UniPASS Report Semester 1 2012 - Unilife - Curtin University

UniPASS Report Semester 1 2012 

“The facilitator was knowledgeable, friendly and helpful. The 

activities and group work helped improve my knowledge of the 

unit and made me more confident” 

UniPASS Student, Semester 1 2012

UniPASS Semester 1 2012 Report 

Contents 

Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 

Summary of Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 4 

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 

UniPASS Results Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 6 

Benefits of the Program .............................................................................................................................................. 7 

Average Increase in Grades ..................................................................................................................................... 7 

Effect on Borderline Students .................................................................................................................................. 7 

Demographic of UniPASS Regular Attendees ........................................................................................................... 7 

Benefits to the Student Experience and Curtin’s Reputation .................................................................................... 8 

Attendance ................................................................................................................................................................. 8 

Promotion and Marketing ........................................................................................................................................... 9 

Feedback from Regular Attendees............................................................................................................................. 10 

Attendees Positive Comments ............................................................................................................................... 11 

Attendees Suggestions for Improvement ............................................................................................................... 11 

Feedback from Non-Attendees.................................................................................................................................. 12 

Feedback from Peer Learning Facilitators .................................................................................................................. 16 

Graduate Attributes .............................................................................................................................................. 18 

Feedback from Faculty Staff ...................................................................................................................................... 18 

HEPPP Targets ........................................................................................................................................................... 19 

Figure 11 ............................................................................................................................................................... 19 

Figure 12 ............................................................................................................................................................... 20 

Low Socio-Economic Status Students..................................................................................................................... 20 

Regional and Remote Students .............................................................................................................................. 20 

Centre for Aboriginal Studies ................................................................................................................................. 21 

Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA)............................................................................................... 21 

Program Achievements to Date ................................................................................................................................. 23 

Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 24 

Additional Information .............................................................................................................................................. 25 

References ................................................................................................................................................................ 25 

Raphael Pereira September 2012 UniLife – START – UniPASS 1

Acknowledgements 


It is important to acknowledge the immense contributions to the program by the Peer Learning Facilitators all of who 

give to the program much more than they take. We also acknowledge the various contributions from the START 

team and Dr Jim Elliott. Finally, this program would not have been so successful without the support of faculty staff 

and Unit Coordinators, including: 

Professor Clare Pollock, Amanda Jefferson, Gary Whittaker, Rayne Stradwick-Thompson, Jenny Dolzadelli, Professor 

Sue Trinidad, Dr Cathy Cupitt, Associate Professor Len Sparrow, Lara Mackintosh, Leonie Matthews, Dr Tanya Elliott, 

Dr Daniel Southam, Peter McKinnon, Dr Leslie Almberg, Dr Roger Mandel, Associate Professor Stacey Porter, Dr 

Rossie Kerr, Dr Mike Robey, Associate Professor John Venable, Bikram Chatterjee, Sheldon Smith, Sharon Woodfield, 

Geraldo Martinez, Peter Ridley and Maggie McAlinden. 

We also acknowledge that the UniPASS program is based on PASS from the University of Wollongong (Australasian 

PASS Training Centre) and Supplemental Instruction (International SI/PASS Training Centre) from the University of 

Missouri – Kansas City. PASS/SI are service marks of the University of Missouri-Kansas City. 

Finally, UniPASS currently operates on Whadjuk/Nyungar land at the Bentley Campus. We go forward with honour 

and respect, by acknowledging the Elders of Nyungar Nation past and present, their descendants and families, 

sovereign owners of Whadjuk country. 

UniPASS is supervised and coordinated by Raphael Pereira and Anna Neindorf. 


Executive Summary 

• Background 


◦ UniPASS is an academic support program that uses collaborative peer learning to achieve academic, 

transition, retention, student experience and regulatory outcomes. 

◦ UniPASS is an evidenced and nationally accredited academic support program. 

◦ In semester one 2012 UniPASS underwent a successful rapid expansion from 3 pilot units to 14 units 

across four faculties. 

• Benefits 

◦ An 11.7% average increase in the grades of regular attendees. 

◦ A reduction in the fail rate of regular attendees by 64%. 

◦ 20% of UniPASS students from HEPPP target groups. 

◦ Graduate attributes of facilitators are significantly extended and developed 

◦ UniPASS is a pathway into academia for facilitators. 

◦ UniPASS has a low impact on academic staff workload. 

◦ Assists meeting TEQSA requirements. 

◦ Assists meeting equity targets. 

• Challenges for UniPASS include: 

◦ Improving attendance levels in specific units. 

◦ Refining the marketing message to appeal to students more strongly. 

◦ Securing funding independent of HEPPP after 2013. 

◦ Maintaining the pedagogical integrity of the program by not becoming remedial or tutoring. 

• TEQSA 

◦ The dual influences of the Bradley Review with its focus on widening participation and the emergence of 

TEQSA as the national regulator gives increased value to UniPASS. By offering an evidenced and 

nationally accredited academic support program Curtin is strategically aiming to meet the diverse 

learning needs of its students (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011) (Review of 

Australian Higher Education (Executive Summary), 2008). 

• Funding 

◦ UniPASS requires committed fiscal resources to operate beyond 2013. By committing to the learning 

needs of an increasingly diverse student population with UniPASS, Curtin University will demonstrate its 

ability to improve academic outcomes, enhance the student experience and meet equity and regulatory 

obligations. 



Summary of Recommendations 

• Maintain the program at its current operational capacity and consolidate systems to improve upon current 

gains. 

• Commence discussions with relevant areas on funding arrangements post 2013. 

• Establish UniPASS at the Kalgoorlie Campus to provide an equitable student experience and improve learning 

outcomes for students transitioning to the Kalgoorlie campus. 

• Examination of the upcoming AIME program for Indigenous students to determine if a need still exists for 

UniPASS in CAS. 

• Continued development of UniPASS unit selection criteria which would list characteristics that units would 

ideally possess to be successful candidates for UniPASS. Such a profile would be most indicative after 

analysis of results and data from 2013. 

• Improving recruiting procedures by formally identifying the characteristics of our most successful facilitators. 

Enhancing the promotion related to recruitment to get a large pool of applicants. Continue to develop a 

commitment to recruit from UniPASS regular attendees to build on the culture of constructivist peer learning 

already established in the classroom. 

• Build links with similar programs within WA to develop a professional body of practice specific to the local 

context. 

• Continue to develop Curtin’s peer learning reputation at a national level. 

• Conduct research into attendance of voluntary support programs at Curtin University. 

• Examine the prospect of formal university recognition for UniPASS PLFs as the program develops desired 

graduate attributes. 



Introduction 

UniPASS was a peer learning program selected to strategically meet Curtin University’s student support and equity 

requirements under the Bradley Review (Review of Australian Higher Education (Executive Summary), 2008) (Student 

Equity Strategy 2010-2013, 2009). UniPASS was successfully piloted with one unit in semester 1 2011 then three 

units in semester two 2011. This report covers the expansion of UniPASS in semester 1 2012 from three to 14 units. 

The expansion of the program to this level provided some challenges, namely: gaining sufficient attendance; 

obtaining support and building relationships with all faculties; recruiting, training and supervising 34 student 

facilitators; gathering appropriate reporting data; meeting HEPPP targets; commencing an online pilot for UniPASS. 

UniPASS is a nationally accredited peer learning programme (PASS- Guidelines for Best Practice, 2010) where weekly 

group study sessions are run by senior students. UniPASS has multiple benefits for learners. Apart from improving 

academic performance, study skills and social integration, its follow-on benefits are to improve student transition 

and retention. Also, due to its HEPPP (Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program) funding 

arrangements the programme works to improve retention of low SES, regional, remote and Indigenous students 

(Student Equity Strategy 2010-2013, 2009). 

At its core, UniPASS uses peer to peer relationships in a collaborative learning environment to meet the above aims. 

The sessions provide a place where a trained senior student creates a non-hierarchical, non-threatening learning 

environment. The senior students are trained in facilitation techniques and do not re-teach content; instead they 

strive to enable students to become active, independent learners. UniPASS targets units that have a history of 

difficulty for students and not by targeting at-risk students directly. This enables UniPASS to be inclusive and 

voluntary, avoiding any remedial stigma so that students at varying levels of achievement can integrate and aspire to 

improve (PASS- Guidelines for Best Practice, 2010) (PASS – Accredited Supervisor Manual, 2012). 

The UniPASS model has been adapted from Supplemental Instruction (SI), which was initially created by the 

University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) in 1973 as a way of improving academic performance of medical students, 

and its Australian counterpart (PASS: Peer Assisted Study Sessions) from the University of Wollongong (UOW). This 

model has a strong history of research and evidence to support the positive effects on student learning (PASS – 

Accredited Supervisor Manual, 2012). 


UniPASS Results Overview 


Figure 1: UniPASS Results Summary Table Semester 1 2012 (actual unit identity available from supervisor) 

Unit 

UniPASS 

Average 

Increase 


Regular 

Attendee 

Fail Rate 

Non- 

Attendees 

Fail Rate 

Difference 

in fail rate 

Regular 

Attendees 

who would 

have failed 

Percentage 

of Regular 

attendees 

who would 

have failed 


Regular 

Attendees 

Total 


Attendees 

Total 

Enrolled 

Student 

Cohort 

Regular 

Attendees 

as 

Percentage 

of Total 

Enrolments 

2 nd Year 

Accounting Unit 

2 nd Year 

Architecture 

Unit 

1 st Year Biology 

Unit 

1 st Year 

Chemistry A 

1 st Year 

Chemistry B 

1 st Year 

Humanities Unit 

1 st Year Geology 

Unit 

1 st Year Human 

Biology Unit 

1 st Year 

Anatomy Unit 

1 st Year 

Mathematics 

Unit 

1 st Year 

Programming 

Unit 

1 st Year 

Pharmacy Unit 

1 st Year Physics 

Unit 

18.03% 14.29% 42.49% 28.21% 2 28.57% 7 25 335 2.10% 

2.67% 0.00% 17.78% 17.78% 3 60.00% 5 19 107 4.67% 

12.50% 14.29% 30.67% 16.38% 1 7.14% 14 35 179 7.80% 

12.51% 0.00% 27.92% 27.92% 1 16.67% 6 21 259 2.32% 

18.51% 0.00% 26.40% 26.40% 0 0.00% 16 52 284 5.63% 

16.11% 25.00% 36.14% 11.14% 0 0.00% 4 18 100 4.00% 

13.66% 0.00% 30.00% 30.00% 4 44.44% 9 28 152 5.92% 

8.07% 3.64% 10.15% 6.51% 16 14.69% 110 263 1727 6.31% 

9.50% 0.00% 13.99% 13.99% 3 21.43% 14 36 176 7.96% 

9.87% 10.00% 28.78% 18.78% 4 40.00% 10 55 322 3.11% 

15.47% 28.57% 47.45% 18.87% 1 7.14% 14 35 168 8.33% 

4.19% 13.04% 21.33% 8.29% 11 47.83% 23 37 111 20.72% 

13.60% 0.00% 25.81% 25.81% 1 33.33% 3 13 130 2.31% 

2 nd Year 

Business IT Unit 

9.52% 38.10% 44.44% 6.35% 6 28.57% 21 40 100 21.00% 


Program 11.73% 10.49% 28.81% 18.32% 53 24.99% 256 677 5062 7.04% 

Average/Totals 

Notes on the table: 

• This data is descriptive and for indicative purposes only. 

• Regular Attendees: students who have attended 5 sessions or more. 

• UniPASS Average Increase: the average mark achieved by regular attendees compared to the unit average less 

UniPASS regular attendees Eg. UniPASS regular attendees average = 60%; Unit Average = 50%; so the UniPASS 

difference = 10%. 

• Regular Attendees who would have failed: Are regular UniPASS attendees who between 50 – 61% so, assuming the 

UniPASS average increase in grades of 12%, would have possibly failed without UniPASS. 

• Percentage of Regular Attendees Who Would Have Failed: this indicates the proportion of at-risk students who were 

regular attendees which can account for a lower UniPASS average increase. 


Benefits of the Program 


Average Increase in Grades 

The most obvious benefit and indicator of success is the average increase in grades for regular attendees. As a 

general rule the national PASS training centre (UOW) states that 10 sessions equates to an increase of approximately 

10% (PASS – Accredited Supervisor Manual, 2012). At Curtin we have been performing above this rate with the 

average increase for semester 1 2012 at 11.73% and the pilot program in 2011 achieved 12% (Figure 1). 

Effect on Borderline Students 

This figure demonstrates that UniPASS has a measurable positive affect on regular attendees and could be the 

difference between a pass or fail for borderline students. UniPASS has proven to help all attendees but it is of most 

value to Curtin when borderline students are assisted in passing. A borderline student who fails a unit becomes a 

potential attrition risk because that student could have increased possibility of termination or withdrawal depending 

on their academic record. A program which reduces the potential for withdrawal or termination clearly saves Curtin 

revenue. In an attempt to measure the effect on borderline students we look at regular attendees who would have 

failed without UniPASS. Conservatively, we estimate UniPASS enabled 53 students to pass their unit who would 

likely have failed their unit last semester (Figure 1.). 

Financially, reducing the number of possible withdrawals from university is sound economic strategy. Students who 

withdraw from university represent lost income for the duration of their intended course not just the semester. The 

marketing costs associated with recruiting these students are also lost. While it is difficult to put a figure on how 

much revenue is retained for Curtin by UniPASS it could be reasonably estimated to be many times the costs of 

delivering the program. 

Reducing fail rates and attrition has become more important with the emergence of the new Tertiary Education 

Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). Students who fail become an attrition risk and the results indicate that 

UniPASS actively reduces this risk. Given the current climate of widening participation under the Bradley Review and 

the client relationship students have with universities as ruled by TEQSA, programs that reduce the risk of attrition 

are of increased strategic value to the university (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011). 

Demographic of UniPASS Regular Attendees 

One concern staff members have concerns the demographic make-up of students who attend UniPASS. The remark 

“Isn’t it only the strong motivated students who attend?” has often been said. This is a fair concern because the 

average increase in grades would not be a particularly valid indicator of success if only strong students attended. 

However, UniPASS has an average fail rate of 10.49% (Table 1.) and 25% of regular attendees were borderline 

students (i.e. would have probably failed without UniPASS) so, if these figures are combined, this indicates that a 

total of about 35.5% of regular attendees were at-risk students. Such a figure tends to indicate that UniPASS is not 

just used by stronger students and makes the average increase of 11.73% even more remarkable. 

On this note, it is important to keep in mind that UniPASS is non-remedial. This is important because as a voluntary 

program (PASS- Guidelines for Best Practice, 2010) the stigma associated with a remedial program could have a 

negative effect on attendance. Also, the pedagogy of UniPASS is based on a diverse range of students because this 

enables productive collaborative peer learning as at-risk students learn from the stronger students and also build 

relationships with each other. 



Benefits to the Student Experience and Curtin’s Reputation 

UniPASS has many benefits for the student experience and Curtin brand. The program has transition and social 

integration benefits that help by providing students with a peer network. A network of peers is an important 

element of support and socialisation for students transitioning to university and having such a group of friends can 

assist in reducing attrition. In this regard, UniPASS complements Curtin’s Mentor program and provides another 

avenue for building relationships between students. Such strong student support can be expected to encourage 

positive word of mouth promotion amongst students and their prospective student peers. 

The unique type of support that UniPASS offers clearly helps students succeed. This support can only add to Curtin’s 

reputation as a leading university. Parents and prospective students are placing increasing value on the level of 

support offered by universities. A comprehensive support program like UniPASS provides extra competitive 

incentive which marketing staff can utilise when engaged in recruiting new students, especially international 

students. 

Attendance 

The biggest challenge for UniPASS is gaining sufficient attendance. The University of Wollongong averages 

attendance rates of around 40% (PASS Accredited Supervisor Manual 2012), whereas the Curtin average for regular 

attendees is 7% (Figure 1.). This means that 7% of students enrolled in UniPASS supported units attend five sessions 

or more - although is worth noting that UniPASS has attendance rates of up to 21% in some units (Figure 1). 

There are many factors that contribute to the attendance rate, some we can influence but many we cannot. The 

factors we can influence to some extent include: session times and timetabling; room location; awareness of the 

program and its benefits; and the method of student registration. All these factors have been addressed to maximise 

the attendance. For example, we choose the closest rooms available to tutorials and lectures; session times are 

planned around lecture and tutorial times; extra sessions are provided at the beginning of the semester to give 

students opportunity to attend; an extensive promotional strategy has been implemented to ensure student 

awareness, with 84% of students in supported units having heard of UniPASS (figure 3); registration is no longer 

required as it was an obstacle to students, instead students come on a ‘first in’ basis. 

The main factor beyond our control is probably that UniPASS is voluntary. The voluntary aspect of UniPASS is 

unlikely to change as it is an essential element of PASS accreditation (PASS Guidelines for Best Practice, 2012) and 

the student numbers involved in a compulsory program would make the cost prohibitive. Other factors include: 

student culture; date of the first assessment; campus culture; cost of living in Perth – resulting in high hours of parttime 

work; unit contact hours; and in the future we anticipate that hourly paid parking will have a measureable 

negative effect on UniPASS attendance. One recommendation is that UniPASS develop a more comprehensive list of 

selection criteria for selecting units based on analysis of the results and data. 

Collaborative Peer learning is not yet a wide spread teaching style at Curtin and the program is still building up its 

reputation with students and staff. We anticipate that as the benefits of UniPASS become more widely known and a 

culture of peer learning starts to establish, the attendance rate will improve. Anecdotal evidence suggests that 

student word of mouth promotion of UniPASS is helping to build attendance over multiple semesters. Also, we have 

been contacted by several unit coordinators requesting UniPASS support for their unit. 


Promotion and Marketing 


UniPASS undertook an extensive marketing campaign for semester one 2012. As a new program with different 

learning methodologies and outcomes from existing academic support a strong promotional strategy was essential. 

The main aim of the strategy was to build support and rapport with key academic staff and generate strong 

awareness of the program amongst students in UniPASS supported units. 

The marketing approach included: 

• Meeting with key academic and faculty staff to understand needs and build awareness. The Peer Learning 

Supervisor met with all key staff at the prior to week two and at the end of the semester or more often if 

required. Currently UniPASS has working relationships with 51 faculty staff. 

• The marketing message to students communicated the academic benefits of UniPASS and how to register. 

Initial student awareness of UniPASS was generated by: 

o Presentations in all relevant lectures in weeks one and two. 

o Direct emails to all students in UniPASS supported units. 

o Posters and flyers in schools. 

o A Powerpoint slideshow during lecturers and tutorials by lecturers to remind students. 

• A slide show and/or presentation at most school orientations. 

• Reminder direct emails to students during the semester. 

• Online session registration was established to predict attendance and gain student commitment to attend. 

• The UniLife website was updated with current UniPASS information and session timetable information 

created. 

• Blackboard access to all relevant units was requested to enable the posting of announcements. 

• In relevant units the facilitators promoted UniPASS in tutorials and school common rooms during the 

semester. 

• A trial of extended UniPASS revision sessions was run before exams in some units. 

• An iPad promotion was initiated in week four to encourage attendance across all units, with approximately 

200 students participating. 

• Facilitators were required to send weekly reminder emails to all attendees. 

• A bulk email inbox was established to enable direct communication to over 5000 eligible students. 

The aims of the marketing strategy were achieved as student awareness was 84% (Figure 3). However, this did not 

translate into high levels of attendance in all units. So the end of semester surveys contained questions to generate 

insights into developing a more effective marketing message. The two main conclusions from the data were that 

time based factors were the biggest reason cited for non-attendance (Figure 5) and that the most effective 

communication channel was the lecture or tutor (Figure 4). These results have shaped the communication strategy 

for semester two with the main marketing message “UniPASS saves you time” being promoted. Evidence suggests 

that one hour of UniPASS is equivalent to three hours study at home (PASS – Accredited Supervisor Manual, 2012). 

Other marketing initiatives for semester two 2012 have included: 

• Developing a UniPASS Blackboard unit where all students in eligible units are uploaded. 

• Removing the need for registration as it proved confusing for many first year students. 

• Emphasising the need for strong support from academic staff during lectures. 

• Having the facilitators conduct the promotional lecture presentations as they are peers and therefore seen 

as more credible. 

• Having facilitators continue to visit tutorials to build rapport if attendance is low. 

• Continuation of Blackboard announcements and direct student emails during semester. 


Feedback from Regular Attendees 

Figure 2: 


100% 

UniPASS Regular Attendees Survey Semester 1 2012 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Overall, 

attending 

UniPASS was 

beneficial. 

My subject 

knowledge has 

improved 

because of 

UniPASS. 

My study skills 

have improved 

because of 


I would have 

withdrawn 

from the unit 

without 


I would have 

failed without 


The facilitator 

was well 

prepared and 

organised. 


should 

continue to 

support this 

unit. 

I would attend 

UniPASS in 

other units. 

I will 

recommend 

UniPASS to my 

friends. 

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree 

Notes on the Chart: 

• A regular attendee is defined by the Australasian PASS Centre as a student who attended 5 sessions or more (PASS – 

Accredited Supervisor Manual, 2012). Only regular attendees are included in the program results as any measurable 

effect of a peer learning program with less than 5 hours of student contact over a semester would be questionable. 

• UniPASS had a total of 256 regular attendees for semester 1 2012, of these 174 answered the survey. The respondents 

were regular attendees from all UniPASS supported units. 

The chart above clearly demonstrates the benefits of UniPASS for regular attendees. 

• 96% of student respondents strongly agree/agree that their subject knowledge improved 

• 79% strongly agree/agree that their study skills improved 

• 11% or 19 students strongly agree/agree that they would have withdrawn without UniPASS 

• 22% or 38 students strongly agree/agree they would have failed the unit 

• 88% of respondents strongly agree that UniPASS should continue to support their unit 

• 99% of respondents strongly agree/agree to recommending UniPASS to their friends 

The perceptions of regular attendees clearly indicate that UniPASS is of value to them. These perceptions are backed 

up by the quantitative data from Figure 1 which shows that UniPASS has a range of positive outcomes for students. 



Attendees’ Positive Comments 

Qualitative feedback indicates that students find the collaborative peer learning pedagogy effective. Some 

representative comments on the positive aspects of UniPASS include: 

“I learnt a lot more than I would have studying on my own, plus the facilitator has done the unit, so he knows what to 

expect and understands problems faced by students” 

“Unlike lectures it is an interactive learning environment where examples are gone over. It helped me because it was 

my only class time to actually learn at my own pace where the lectures were ahead of me and the practical was 

focused on me completing the work” 

“Getting to hear the information from another perspective, learning how other students are remembering the 

information - memory tricks etc. Getting the chance to explain to consolidate my own understanding and the chance 

to check that I am understanding the content at the level required” 

“The facilitator was knowledgeable, friendly and helpful. The activities and group work helped improve my knowledge 

of the unit and made me more confident” 

“Breaking things down making sense of it, Learning different study techniques” 

“Revision, sharing of knowledge, chance to explain concepts to others and in doing so understand/ remember them 

better myself” 

Attendees’ Suggestions for Improvement 

“Having it for more topics, running the sessions for longer than 1 hour, as only 1 hour for the modules with more 

content within units” 

“Extending the session time to 1.5 hours” 

“1 hour is not long enough. Minimum of 2 hours needed. More sessions available. Also please please have UniPASS 

for Chemistry 182. I know I am going to need it next semester” 

“Having more students to come, so group discussion can help poor student understand better” 

“Nothing really, may be having more students” 

“Push the students to do it more! I wish I had gone earlier. Don't just say it's there- go for it. Push students more” 

“It was so personalised, which for me is such a better way to learn. Asking those dumbs questions and sitting in a 

small group and being comfortable to just say 'what! i dont get that!" and have a laugh.” 


Feedback from Non-Attendees 


All students enrolled in the 14 UniPASS supported units who did not come regularly or at all to UniPASS were 

surveyed in an attempt to gain insight into improving attendance. The Qualtrics survey received 413 responses. 

Attendance was the biggest issue the program faced in 2012. Gaining regular attendance to the voluntary 

program required significant promotion and effort on behalf of the facilitators. The main objective of marketing 

UniPASS was to increase awareness of the program and gain sufficient attendance. The charts below indicate 

that the promotional strategies were effective in building awareness of the program in all students enrolled in 

UniPASS supported units. 

Student awareness of the program was very high with 84% (Figure 3) of students having heard of UniPASS. This 

figure shows that the marketing strategies employed were successful and that lack of awareness was not the 

reason for less than expected attendance levels. 

Figure 3 

Students Who Have Heard of UniPASS 

16% 

Yes 

No 

84% 

The next question provides information about the different communication channels used. The most effective 

communication channel was the lecturer with 34% (Figure 4). This highlights the important influence the 

lecturer has on attendance, a lecturer who regularly promotes UniPASS and whose tone indicates genuine 

support will affect higher attendance in their UniPASS sessions. The next most effective channels were emails 

with 23% and flyers with 20%. 

Figure 4 

'I heard about UniPASS through...' 

4% 

16% 

Other 

51% 

21% 

A friend 

A poster or flyer 

26% 

A promotional presentation 

in my lecture 

An email 

A lecturer 

44% 


Feedback from Non-Attendees (continued) 

Figure 5 


Reasons for not Attending UniPASS 

35% 

30% 

25% 

20% 

15% 

10% 

5% 

0% 

It was boring I didn't learn 

anything 

I didn't have 

time 

I didn't think I 

needed it 

They didn't 

give answers 

Timetable 

clash 

Inconvenient 

times 

other 

The main reasons cited for not coming to UniPASS were: Not having time 30%; Didn’t feel they needed it 25%; 

Timetable clash 17%; and Inconvenient times 15%. Overall, 72% of the reasons given for not attending where 

time based reasons. The issue of timetable clash is probably not something we can further improve on as we 

approached this using multiple strategies. The timetabling is a complicated part of the program as the students’ 

timetable, facilitator’s timetable and suitable room availabilities all have to coincide. Also, the coordinators 

believe that too many sessions were scheduled for semester 1 2012 as attendance rates were anticipated at 30% 

so the number of sessions were planned accordingly. This meant that there were a large number of sessions to 

choose from for each unit yet by week four many of the sessions had to be cut due to low/nil attendance. So, the 

availability of session times was probably at maximum level for this program. 

It is interesting to note that the nature of the program itself were not reasons for low attendance. For example: 

It was boring 2%, I didn’t learn anything 2% (Figure 5) are negligible ratings. As the collaborative peer learning 

model is still not commonly employed in many tutorials and workshops we thought that resistance to this new 

way of learning could have led to low attendance but it does not appear to be the case. 

Student Comments 

Some indicative responses for not participating in UniPASS include: 

“I prefer to study by myself” 

“Individuals teaching way of studying that didnt work for me” 

“Didnt look into it at start of semester” “Due to work” “Lazy” 

“Tutor said: ‘No need to go there if you are attending my class’" 

UniPASS is not going to appeal to all students and nor does it aim to so comments indicating a preference to 

study individually are to be expected. The last comment highlights the importance of having academic staff 

support. This comment is even more relevant when we consider that the most recalled promotional channel was 

the lecturer. Having academic buy-in gives the program credibility and staff who may discourage attendance 

could become a concern for the program. 




Figure 6 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

'I am satisfied with my progress in the 

unit' 

Strongly 

Agree 

Agree 

Somewhat Somewhat Disagree 

Agree Disagree 

Strongly 

Disagree 

This question attempted to see if students believed they needed UniPASS. Only 10% of respondents claimed 

they were not satisfied with their progress in the unit to some degree, indicating that 90% of these students did 

not feel they needed UniPASS. The average fail rate of all UniPASS supported units is 29% with some units having 

fail rates over 40% (Figure 1). Given that this survey was conducted before final grades were released because it 

was initially paper based, students may have been unduly optimistic in their anticipated final grade and therefore 

not have been aware of their need for extra study support as only 11% were dissatisfied with their progress but 

almost 30% failed the unit. It is worth considering whether to conduct this survey once the grades are released 

but this could result in a lower response rate. 

Figure 7 

'I now wish I had attended UniPASS 

regularly' 

63% 

37% 

Yes 

No 

The previous question showed that only 11% of students were dissatisfied with their progress to some degree 

but here 37% of respondents said they now wish that they had attended UniPASS regularly. This could highlight 

that the non-remedial aspect of the program is being communicated successfully to students so that even 

though they are satisfied with their progress they want to do better. Further, this figure could be indicating that 

positive evaluations of UniPASS by regular attendees had been passed on to non-attendees by word of mouth so 

non-attendees would now like to have attended. 

37% is still a significant number of students who would like to attend. This represents an increase of 153 

students or an increase in regular attendees of 60%. This figure demonstrates strong positive support for the 

program even among those who were not regular participants. 



Student Comments 

Some general reasons for wanting to attend were: 


“I think I would have achieved better marks in the unit” 

“To help me understand the material a little better” 

“Because I just found out about it and uniPASS is sort of un, it really cements in knowledge to talk about it with 

peers in a stuctured setting.” 

“Losing about 20% on word count (References included in word count) and not uploading for feedback, Hence 

failing the assessment” 

“I only started going towards the end, i wish i went all through the semester. i didnt think it would be as helpful as 

it was. I am actually kicking myself i didnt go earlier in the semester. DOH!” 

“It provides a different level of understanding and sharing between peers.” 

Figure 8 

Non-Attendees Reasons to Attend UniPASS 

Other suggestions 

I had more time 

My friends attended 

It was more interesting 

My mentor recommended it 

My friends recommended it 

My lecturer or other staff member recommended it to me 

I was encouraged by my lecturer to attend more 

I received emails reminding me of the sessions and the content 

There were more sessions 

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 

'I would attend UniPASS if…' 

Students were then asked what factors would encourage them to attend. Having more time was the highest 

with 22%, next was if there were more sessions with 15%, and if students had emails reminding them to attend 

with 14%. In light of these responses the central marketing message was changed for semester 2 2012 with the 

fact that UniPASS saves time being promoted. Regular emails reminding students to attend have also been 

implemented for semester 2 2012 sent via the UniPASS Blackboard page and the Peer Learning Facilitators who 

send regular reminders to their attendees. 




The second reason given for attending is if there were more sessions offered. We believe that this may be to do 

student perceptions of when they would like to attend rather than putting time aside to attend. Too many 

sessions were scheduled for semester 1 2012 as attendance rates were anticipated at 30% so the number of 

sessions were planned accordingly. UniPASS had 82 one hour sessions per week running for the first 4 weeks of 

semester. This meant that there were a large number of sessions to choose from for each unit yet by week four 

many of the sessions had to be cut due to low/nil attendance. It may also reflect the fact that many nonattendees 

looked into joining UniPASS late in the semester when a significant percentage of sessions were no 

longer running. 

Feedback from Peer Learning Facilitators 

The UniPASS facilitators are successful current Curtin students casually employed as Curtin staff. They are 

students who have achieve 70% or above in the participating units. UniPASS Peer Learning Facilitators undergo 

two days training in collaborative peer learning theory and techniques; roles and responsibilities; session planning 

and administration. Facilitators are required to submit a peer learning session plan each week and they are 

formally observed at least once a semester with formative feedback given. Also, at least two hours of paid 

professional development is conducted each semester. 33 of the 34 facilitators responded. 

Figure 9 

UniPASS PLF Survey Semester 1 2012 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Working as a PLF 

in UniPASS was 

beneficial to my 

professional 

development. 

Working as a PLF 

in UniPASS was 

beneficial to my 

academic 

development. 

There was an The unit 

effective working coordinator 

relationship with (faculty academic) 

my unit was supportive 

coordinator and 

(faculty approachable. 

academic). 

Being a PLF is a 

good pathway 

into academic 

leadership. 

I would I believe I had a 

recommend positive impact on 

working as a PLF the students who 

with UniPASS to attended my 

others. sessions. 

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat agree Disagree 



Feedback from Peer Learning Facilitators (continued) 

The benefits of UniPASS are not just for attendees - the facilitators who run the sessions benefit immensely from the 

professional skills and experience acquired (Figure 9). Many of the specific skills the facilitators develop are graduate 

attributes valued by Curtin (Graduate Attributes Policy, 2006). For example, applying discipline knowledge, principles 

and concepts; thinking critically, creatively and reflectively; communicating effectively; demonstrating cultural 

awareness and understanding are all qualities that become highly developed in UniPASS facilitators. Implied 

awareness of this is evident in the facilitators’ feedback as 78% strongly believe being a UniPASS PLF was beneficial 

to their professional development and 66% strongly agree that it was beneficial to their academic development. 

There were a range of responses about the working relationship and support felt with the Unit 

Coordinators/Lecturers. We anticipate that this figure will improve as UniPASS matures and becomes more accepted 

as an academic support program. 

78% of Facilitators strongly agreed that UniPASS was good pathway into academic leadership (Figure 9). This has 

been further evidenced with at least three facilitators gaining employment as sessional tutors or lab demonstrators. 

Given the number of academic Curtin staff due to retire in the near future and the stronger emphasis for academic 

staff to have completed a doctorate, UniPASS could be a valuable pathway into academia and provide longer term 

strategic human resource returns for Curtin. 

Comments from Facilitators 

General comments from the facilitators highlight the benefits to them professionally and academically. 

“Developing professional relationships with academic staff, improving communication skills, helping peers in firstyear 

develop good study skills and transition into university.” 

“it help with my future units that are linked with the one that i was faciliating.” 

“Good Structure, easily integrated into uni life. Great management by anna and raph. Good ideas and purpose of the 

whole unipass thing :)” 

“Helping other students. Fun. Practical problem solving.” 

“Endless really, I have found that taking on the role has forced growth and development within me mentally. It took 

me out of my comfort zone and I am solidifying content already learnt and learning so muchmore in the process.” 

“Improving leadership and organisational skills and becoming a more confident person” 

“Helping other students reach their goals; Helping others was really rewarding and helped me reach my own goals.” 

“Being able to revise concepts learnt whilst helping others to learn these concepts too.” 

“Being able to help students achieve their goals and improving my communication and leadership skills.” 

“Encouragement and trust, also the motivation and positive feedback from Anna and Raphael” 



Graduate Attributes 

The comments above clearly demonstrate that the role of PLF develops the whole range of Curtin graduate 

attributes. These attributes include: applying discipline knowledge, think critically and reflectively, synthesise 

information, communicate effectively and applying professional skills (Graduate Attributes Policy, 2006); and are all 

evident in the facilitator responses. A program which develops and extends these graduate attributes is of clear 

strategic value to the university as it assists in ensuring the high employability of Curtin graduates. 

Feedback from Faculty Staff 

The support of the faculty staff is essential to the success of UniPASS, especially the Unit Coordinator and Lecturers 

as they provide the permission for UniPASS to support their unit and an essential channel for credible promotion 

(Figure 4). UniPASS enjoys overwhelmingly positive relationships with faculty staff (Figure 10) and the program 

strives to make the student experience for their unit exceptional. Eight faculty staff responded to the survey. 

Figure 10 

UniPASS Faculty Staff Survey Semester 1 2012 

The goals and principles of UniPASS are of value to Curtin University. 

I will recommend UniPASS to other university staff & students. 

I would support UniPASS involvement in the future. 

Students from my unit who attended UniPASS gained academically from 

the experience. 

Not including initial set-up effort, involvement with UniPASS was workload 

neutral. 

Liaising with the PLFs was not time consuming or problematic. 

The student facilitators were professional. 

The student facilitators knew the content sufficiently. 

Communication with the UniPASS coordinators was clear and timely. 

The UniPASS coordinators were organised and professional. 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 

Unable to Judge Disagree Somewhat Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree 



Feedback from Faculty Staff (continued) 

Faculty Staff Comments 

“[The positive aspects were] Definitely the integrated and coordinated nature of the sessions. Students who had 

more than one unit offering UniPASS seemed more likely to want additional sessions for other units. It seemed a very 

positive experience.” 

“Peer learning is valuable. Students benefit from advice from their seniors. The PLFs selected conducted themselves 

exceptionally well.” 

“I really can't think how UniPASS could be improved. I hope it's sustainable and can continue.” 

HEPPP Targets 

UniPASS is currently HEPPP funded and works to meet Curtin University’s equity requirements (Student Equity 

Strategy 2010-2013, 2009) (Review of Australian Higher Education (Executive Summary), 2008). The program has 

attracted a good mix of students with 18% of total attendees being either Low Socio-Economic Status, Remote or 

Regional students. This number demonstrates a proportionate mix of students with the greater Curtin student 

population showing that the demographic of UniPASS students is inclusive. It is the inclusive nature of the program 

with a strong mix of students from different demographic categories that is one of the key aspects of the program 

(PASS- Guidelines for Best Practice, 2010). In a peer learning program students learn from and build networks with 

each other so a diverse demographic enables strong students to help others. 

Figure 11 

Proportion of HEPPP Students 

18% 

Total HEPPP Students 

Non-HEPPP Students 

82% 


HEPPP Targets (continued) 


Figure 12 

UniPASS Student HEPPP Categories 

90 

5 

47 

Total LSES 

Total Remote 

Total Regional 

555 

Total Non-HEPPP 

Attendees 

Low Socio-Economic Status Students 

Widening the participation of low Socio-Economic Status (SES) students is an important strategic goal for Curtin and 

for HEPPP funded programmes like UniPASS (Student Equity Strategy 2010-2013, 2009) (Review of Australian Higher 

Education (Executive Summary), 2008). An essential part of the pedagogical framework of UniPASS is that it is 

inclusive and non-remedial (PASS- Guidelines for Best Practice, 2010). Therefore, low SES learners were not targeted 

individually in semester one but units that have a significant number of low SES learners are targeted instead. 13.3% 

(Figure 12) of UniPASS students were identified as Low SES which is in line with Curtin’s 2008 Low SES numbers of 

11.2% (Student Equity Strategy 2010-2013, 2009). This indicates that the proportion of Low SES students in UniPASS 

is in proportion with the total student population showing that the program is attracting HEPPP targeted students. 

Regional and Remote Students 

According to Figure 12, about 7.7% of total UniPASS attendees were Regional or Remote students. Due to the 

difficulty in delivering UniPASS to Regional and Remote students not attending Bentley campus, an online UniPASS 

pilot was initiated in semester one 2012. 

The online pilot was run with external students enrolled in a first year Humanities unit as a means to test the 

technological constraints and customise the pedagogy for online facilitation. The online pilot was pedagogically 

successful with regular attendees achieving 16.11% higher grades than non-attendees. However, the attendance 

rate was lower than expected with only four regular attendees. 

Some barriers to attendance were recognised and the delivery of the program further refined for a continuation of 

the pilot in semester two 2012. Some of the barriers in semester one included a cumbersome registration system, 

unappealing and difficult to use software, and unpopular session times. These barriers were removed for the 

semester two pilot. The need for registration was removed, the software was changed from Blackboard Elluminate 

to Blackboard Collaborate, and polls were conducted to find the best session times. The results of this pilot will be 

available in the semester two 2012 UniPASS report. 



HEPPP Targets (continued) 

Centre for Aboriginal Studies 

The Centre for Aboriginal Studies (CAS) has worked with UniPASS for three semesters to try to implement UniPASS 

support due to the widening participation targets linked to HEPPP funding (Student Equity Strategy 2010-2013, 2009) 

and the possibility that peer learning would be well received by indigenous students. 

However, UniPASS was not able to start in semester 1 2012 because we were not able to identify an appropriate unit 

in the CAS Bachelor of Education Regional and Remote course. The course uses a block structure where students fly 

to Bentley campus for intensive two week blocks of study then continue their studies remotely in their home 

communities. In discussions with the course coordinator it was felt that these blocks of study were too busy to 

include UniPASS and this could put undue pressure on these students; although, it was thought that UniPASS would 

be extremely beneficial. We were unable to identify another suitable unit in the weeks remaining before semester 

one started. 

A unique mentoring program for Indigenous students is being established next year at Curtin. The Australian 

Indigenous Mentoring Experience (AIME) is a national mentoring program that has had much success at other 

Universities. As UniPASS continues to work with CAS it would be timely to consider the outcomes of AIME to 

determine if a need still exists to implement UniPASS with CAS students. 

Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA) 

As Curtin moves to ensure it is compliant with TEQSA standards it is timely to consider the importance of academic 

support programs like UniPASS under the TEQSA environment. 

Section 6.5 of the TEQSA legislation states that “The higher education provider identifies and adequately meets the 

varying learning needs of all its students, including: the provision of orientation courses and transition support; and, 

ongoing academic language and learning support” (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011). 

UniPASS is unique at Curtin in that as a peer learning program students can have a huge variety of learning needs 

met in a supportive learning environment that are not easily met within the traditional education structures at 

Curtin. 

Some of the differences between UniPASS and tutorials, clinics or workshops include: 

• Co-construction of meaning: students teach each other which enables them to solidify their own 

understanding and identify their areas needing improvement as they collaborate to assist each other. 

• Non-hierarchical: as it is facilitated by a fellow student and there is no assessment (power relationship). This 

lack of hierarchy enables students to ask questions and attempt answers without fear of perceived 

judgement. 

• Senior student approach and perspective to the unit: this is different from a lecturer’s and is often something 

new students can relate to more easily. 

• Targeting difficult units not at-risk students: this keeps the program non-remedial and focussed on 

improving performance of stronger and weaker students alike. 

• A focus on embedded academic skills gives attendees transferable skills for subsequent units. 

• Facilitating student transition and retention: because of the mentoring and support networks from peers. 

• Focus on developing independent active learners. 

• Support from a national peer learning body (Australasian Centre for Peer Assisted Study Sessions – University 

of Wollongong) 

• Increasing academic performance of attendees by 11.7%. 



Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA) continued 

These differences enable students from all backgrounds to improve their academic performance by meeting a variety 

of learning needs of students not easily met by traditional tutorials, clinics or workshops. 

The TEQSA legislation clearly states that universities have a responsibility to adequately meet diverse student 

learning needs and provide ongoing academic support (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011). 

Furthermore, the Federal Government’s equity strategy (Review of Australian Higher Education (Executive Summary), 

2008) and consequent Curtin University aims to widen participation (Student Equity Strategy 2010-2013, 2009) 

increases the challenge in supporting students through university. As the proportion of students from non-academic 

backgrounds gain entry to university increases, the learning needs and the level of academic support required could 

also be expected to increase. If students are admitted into a course and they actively engage with the required 

learning content, they should have a reasonable expectation of passing. Not providing sufficient academic support 

to pass could be unfavourably by TEQSA (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011). 

UniPASS is one program that strategically aims to provide such support. The strategic element must be emphasised 

as supplementary clinics run at unit level and have a tendency to be more ad hoc than strategic. A Curtin University 

commitment to UniPASS clearly demonstrates to the new tertiary regulator that Curtin is strategically supporting 

students’ varying learning needs with a nationally accredited peer learning program. 


Program Achievements to Date 

• Outstanding Senior Facilitator Award 


One of our Senior Peer Learning Facilitators won a national award this year. The award for outstanding senior 

leader is from the Australasian PASS Centre (University of Wollongong) and the International Supplemental 

Training Centre (University of Missouri – Kansas City). Receiving such an award acknowledges the high standard 

of training and facilitation within Curtin University’s UniPASS program. 

• Program Expansion 

The results in this report show that the expansion from the pilot of three units to 14 units was successful. This was a 

considerable undertaking with 34 new facilitators being trained and supervised, faculty support developed with 51 

staff (Teaching and Learning Deans, Unit Coordinators, Lecturers and administrative staff), rooms and timetabling for 

81 sessions per week. 

• National Accreditation 

The training of the Peer Learning Supervisor and Peer Support Project Coordinator at the Australasian PASS Training 

Centre enabled the program to maintain its national accreditation. 

• Administrative Improvements 

Development of a customised Student One report; Development of BI Tool reports; Streamlining the room booking 

process; Moving to online Qualtrics surveys; Improvement of the UniPASS website; Creation of a UniPASS Blackboard 

unit; Creation of The Transit Lounge - a dedicated facilitator space in building 102. 

• Facilitator Development 

Establishing a two day initial training program to replace the one day program; Conducting two facilitator 

development sessions during the semester; Conducting formal observations and feedback of facilitator performance; 

Providing open coordinator availability to PLFs during the semester; Providing opportunities for team social 

gatherings. 

• Senior Facilitators 

We promoted and trained a Senior Peer Learning Facilitator (SPLF) in semester one to support the program 

administratively and structurally embed the peer learning philosophy of UniPASS. The SPLF coordinated and 

mentored eight other facilitators and subsequently won a national award as an Outstanding Senior Leader. It was so 

successful that three more were promoted and trained in semester two. 


Conclusions and Recommendations 


The strong academic outcomes of UniPASS are clear, with an 11.7% average increase in the grades of regular 

attendees and a reduction of the fail rate by about two thirds. UniPASS is attracting a sound proportion of students 

from non-traditional backgrounds with approximately 20% coming from HEPPP target groups. UniPASS develops and 

extends the graduate attributes of its facilitators and is proving to be a pathway into academia. The program has 

proven that it is not burdensome for academic staff. Overall, the expansion of such a new and different program has 

been highly successful. 

The main challenge for the program is to build up attendance levels. Given the importance of faculty support and 

lecturer promotion any effort to improve attendance needs to be integrated. Attendance will continue to develop as 

the program matures and the peer learning culture becomes more established throughout Curtin. 

The dual influences of the Bradley Review with its focus on widening participation and the emergence of TEQSA as 

the national regulator gives increased value to UniPASS. By offering an evidenced and nationally accredited 

academic support program Curtin is strategically aiming to meet the diverse learning needs of its students. 

However, such a strategic approach requires committed fiscal resources as UniPASS has HEPPP funding only until the 

end of 2013. It takes time for the benefits of a program like UniPASS to become widespread. By committing to the 

learning needs of an increasingly diverse student population with UniPASS, Curtin University will demonstrate its 

ability to improve academic outcomes, enhance the student experience and meet equity and regulatory obligations. 

In the meantime, operational recommended improvements include: 

• Establishing UniPASS at the Kalgoorlie Campus to provide an equitable student experience and improve 

learning outcomes for students transitioning to the Kalgoorlie campus. 

• Examination of the upcoming AIME program to determine if a need still exists for UniPASS as a peer learning 

program for CAS. 

• Continued development of a UniPASS unit profile which would list criteria that units would ideally possess to 

be successful candidates for UniPASS. Such a profile would be most accurate after analysis of results and 

data from 2013. 

• Improving recruiting procedures by formally identifying the characteristics of our most successful facilitators. 

Enhancing the promotion of recruitment to get a large pool of applicants. A commitment to recruit from 

UniPASS regular attendees to build on the culture of constructivist peer learning already established in the 

classroom. 

• Build links with similar programs within WA to develop a professional body of practice specific to the local 

context. 

• Conduct research into attendance of voluntary support programs at Curtin University. 

• Examine the prospect of formal university recognition for UniPASS PLFs as the program develops desired 

graduate attributes. 



Additional Information 

Curtin UniPASS Website: http://unilife.curtin.edu.au/learning_support/unipass_program.htm 

Australasian PASS Centre: http://www.uow.edu.au/student/services/pass/index.html 

International Centre for Supplemental Instruction: www.umkc.edu/cad/si/ 

References 

Australasian Centre for PASS. (2012). Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS) – Accredited Supervisor Manual. 

University of Wollongong, NSW. 

Australasian Centre for PASS. (2010). Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS) – Guidelines for Best Practice. [Brochure]. 

University of Wollongong, NSW: Sally Rogan. Retrieved from 

http://www.uow.edu.au/content/groups/public/@web/@stsv/@pass/documents/doc/uow099559.pdf 

Curtin University. (2006). Graduate Attributes Policy. Retrieved from 

http://policies.curtin.edu.au/local/includes/getdoc.cfm?url=https://ecm.curtin.edu.au:443/alfresco/gd/d/wor 

kspace/SpacesStore/1732159b-7884-11e1-ae69-1dacfacca190/Graduate Attributes Policy.pdf 

Curtin University. (2009). Student Equity Strategy 2010-2013. Retrieved from 

http://eesj.curtin.edu.au/local/documents/Wsite_Strategy_Nov2010.pdf 

Curtin University. (2010). Teaching and Learning Enabling Plan 2009-2013. Retrieved from 

https://planning.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/restricted/plan_en_t&l_2009-2013.pdf 

Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2011). Higher Education Participation and 

Partnerships Program. Retrieved from 

http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Programs/Equity/Pages/HEPPProgram.aspx 

Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. (2008). Review of Australian Higher 

Education (Executive Summary). Retrieved from 

http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Review/Documents/PDF/Higher%20Education%20Review_Execut 

ive%20summary%20Recommendations%20and%20findings.pdf 

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. (2011). Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011. 

Retrieved from http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2012L00003/Download

UniPASS Report Semester 1 2012 - Unilife - Curtin University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?