The academic leadership TEQSA expects from a private provider is a small group of people whose roles interlock: an external chair of the academic board, a dean who answers to that board, course coordinators who own their courses, and independent directors who can hold management to account. Assessors read these people as a team, not a list of titles, and look for evidence that the team has met, argued and decided.
This article covers the people side of Domain 6: who you need, what each does, and how TEQSA tells a functioning leadership group from an organisation chart. It draws on fifteen years of TEQSA registration work with private providers, most of whom started with fewer people than they needed and more titles than they could fill.
What academic leadership TEQSA will accept looks like
Standard 6.3 of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 requires academic governance with responsibility for, and authority over, academic quality. Standard 6.1 requires a governing body with the independence and expertise to direct the provider. Neither names positions, so TEQSA reads for function rather than nomenclature. TEQSA's guidance notes on governance describe the roles further, though guidance notes are not themselves Threshold Standards.
In my experience the minimum functional team for a new institute of higher education is four roles filled by at least four people: an external academic chair, a senior academic who runs teaching and answers to the academic board, a coordinator for each course qualified at least one AQF level above it, and two or more independent directors. An application that collapses any two of those roles into one person will draw questions.
Why the academic board chair must come from outside
The academic board chair is the most important appointment in the application, and the one most often filled badly. Assessors expect a chair with no employment or financial relationship with the provider, senior academic experience elsewhere, and a record of chairing something. They are looking for a person capable of declining to approve a course the owner wants to run.
The role interlocks with two others. The chair must be able to require the dean to bring matters to the board rather than settle them in a management meeting, and must report to the corporate board in writing, at least annually, on academic quality. Where the chair was appointed a month before lodgement and no minutes show either happening, the application reads as a structure assembled for the assessor. Our article on how to build an academic board TEQSA will accept covers the composition around the chair.
The dean: accountable to the board, not only to the CEO
Small providers often appoint a dean who reports to the CEO alone. TEQSA reads that line closely, because Standard 6.3 expects the academic board, not the CEO, to hold the dean accountable for academic quality.
The practical test is simple. When a coordinator wants to change an assessment weighting, who approves it, and where is that recorded? If the answer is "the dean, by email", the academic board is not governing. If the dean recommends, the board approves and the minutes show the discussion, the team is doing what the standard requires.
Course coordinators as owners, not administrators
Course coordinators are where academic leadership meets the student. Assessors expect each course to have a named coordinator qualified under Standard 3.2, with a current scholarly profile, responsible for the course's design, delivery and review. The mistake is treating the role as timetabling while a curriculum consultant or the owner makes the design decisions.
TEQSA interviews coordinators at the site visit and asks how learning outcomes were set, how assessment was benchmarked, and what changed after the last review. A coordinator who can answer is evidence that Standard 5.3 is operating. One who defers to the dean on every question is evidence that the title exists and the role does not.
Independent directors who can say no
On the corporate side, Standard 6.1 expects independent members with experience in higher education, finance, law or governance, and Standard 6.2 expects that board to monitor risk, finances and compliance. Independent directors make non-delegation real. Consultants advise, management proposes, the board decides, and the record must show the decision was the board's own.
Assessors look for a board that has, at least once, sent something back: a lease questioned, a budget revised, a course proposal deferred. I discuss the board's influence in from boardroom to registration. Independent directors need to be recruited for their willingness to disagree, and that needs to be visible in the minutes before lodgement.
How the roles interlock in the evidence
The Threshold Standards are written in the present tense, and TEQSA reads them as a demand for evidence of operation rather than existence. For a leadership team that means the interlocks must appear in the record: the academic board's annual report to the corporate board, the dean's report at each academic board meeting, course review reports from coordinators with actions tracked to closure, and board minutes showing the academic board's advice received and acted on. The wider implementation is set out in academic governance under TEQSA.
Where that chain exists, assessors see a team. Where the application contains four position descriptions and a chart, they see titles, and a request for further information follows.
Build the team before you need it
Appoint the academic chair and the independent directors at least twelve months before lodgement, hold real meetings with real decisions, and let the record accumulate. A team that has worked together for a year produces minutes no consultant can draft, and TEQSA can tell the difference. Sustaining that team past registration is a separate discipline, which I take up in leadership that lasts.
The academic leadership TEQSA is looking for is not large or expensive. It is four roles, filled by people who understand the difference between their jobs, meeting often enough to leave a trail.
Download the Darlo Governance Readiness Checklist
— a one-page self-assessment against Standards 6.1 to 6.3, drawn from our TEQSA registration and governance work with private providers. Get the checklist
Want the full article?
Enter your email for free access to the rest of this guide and our TEQSA resource library.
Frequently asked questions
Can the CEO of a private provider also be the dean?
It is possible in a very small provider, but it weakens the separation TEQSA looks for between commercial and academic decision-making, and the academic board must still be able to hold that person accountable for academic quality. In my experience assessors ask harder questions where the roles are combined.
Does the academic board chair need to be a professor?
No. The Threshold Standards do not set a title, but TEQSA expects a chair with senior academic experience at another institution, no financial relationship with the provider, and a record of chairing academic bodies.
How many independent directors does TEQSA expect?
The Threshold Standards do not fix a number. Standard 6.1 requires independence and expertise sufficient to direct the provider, and in my experience two or more independent members with relevant experience is the practical minimum for a small provider.
What qualifications must course coordinators hold?
Standard 3.2 expects academic staff to be qualified at least one AQF level above the course they teach or to hold equivalent professional experience, with a current scholarly profile in the field. A coordinator for an AQF level 7 bachelor degree would ordinarily hold a masters or doctorate.
Dr Brendan Moloney is CEO of Darlo Higher Education, Australia's largest specialist TEQSA consultancy. He holds a PhD from the University of Melbourne, is a Cambridge University Press author on governance in higher education, and has advised private providers on registration and course accreditation for more than fifteen years.