MEA is a Tier 1 strategic initiative designed to strengthen the clarity, coherence and integrity of our courses.
Its purpose is to ensure that students experience what they are promised when they enrol, and that learning and assessment are aligned at a course level, not fragmented across subjects.
The focus is student-centred quality, delivered in a way that can be confidently sustained.
Every course is delivered through one of three models: Online, On-Campus, or Mixed. Each model was confirmed based on what best supports how that course is taught.
These names reflect what our students told us. We surveyed over 1,000 students on model naming, and they told us clearly which terms they found clearest and most meaningful, including a preference for "Mixed" over "Combined".
Moving to one model per course supports the university’s strategic priority of delivering a clear and consistent student experience.
A course-level model supports coherence across subjects, reduces unnecessary variation in delivery expectations, and strengthens the integrity between what is promised and what is delivered.
This clarity helps students plan their time, understand expectations, and focus on learning rather than navigating inconsistent formats.
The starting point is educational quality and course-level coherence.
Designing at course level helps ensure clarity of expectations and alignment between what is promised and what is delivered.
At the same time, courses must be sustainable and appropriately resourced to maintain that quality over time.
Educational integrity and responsible stewardship of resources are complementary goals, both are necessary to support a strong student experience.
Students are central to the MEA initiative.
Existing student feedback and experience insights have informed the emphasis on clarity, coherence, and integrity in course delivery.
Structured student focus groups in 2026 shaped how the Models of Engagement are described and communicated, including the tone and language used to articulate the student experience. Students told us directly what mattered most: honest, upfront information about how their course is delivered, before they enrol.
That input was then tested at scale. We surveyed over 1,000 students on model naming, and the results directly shaped the names in use today. Model refinement continues to be informed by ongoing student engagement as MEA moves through implementation.
Most Charles Sturt students study online, they're typically mature-age, employed, and many live in regional or remote communities. Online courses are designed with the same quality, rigour, student support, and learning outcomes as on-campus delivery. MEA makes this intentional and consistent across our online offering.
Decisions are faculty-led and informed by:
Final decisions follow established academic governance processes.
Academic staff contribute to MEA through established Faculty and University processes, including:
Engagement is designed to be ongoing and iterative as models are refined and implemented.
Accreditation and industry engagement are critical to maintaining course quality and reputation.
Implementation timelines and decisions will account for:
Courses with accreditation requirements will be supported to align thoughtfully and realistically with MEA principles.
MEA clarifies and strengthens how courses are delivered and assessed, it doesn't change faculty authority over curriculum decisions, the rigour of academic standards or our commitment to accreditation and professional standards. Governance processes remain the same. What's changing is greater clarity and consistency in how students experience courses.
MEA defines course-level structure, not individual adjustments.
Reasonable adjustments and inclusive practices remain fully applicable within all models.
Clear and predictable course structures often better support students who rely on explicit expectations and consistency.
No.
While a course adopts a primary engagement model, flexibility within subjects remains.
Contextual factors, such as placements or campus requirements, will continue to be considered where appropriate.
Exceptions may be considered through academic governance processes.
If a course is intentionally designed as On-Campus, its delivery model will be guided by its educational purpose and value proposition, not automatically shifted based solely on enrolment numbers.
Course-level modelling supports deliberate decisions.
The principles are established.
Model descriptions and value statements will continue to be refined through engagement with staff and students to ensure that what we communicate accurately reflects what we can confidently deliver.
A full list of FAQ's specific to supervised assessment can be found here.
Supervised assessment involves assessment tasks where student identity and authorship are assured through direct academic oversight.
It strengthens assessment integrity and supports authentic demonstration of learning in an AI-enabled environment.
Supervised assessment is an important step toward stronger course-level assurance and programmatic assessment.
In 2026, supervised assessments remain anchored to subjects. Over time, MEA will support more integrated, course-level approaches to assessing student progression and capability.
Implementation is phased:
Not all courses will transition simultaneously.
Timelines will account for accreditation, governance requirements, and discipline complexity.
Academic staff are central to MEA. The Division of Learning and Teaching is providing comprehensive support including professional development in course design and transition planning, dedicated project coordination and project management as courses transition. Implementation is staged from 2027–2029, giving everyone time to prepare and adapt. Faculty leadership will work with staff on workload implications as courses progress through transition planning.