the staff members who do not fully meet the requirements of the Standards are supervised by staff who do meet the Standard. We will need to be satisfied that the qualifications and experience of staff collectively and individually meet the requirements of the Standards.

Staff who hold academic leadership roles at any level need to have experience and qualifications at a level necessary for their responsibilities. Academic leaders at higher levels have an important role in guiding the development of a higher education learning environment within their scope of responsibility, including the development of advanced inquiry at the appropriate course level and staff scholarship.

TEQSA has found academic leadership to be a critical success factor, especially for applicants seeking to enter higher education for the first time.

Unusually high reliance on casual staff poses risks for the quality of the student experience, and we will investigate where high reliance on casual staff is combined with data indicating lower student outcomes. We do not set a threshold for the ratio of ongoing staff to casual staff, except for the purpose of risk assessment. Findings are made after considering contextual factors including qualifications, experience and depth of scholarship in academic leaders and the nature of the field.

3.3 Learning Resources and Educational Support

This Section focuses on both the quality of and access to learning resources that are specific to the learning needs of a course of study and its level. TEQSA will expect a provider to demonstrate that the learning resources provided and recommended are appropriate to the level of the course of study, consistent with the expected learning outcomes and modes of participation, and accessible when needed (including for individuals with special needs).

The Standard does not specify the form in which information resources are made available (whether physical books and journals or electronic databases), but they must be accessible by all students regardless of mode of delivery or location, and whether the course is delivered directly by the registered provider or by a third party. The quality of learning resources may be assessed in part by an external expert in the subject area and the resources will need to be specified in detail sufficient for such an expert to form a view on their quality and appropriateness. We do not regard sole reliance on other parties with whom the provider has no relationship (such as a municipal library) to provide resources as acceptable. We may require more or less information on learning management systems employed by a provider depending on our familiarity with the provider.

Relevant guidance notes

The following guidance notes can be accessed at our Guidance notes page, or from the links below:

• Academic monitoring, review and improvement
• Course design, learning outcomes and assessment
• Determining equivalence of professional experience and academic qualifications
• Diversity and equity
• Learning resources and educational support
• Nested courses
• Scholarship
• Staffing
• Technology-enhanced learning
• Work-integrated learning

Scope and intent of the Domain

This Domain (Sections 4.1-4.2) of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (HES Framework) encompasses:

• the minimum requirements for the conduct of research and recording of research activity by a higher education provider
• the additional requirements that must be met if research training is offered.

Our commentary

4.1 Research

This Section of the Standards is intended to apply to all research carried out by higher education providers (whether within the context of research training or not). TEQSA recognises that providers who are receiving funding from national Australian funding bodies, such as the Australian Research Council (ARC) or the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) or other major agencies, must meet stringent and onerous requirements attached to their funding that are more detailed than the requirements of the HES Framework, including various codes of conduct. Definitions of research are discussed in our Guidance Note on Research and Research Training, available on our Guidance notes page.

The Standards in this Section represent more basic requirements, but we encourage providers who do not receive funding from the major funding bodies to use their higher requirements as a guide for their own operations (see Reference points), taking account of the scale and nature of their research mission. Where those requirements are already demonstrated to be met for other purposes, either in full or in relation to the matters encompassed specifically by Standard 4.1.2, we will not require further demonstration in relation to compliance with Standard 4.1.2. We interpret Standard 4.1.2 to broadly include all staff in a research team, such as technical specialist staff, not just academic staff.

As to the system for recording research outputs (Standard 4.1.3), a system required by major funding bodies will suffice but we would otherwise expect the system to be appropriate to the scale and purposes of the provider (for example, an authorised spreadsheet could suffice, provided it is accurate and current). This recording system will also serve to provide evidence of research activity for the purpose of meeting other Standards (e.g. 3.2.3, 4.2.2, 4.2.3).

Reference points

• Australian Government, Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018).
• Australian Government, The National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007).
• Australian Government, The Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes 8th Edition (2013, updated 2021).   

4.2 Research Training

Providers who undertake research training must meet the requirements of Section 4.1 as well as those of 4.2. TEQSA expects to see that research training is guided by and undertaken in accordance with an institutionally-approved policy framework covering at least the items specified by Section 4.2. The Standards also require research training to occur in an environment of research/scholarly/creative activity (such as on-going projects within a community of scholars, leading to research publications in relevant fields) with adequate resources and with competent continuing supervisory arrangements as specified by the Standards. The Standards do not permit a course in research training (i.e. a higher degree by research) to be offered in an environment that is otherwise devoid of research activity. Providers should note the requirements for specified learning outcomes for research training and additional specific assessment requirements for research training (see Section 1.4).

Reference points

• Australian Council of Graduate Research Inc., Australian Graduate Research Good Practice Principles.
• Australian Government,  Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018).

Relevant guidance notes

The following guidance notes can be accessed at our Guidance notes page, or from the links below:

• Academic governance
• Academic and research integrity
• Determining equivalence of professional experience and academic qualifications
• Learning resources and educational support
• Nested courses
• Research and research training
• Staffing

Scope and intent of the Domain

This Domain (Sections 5.1-5.4) of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (HES Framework) encompasses:

• whether the provider has a credible and effective process for internal approval of all courses of study that is applied consistently and involves competent academic oversight and scrutiny independent of those directly involved in the delivery of the courses of study (Section 5.1)
• the effectiveness of the policy framework and processes that are applied to maintain academic integrity throughout the provider’s academic activities (including arrangements with other parties) and to address and prevent lapses in academic integrity (Section 5.2)
• the mechanisms for regular review of the quality of higher education activities and how the findings of such reviews are used to bring about improvements (Section 5.3)
• how delivery arrangements with other parties are quality assured, including verification of the continuing compliance of those arrangements with the requirements of the HES Framework (Section 5.4).

Our commentary

5.1 Course Approval and Accreditation

TEQSA’s main focus will be on ensuring that the provider has an effective internal process for approval of all courses, which includes rigorous academic scrutiny through the institutional academic governance processes of the provider, independently of those involved directly in delivery of the course of study. All providers are expected to have such an approval process, whether they have self-accrediting authority or their courses are accredited by TEQSA. If we accredit a course of study, the point of departure will be the evidence of rigorous internal approval of the course carried out by the provider prior to making an application for course accreditation. Once we are satisfied that a provider’s approval process is capable and continues to be so, less detailed evidence about the approval process itself may be required for regulatory purposes. Any course of study submitted to us for approval must have been both considered and approved by the responsible internal academic governance body or bodies or it will not be accredited.

5.2 Academic and Research Integrity

TEQSA will need to be satisfied that there is an institutional policy framework to maintain and support academic integrity of students and staff that is backed by processes and practices that implement institutional policies effectively. Providers will need processes for detecting and addressing instances of plagiarism and other forms of ‘cheating’. Once a provider is operating, evidence of effectiveness will be provided in part by records of management of incidents as required by Paragraph 7.3.3c. 

Reference points

• Australian Government, Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018).
• Reports of studies on good practice commissioned by the Office for Learning and Teaching and the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (2011-2013).
• Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, Academic Integrity Toolkit (2020).

5.3 Monitoring, Review and Improvement

This Section requires a provider to conduct periodic, comprehensive reviews of all courses (at least every seven years with evidence to be provided as part of the renewal of registration application to TEQSA), backed by more frequent monitoring of the day-to-day delivery of courses of study, for example, periodic reviews of units and annual review of student performance. We will expect to see that such reviews are conducted (or will be conducted in the case of a new provider or course of study) according to the requirements of the Standards as part of the provider’s normal operations, and that the findings of the reviews are evidently used to generate improvements. In demonstrating that it meets this Standard, a provider will need to demonstrate in particular that reviews of courses of study involve considered oversight by the institutional academic governance processes, external referencing (which can include moderation of assessment against other programs, benchmarking of student success and course design against programs at other providers) and feedback from students. 

5.4 Delivery with Other Parties

Where a provider delivers courses of study or parts of courses of study through arrangements with other parties, TEQSA will need to be satisfied that the provider remains accountable for such arrangements, that the delivery of the program is monitored and quality assured by the provider and that both the program delivery and the student experience with other parties comply with the requirements of the HES Framework. How this is demonstrated may vary with the circumstances. If in doubt, contact the TEQSA Enquiries Management team at providerenquiries@teqsa.gov.au. However, the starting point will be the terms and conditions of the contract between the registered provider and the third party, and how the registered provider reviews compliance with these.

Relevant guidance notes

The following guidance notes can be accessed at our Guidance notes page, or from the links below:

• Academic governance
• Academic and research integrity
• Academic monitoring, review and improvement
• Academic quality assurance
• Corporate governance
• Delivery with other parties
• Nested courses
• Research and research training
• Scholarship
• Technology-enhanced learning
• Transnational higher education
• Work-integrated learning