This course introduces students to the fundamentals of contemporary public policy making. Students will explore core debates in policy studies and consider concepts, models and tools for making, implementing and evaluating public policy. To provide a deeper understanding of the policy process, students will be introduced to analytical perspectives on various stages of the policy process with the aim of provoking critical inquiry into policy practices and outcomes. Students will consider the variety of policy actors and networks in the policy process, and reflect on how competing values and interests influence what issues get policy attention, how they shape decisions, outcomes and evaluation procedures. Students will also debate the different approaches to policy decision making (incrementalism or rational approaches),the implications of governance arrangements between state and non-state actors, and the internationalisation and globalisation of public policy.

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion, students will have the knowledge and skills to:

On successful completion of this course students will be able to:

1. demonstrate a working knowledge of key terms, concepts and ideas in the study of public policy;

2. analyze, debate and critically evaluate how public policy issues come onto the agenda, how they are framed, defined and managed;

3. debate and apply knowledge of policy instruments, including their behavioral assumptions and the necessary institutional and political conditions for effective implementation;

4. understand and critically engage in core debates in the field of policy studies including on policy decision-making, implementation, evaluation and policy transfer;

5. demonstrate the ability to think independently, reflectively and persuasively on the politics and practices of implementing and evaluating public policy.

Staff Feedback

Students will be given feedback in the following forms in this course:

• Written comments
• Verbal comments
• Feedback to the whole class, to groups, to individuals, focus groups

Student Feedback

ANU is committed to the demonstration of educational excellence and regularly seeks feedback from students. Students are encouraged to offer feedback directly to their Course Convener or through their College and Course representatives (if applicable). The feedback given in these surveys is anonymous and provides the Colleges, University Education Committee and Academic Board with opportunities to recognise excellent teaching, and opportunities for improvement. The Surveys and Evaluation website provides more information on student surveys at ANU and reports on the feedback provided on ANU courses.

Class Schedule

Week/Session	Summary of Activities	Assessment
1	Lecture, tutorial - Week 1: Public Policy Within and Beyond 'the State' This introductory session has three components. First, we discuss the course rationale, structure, and assessment. Second, we ask ‘what is public policy?’ and explore some of the nuances of this fundamental question. Third, we consider a number of the key concepts that we will be using throughout the course, including ‘the state’, policy actors and notions of 'the public'. Essential readings: Hague, R & Harrop, M 2004, ‘Chapter 1: Politics and government’, in Comparative government and politics: an introduction, 6th ed., Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. Hague, R & Harrop, M 2004, ‘Chapter 17: The policy process’, in Comparative government and politics: an introduction, 6th ed., Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. · Chapter One surveys some of the key concepts used in political science. Of particular relevance to this course are the concepts of ‘the state’ and ‘government’. · Chapter Seventeen provides a useful introduction to the central concepts of the course including policy, policy implementation and evaluation. It also introduces an idealised scheme of the policy process, which we will be critiquing in week 2. Howlett, M & Ramesh, M 2003, ‘Chapter 3: The policy context’, in Studying public policy: policy cycles and policy subsystems, Oxford University Press, Toronto. · This reading describes some of the key institutions and actors found in contemporary policy systems. Cairney, P 2015, ‘12 things to know about studying public policy’, Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy, 29 October, . · This blog provides some insights into what is involved in the scholarship of public policy.
2	Lecture, tutorial - week 2: Making sense of public policy This session will explore some of the ways that scholars of public policy have sought to make sense of how the policy process works, and how decisions are made. In particular we will examine different kinds of policy models. For example, we examine models that aim to describe how policy actually works, those that provide normative guides on what ought to happen, and those that try to explain why things occur the way they do. Our discussion will also explore the debate between rational and incremental models of decision making, and consider the notion and effects of bounded rationality. Essential readings: Peters, BG 2015, ‘Chapter 3: Models of policymaking’, in Advanced introduction to public policy, Elgar advanced introductions, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, UK. · This chapter summarises some of the scholarly attempts to explain how the policy process works, or ought to work. Smith, KB & Larimer, CW 2009, ‘Chapter 5: Where does policy come from? The policy process’, in The public policy theory primer, Westview Press, Boulder, CO. · This chapter asks ‘where does policy come from?’ and explores some important theories of the policy process. Migone, A & Howlett, M 2015, ‘Charles E Lindblom, “The science of muddling through”’, in M Lodge, EC Page & SJ Balla (eds), The Oxford handbook of classics in public policy and administration, Oxford University Press, Oxford. · This chapter reflects on one of the classics in the public policy literature which introduced the idea of ‘incrementalism’ in public policy decision-making.
3	Lecture, tutorial - Week 3: Policy Problems, Agenda Setting and Framing Defining public problems is not a neutral act. It involves selecting certain facts and values as important in one’s representation of the world while dismissing others. At any given time, different groups push their problem definitions into the public and political realm. They work to ‘frame’ problems and issues in order to grab the attention of key power brokers (such as the mass media) and policy makers. Without this attention, even the best-argued case for policy reform can fall flat. In this session we consider how the scarce resource of ‘attention’ is allocated in political systems. We begin by considering the significance of values and value conflict in public policy. We then consider what sort of issues receive attention and why. Finally we consider how policy agendas are formed and altered, and discuss various mechanisms used to keep issues off the agenda. Essential readings: Rochefort, DA & Cobb, RW 1993, ‘Problem definition, agenda access, and policy choice’, Policy Studies Journal, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 56–71. · This article discusses the concept of problem definition, and proposes a typology of common types of policy problems. The authors also point out how the definition of policy problems shapes how target populations are characterised, and what policy solutions are proposed. Birkland, TA 2007, ‘Agenda setting in public policy’, in F Fischer, GJ Miller & MS Sidney (eds), Handbook of public policy analysis: theory, politics, and methods, CRC Press, Boca Raton. · This chapter provides an overview of the agenda setting process, and offers insights into the role of groups, power, stories and symbols in focusing policy issues. Althaus, C, Bridgman, P & Davis, G 2018, ‘Chapter 4: Identifying issues’, in The Australian policy handbook, 6th edn, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW. · This chapter provides an overview of how issues are selected for attention from among the multitude of concerns facing government.
4	Lecture, tutorial - week 4: Governance, Policy Co-ordination and Engagement Most policy arenas in most political systems can be characterised as shared power worlds: no single actor can make binding decisions about policies and programs alone. This means that whatever substantive disagreements they may have, all actors (politicians, bureaucrats, interest groups, and citizens) in policy processes know that they are (at least in part) mutually interdependent. In this session we explore the concept of governance and consider the increasing role of policy networks in making, implementing and evaluating public policy. This will lead us into a discussion about the issues surrounding interactive forms of policy making where governments attempt to work collaboratively with a host of non-government actors (e.g. business groups and NGOs), and the broader public. We also consider recent attempts to democratise the policy process through the application of more deliberative and inclusive forms of citizen engagement. Essential readings: Robichau, R.W., 2011. The mosaic of governance: creating a picture with definitions, theories, and debates. Policy Studies Journal, 39, pp.113-131. · This article provides an overview of governance debates. Lewis, JM 2009, ‘The why and how of partnerships: policy and governance foundations’, Australian Journal of Primary Health, vol. 15, no. 3, p. 225. · This research article discusses a particular example of governance: partnerships. The author explores the form and function of partnerships by drawing on insights from the Primary Care Partnerships in Victoria, Australia. Quick, KS and Bryson, JM 2016, ‘Public participation’ in Ansell CJ Torfing. (eds) Handbook on Theories of Governance. pp. 158-169. · This is chapter situates public participation in the context of governance and introduces core theoretical concepts such as legitimacy and inclusion.	Assessment 1 due Friday 20 March (11.55pm)
5	Lecture, tutorial - week 5: The Tools and Instruments of Policy In this session, we look at the building blocks and behavioural assumptions behind the various types of policy interventions that governments may consider. They constitute the ‘tools’ or ‘instruments’ of government. We will discuss the logics underlying policy instruments and consider their likely desired and undesired effects among and beyond ‘target populations’. Essential readings: Althaus, C, Bridgman, P & Davis, G 2018, ‘Chapter 6: Policy instruments’, in The Australian policy handbook, 6th edn, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW. · This chapter provides an overview of the main set of instruments used in public policy programs. Schneider, A & Ingram, H 1990, ‘Behavioral assumptions of policy tools’, The Journal of Politics, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 510–529. · This article explores the various assumptions underlying different kinds of policy instruments. It shows how many well-intentioned policy programs make inappropriate assumptions about the nature and motivations of target populations. Maddison, S and Denniss, R, 2013, ‘Chapter 5: Policy actors and policy instruments’, in An introduction to Australian public policy: theory and practice, Cambridge University Press. - This chapter builds from a discussion of policy actors to explore the wide range of policy instruments used in public policy.
6	Lecture, tutorial - week 6: Policy Transfer and Learning in a Global Context In this session, we explore the concepts of policy learning and policy transfer which are used to 'make sense' of the movement of ideas and programs between jurisdictions and nations. We will also discuss the increasingly global context in which policy issues emerge and are addressed. Essential readings: Dolowitz, DP & Marsh, D 2000, ‘Learning from abroad: the role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making’, Governance, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 5–23. · This reading discusses the concept of policy transfer and explores how it has been used to make sense of the way ideas, institutions and programs are borrowed from one context and then applied in another. Benson, D & Jordan, A 2011, ‘What have we learned from policy transfer research? Dolowitz and Marsh revisited’, Political Studies Review, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 366–378. · This concise article provides an overview of the utility of the concept of policy transfer for policy analysis. Stone, D 2008, ‘Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks’, Policy Studies Journal, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 19–38. · This article discusses the rising significance of international organisations and transnational networks in public policy.	Assessment 2 due Friday 17 April (11.55pm)
7	Lecture, tutorial - week 7: Knowledge, Uncertainty and Policy Analysis In this session we examine the role of knowledge in the policy making process. In our discussion we will explore the contribution that different kinds of policy analysis can make to the policy process. We also discuss the heavily contested concept of 'evidenced-based policymaking’. Increasingly policy controversies and problems emerge in contexts where knowledge is ambiguous, uncertain, and contested. In such contexts, what are the prospects for making informed, rational, fair and legitimate policy decisions? In exploring this question we discuss the potential role of public deliberation, argumentation, negotiation and judgment. Essential readings: Head, BW 2008, ‘Three lenses of evidence-based policy’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 1–11. · This article discusses the concept of Evidenced Based Policy, exploring its evolution, variety and challenges in practice. Mulgan, G 2005, ‘Government, knowledge and the business of policy making: the potential and limits of evidence-based policy’, Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 215–226. · This piece is presents a practitioner's view of Evidenced Based Policy Making. Mayer, IS, Daalen, CE van & Bots, PW 2012, ‘Policy analytical styles’, in E Araral, S Fritzen, M Howlett, M Ramesh & X Wu (eds), Routledge handbook of public policy, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon. · This chapter provides an overview of the different styles of policy analysis, and considers relationships between them.
8	Lecture, tutorial - week 8: Policy implementation In this session we explore issues relating to policy implementation. In particular we consider why many polices on the ground differ from what they were intended to do. Our discussion will also explore the discretion and legitimacy of front-line or ‘street-level’ public servants. Essential readings: Hill, MJ 2005, ‘Chapter 9: Implementation: an overview’, in The public policy process, 4th ed, Pearson Longman, Harlow, England. · This reading provides an overview of the ways scholars have studied and conceptualised policy implementation. It also presents some useful examples for reflection. Vinzant, JC & Crothers, L 1998, ‘Chapter 2: Discretion and legitimacy in front line public service’, in Street-level leadership: discretion and legitimacy in front-line public service, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. · This reading discusses the discretion and legitimacy of front-line or street-level bureaucrats. Maynard-Moody, S & Musheno, M 2012, ‘Social equities and inequities in practice: Street-Level workers as agents and pragmatists’, Public Administration Review, vol. 72, no. s1, pp S16-S23. - The article provides an alternative perspective on street-level bureaucrats.
9	Lecture, tutorial - week 9: Centralising and Decentralising Public Policy In this session we will explore the distinction between, and variations in, centralised and decentralised systems of government and the impact these arrangements have on the policy development process. We will explore the differences between federalism and unitary systems and discuss the basic features, benefits and problems that different systems can present for public policy development. We will consider the arrangements that federations such as Australia put in place to facilitate coordination and cooperation between the different levels of government, and ways in which unitary systems ensure the needs of regions are met by centralised policy making. International trends towards decentralisation and ‘subsidiarity’ will be addressed. Essential readings: Cheema, GS & Rondinelli, DA 2007, ‘From government decentralization to decentralized governance’, in GS Cheema & DA Rondinelli (eds), Decentralizing governance: emerging concepts and practices, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC. · This chapter provides a useful introduction to the debates on decentralization (as they relate to the developing world) and links these to notions of governance. Turner, M 2006, ‘From commitment to consequences: comparative experiences of decentralization in The Philippines, Indonesia and Cambodia’, Public Management Review, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 253–272. · This article considers the impacts of decentralization efforts in three Southeast Asian countries. It provides a more nuanced picture of how, in practice, decentralisation and centralisation often co-exist.
10	Lecture, tutorial - week 10: The Purpose, Process and Politics of Evaluation In this session we ask: Why evaluate policy? We consider the stages involved in standard (rational-oriented) evaluation methodologies and explore how they might inform as well as impede lesson-drawing in public policy. We then consider alternative approaches to the standard (rationalist) approach to policy evaluation, including case-study and participatory approaches. We reflect on the politics of evaluation: ultimately, the ‘success’ or ‘failure’ of public programs is in the eyes of the beholder, and therefore, prone to exactly the same kind of framing battles and pulling and hauling between policy actors that we encounter in the problem-definition and policy implementation stages of the policy process. Essential readings: Theodoulou, SZ & Kofinis, C 2003, ‘Chapter 11: Policy evaluation: the assessment of executed policy solutions’, in The art of the game: understanding public policy, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA. · This reading introduces students to the key types of policy evaluation, and provides an overview of a typical evaluation process. It presents a ‘conventional’ view of policy evaluation. Anderson, JE 2011, ‘Chapter 7: Policy impact, evaluation and change’, in Public policymaking: an introduction, 7th ed, Cengage, Boston, MA. · This chapter offers a broader discussion of evaluation by considering the role of actors, values and interests in shaping the conduct and interpretation of policy evaluations. In doing so this chapter provides a useful basis for understanding what makes policy evaluation so political. Hendriks, C 2012, ‘Policy evaluation and public participation’, in E Araral, S Fritzen, M Howlett, M Ramesh & X Wu (eds), Routledge handbook of public policy, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon. · This chapter discusses the idea and politics of participatory policy evaluation where multiple perspectives are brought into the evaluation of policies.
11	Assessment 3: in class assessment task (no tutorials this week) Essential readings: See readings for week 10.	Assessment 3: in class assessment task (during lecture time)
12	lecture - week 12: Public Policy in a Connected World (no tutorials this week) In this final session we will collectively draw out the main lessons from the course. We will consider some of the emerging themes in policy studies, such as how can states develop effective and legitimate public policies in an increasingly global context. The class will reflect on some of the key differences between making and evaluating public policy in the developing and developed world. Are these differences becoming more or less significant in an increasingly connected world? Essential readings: Boin, A 2009, ‘The new world of crises and crisis management: implications for policymaking and research’, Review of Policy Research, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 367–377. · This reading provides an overview of some of the big issues facing nations and the globe in seeking to address policy crises.

Assessment Summary

Assessment task	Value	Due Date	Return of assessment	Learning Outcomes
Analysis Paper – Framing	25 %	20/03/2020	05/04/2020	1, 2, 4, 5
Policy Transfer Essay	45 %	17/04/2020	13/05/2020	1, 3, 4, 5
Evaluation Task	30 %	19/05/2020	02/07/2020	1, 4, 5

* If the Due Date and Return of Assessment date are blank, see the Assessment Tab for specific Assessment Task details

Policies

ANU has educational policies, procedures and guidelines, which are designed to ensure that staff and students are aware of the University’s academic standards, and implement them. Students are expected to have read the Academic Misconduct Rule before the commencement of their course. Other key policies and guidelines include:

• Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure
• Special Assessment Consideration Policy and General Information
• Student Surveys and Evaluations
• Deferred Examinations
• Student Complaint Resolution Policy and Procedure

Assessment Requirements

The ANU is using Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing Academic Integrity. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the ANU Online website Students may choose not to submit assessment items through Turnitin. In this instance you will be required to submit, alongside the assessment item itself, hard copies of all references included in the assessment item.

Moderation of Assessment

Marks that are allocated during Semester are to be considered provisional until formalised by the College examiners meeting at the end of each Semester. If appropriate, some moderation of marks might be applied prior to final results being released.

Assessment Task 1

Analysis Paper – Framing

800 words (NOT including reference list)

This assessment builds your skills in analysing policy problems, critical reading and reflection, connecting policy theory with practice, applying the language of policy studies and writing effectively.

You are required to write an 800-word analysis paper that draws on your own policy experience or knowledge and the readings and lecture from week 3. 

For this task you need to:

• Choose a controversial policy issue that you have been involved in or actively followed in your own country.
• Identify and discuss how different policy actors have framed the ‘policy problem’. In your discussion, use examples to show how policy actors have used symbols, stories or characterisations of policy populations.
• Your paper should be no more than 800 words (lengthy contributions will be penalized). Please be concise and stay on topic. This task requires that you use your own words; do not simply regurgitate text from the readings.
• You must cite and reference any articles, books, media and policy documents where applicable (note the reference list is not included in the word count).

The Analysis Paper is designed to assess learning outcomes 1, 2, 4, and 5. It will be assessed against the following criteria:

• comprehension of the set task
• demonstrated understanding of key concepts (policy actors and problem framing)
• analysis of how policy actors frame the problem (with examples)
• capacity to make relevant connections between practice and theory
• evidence of your own reflections, ideas and perspectives
• accurate citing of sources (readings/media/online sources/reports)
• presented your ideas and arguments succinctly with accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar

 Before submission, please ensure that your written Analysis Paper has:

• pages numbered
• at least 2cm margins
• 1.5 spaced text

Assessment Task 2

Policy Transfer Essay

2000 words (NOT including reference list)

This assessment builds your skills in analysing policy programs, critical reading and reflection, connecting policy theory with practice, applying the language of policy studies and writing effectively.

You are required to write a 2000-word essay in which you make the case for transferring a real world policy program of your choice within or to your home country. 

In your essay you need to:

1. Briefly describe the policy program that you think should be transferred. For example, drawing on the literature (Week 5, in particular), analyse what policy instruments are used and what behavioural assumptions do they involve?
2. Make an argument for why the program should be transferred to your context. For example, why do you think the policy program is relevant to your context? What is the target population and what impact might the policy program have?
3. Analyse how the program should be transferred. For example, drawing on the literature (Week 6, in particular), what factors might restrict and/or facilitate the transfer process? What actors might be involved in the transfer process and what roles would they play? How might you ensure it was a successful transfer process?

The Policy Transfer Essay is designed to assess learning outcomes 1, 3, 4, and 5. It will be assessed against the following criteria:

• focus on the set task
• demonstrated understanding of key concepts (policy actors and policy transfer)
• critical analysis of the policy program
• capacity to make relevant connections between practice and theory
• evidence of your own reflections, ideas and perspectives
• accurate citing of sources (readings/media/online sources/reports)
• presented your ideas and arguments succinctly with accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar

 

Before submission, please ensure that your Policy Transfer Essay has:

• pages numbered
• at least 2cm margins
• at least 1.5 spaced text

Assessment Task 3

Evaluation Task

This assessment requires students to respond to three questions on the topic of policy evaluation in class (under exam conditions, 60 minutes) in week 11. The assessment will require students to use key terms, concepts and ideas from across the course.

The questions will be related to a particular policy scenario, which will be available from Wattle for the students to read at least three days before the exam.

To assist students prepare for this assessment task, there will be a practice session in the tutorial in week 10 with a practice scenario and mock questions.

Your Scenario Response will be assessed against the following criteria:

• comprehension of the question(s)
• demonstrated understanding of the process and politics of policy evaluation
• capacity to apply evaluation themes to a particular policy scenario
• evidence of critical thought and reflection
• structure and coherence of response
• ability to prepare concise responses to the set questions.

This assessment task is specifically designed to assess learning outcomes 1, 4, and 5.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a core part of our culture as a community of scholars. At its heart, academic integrity is about behaving ethically. This means that all members of the community commit to honest and responsible scholarly practice and to upholding these values with respect and fairness. The Australian National University commits to embedding the values of academic integrity in our teaching and learning. We ensure that all members of our community understand how to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support academic integrity. The ANU expects staff and students to uphold high standards of academic integrity and act ethically and honestly, to ensure the quality and value of the qualification that you will graduate with. The University has policies and procedures in place to promote academic integrity and manage academic misconduct. Visit the following Academic honesty & plagiarism website for more information about academic integrity and what the ANU considers academic misconduct. The ANU offers a number of services to assist students with their assignments, examinations, and other learning activities. The Academic Skills and Learning Centre offers a number of workshops and seminars that you may find useful for your studies.

Online Submission

The ANU uses Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing Academic Integrity. While the use of Turnitin is not mandatory, the ANU highly recommends Turnitin is used by both teaching staff and students. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the ANU Online website.

Hardcopy Submission

For some forms of assessment (hand written assignments, art works, laboratory notes, etc.) hard copy submission is appropriate when approved by the Associate Dean (Education). Hard copy submissions must utilise the Assignment Cover Sheet. Please keep a copy of tasks completed for your records.

Late Submission

Late submission of assessment tasks without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the course outline for the return of the assessment item. Late submission is not accepted for take-home examinations.

Referencing Requirements

Accepted academic practice for referencing sources that you use in presentations can be found via the links on the Wattle site, under the file named “ANU and College Policies, Program Information, Student Support Services and Assessment”. Alternatively, you can seek help through the Students Learning Development website.

Extensions and Penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure The Course Convener may grant extensions for assessment pieces that are not examinations or take-home examinations. If you need an extension, you must request an extension in writing on or before the due date. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it after the due date.

Privacy Notice

The ANU has made a number of third party, online, databases available for students to use. Use of each online database is conditional on student end users first agreeing to the database licensor’s terms of service and/or privacy policy. Students should read these carefully. In some cases student end users will be required to register an account with the database licensor and submit personal information, including their: first name; last name; ANU email address; and other information. In cases where student end users are asked to submit ‘content’ to a database, such as an assignment or short answers, the database licensor may only use the student’s ‘content’ in accordance with the terms of service — including any (copyright) licence the student grants to the database licensor. Any personal information or content a student submits may be stored by the licensor, potentially offshore, and will be used to process the database service in accordance with the licensors terms of service and/or privacy policy. If any student chooses not to agree to the database licensor’s terms of service or privacy policy, the student will not be able to access and use the database. In these circumstances students should contact their lecturer to enquire about alternative arrangements that are available.

Distribution of grades policy

Academic Quality Assurance Committee monitors the performance of students, including attrition, further study and employment rates and grade distribution, and College reports on quality assurance processes for assessment activities, including alignment with national and international disciplinary and interdisciplinary standards, as well as qualification type learning outcomes. Since first semester 1994, ANU uses a grading scale for all courses. This grading scale is used by all academic areas of the University.

Support for students

The University offers students support through several different services. You may contact the services listed below directly or seek advice from your Course Convener, Student Administrators, or your College and Course representatives (if applicable).

• ANU Health, safety & wellbeing for medical services, counselling, mental health and spiritual support
• ANU Diversity and inclusion for students with a disability or ongoing or chronic illness
• ANU Dean of Students for confidential, impartial advice and help to resolve problems between students and the academic or administrative areas of the University
• ANU Academic Skills and Learning Centre supports you make your own decisions about how you learn and manage your workload.
• ANU Counselling Centre promotes, supports and enhances mental health and wellbeing within the University student community.
• ANUSA supports and represents undergraduate and ANU College students
• PARSA supports and represents postgraduate and research students