Faculty staff TEQSA registration evidence is the part of an application that cannot be written; it has to be recruited. Standard 3.2 of the Threshold Standards requires a staffing complement sufficient to deliver each course, academic staff qualified at least one AQF level above the course they teach or with equivalent professional experience, continuing engagement with scholarship, and a defined role for staff in course design and oversight. TEQSA expects to see named people, their CVs, a matrix showing who teaches what, and the workload and sessional arrangements that make the complement real.
This article sets out what that evidence looks like for a prospective provider, where applications fall short, and how to sequence recruitment so the staffing exists when the assessor reads the file. It draws on fifteen years of TEQSA registration work in which staffing has been the most common reason a domestic application slips a year.
Why faculty staff TEQSA registration evidence is different from other evidence
Most of a registration application can be created; staffing has to exist, because the standard is written in the present tense. Standard 3.2.1 of the Threshold Standards requires that the staffing complement is sufficient, not that it will be, and the application guide for prospective providers asks for the people who will deliver the first courses, not the plan to find them.
In my experience new providers underestimate this because they assume they can recruit once registration is granted, a pattern discussed in our article on faculty and staff in higher education. Assessors read a staffing plan without names as an intention, and an intention does not satisfy a standard in the present tense. The practical answer is contracted appointments conditional on registration, with signed letters and CVs in the application, and a small core of continuing staff already engaged in course development and academic board work before lodgement.
The qualifications matrix and what assessors check in it
The document at the centre of the staffing evidence is a matrix: every unit in every proposed course down one side, the named academic who will teach it, their highest qualification and its field, their AQF level relative to the course, and their relevant professional and teaching experience. Standard 3.2.2 requires the qualification to be at least one level above the course, so a bachelor degree at AQF level 7 needs staff at level 8 or above, and a coursework masters at level 9 needs doctoral staff at level 10 or equivalent experience.
Assessors check three things. Whether the qualification is in the field of the unit, not just at the level, because a doctorate in one discipline does not qualify someone to teach another. Whether "equivalent professional experience" is argued rather than asserted, with the experience described and the equivalence explained. And whether the same three people appear against every unit, which tells the assessor the complement is too thin to sustain a full course load and the scholarship time the standard also requires.
Scholarship, workload and the course coordinator
Standard 3.2.3 requires academic staff to maintain knowledge of their field and of contemporary practice in teaching, learning and scholarship. Founders often assume scholarship means publication. It does not; it means demonstrable, current engagement with the discipline and with teaching practice, and the evidence is a scholarship policy, an allocation of time in the workload model, and a record of what each academic did with it.
The workload model is the document that makes this credible. A model that allocates every hour to teaching shows that scholarship is not happening, and a model with no allocation for course coordination shows that nobody owns the course. Assessors look for a named course coordinator for each course, with a position description and time in the model to do the job, because that person is the link between the classroom and the academic board. How staff capability is built over time is covered in our article on professional development and TEQSA.
Sessional staff are not a substitute for a complement
Most private providers rely on sessional academics, and TEQSA does not object to that as such. What assessors object to is a complement in which sessional staff carry the course while the continuing staff exist only in the organisation chart. The application needs a sessional staff policy that covers recruitment, induction, supervision, access to resources and evaluation, and the matrix should show sessional staff supervised by a continuing academic responsible for the unit.
The tell-tale sign of trouble is a sessional academic named as course coordinator, or as the only staff member at the required AQF level. Either tells the assessor that the person responsible for the course could leave between semesters. The way teaching itself is examined at assessment is described in our article on learning and teaching under the TEQSA microscope.
What good faculty staff TEQSA registration evidence looks like
A complete staffing section has a matrix with a name in every cell, a CV for every name, letters of appointment or conditional contracts, a workload model with allocations for teaching, coordination and scholarship, a scholarship policy with a first-year plan, a sessional staff policy, and academic board minutes showing the staff already engaged in course development. It is consistent with the financial model and the course documents, so the salaries in the projections and the names in the unit outlines match the matrix.
My advice on sequencing recruitment
Recruit the course coordinators first, at least six months before lodgement, and put them to work on the course documents and the academic board. Contract the rest of the complement conditionally, with CVs and signed letters in hand. That sequence produces evidence in the present tense, and it avoids the request for further information asking who, exactly, will teach the course.
Download the Darlo Threshold Standards Map
— a one-page map of every standard to the document or record that evidences it, including the Standard 3.2 staffing set, drawn from our TEQSA registration and governance work with private providers. Get the map
Want the full article?
Enter your email for free access to the rest of this guide and our TEQSA resource library.
Frequently asked questions
What qualifications must academic staff hold for TEQSA registration?
Standard 3.2.2 requires academic staff to hold a qualification at least one AQF level above the course they teach, in a relevant field, or equivalent professional experience that the provider can explain. Staff teaching an AQF level 7 bachelor degree need level 8 or above.
Do we need staff employed before we apply to TEQSA?
The standard is written in the present tense, so assessors expect named staff with CVs and signed appointments or conditional contracts in the application, and a core of continuing staff already engaged in course development and academic board work.
Can sessional staff make up most of our teaching complement?
Sessional staff are common in private providers, but TEQSA expects continuing academic staff to coordinate each course, supervise sessional teaching, and hold the required qualifications, supported by a sessional staff policy covering induction, supervision and evaluation.
What does TEQSA mean by scholarship for a non-research provider?
Standard 3.2.3 requires staff to maintain current knowledge of their field and of teaching practice. It does not require publication, but it does require a scholarship policy, time allocated in the workload model, and a record of the activity each academic undertakes.
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.