Students are normally admitted upon satisfactory completion of Year 12 in an Australian school system or equivalent. Consideration will also be given to other factors such as practical experience, maturity and motivation, and the likelihood of satisfactory completion of the academic requirements of the course.

Mature age entry to the Diploma or Advanced Diploma is available for those over the age of 20.

Anyone who wishes to apply to study full time should seek an initial interview with the Director of Studies. Final acceptance is the responsibility of Mary Andrews College.

The minimum period of study is two years full time for the Diploma and three years full time for the Advanced Diploma. Doing four subjects per semester is counted as full time.

No-one may take more than five subjects in any one semester.

There is no maximum time for the completion of the course.

If you are doing the assessments, then you must attempt all assignments set. Marks awarded by Mary Andrews College may be statistically moderated by The Australian College of Theology. The Australian College of Theology supervises the academic standards across its member colleges.

Assignment word limits
You need to keep to the specified word limit for each assignment. The number of words in your assignment may only vary by 10% more or less than the specified word limit. For example, a 1,500 word assignment should only be between 1,350 and 1,650 words in length (i.e. 90%-110% of the word limit).

If you submit an assignment which is less than 90% of the word limit, then you are only penalising yourself.

Starting from 2010, if you submit an assignment which exceeds the specified word limit by more than 10% of words, you will receive a penalty of 5% off your assignment mark for each extra 10% of words that are over 110% of the word limit. This equates to losing one letter grade for every extra 10% of words that your assignment is over 110% of the word limit.

In other words

For example, if you submit a 1,890 word assignment which was originally set with a 1,500 word limit, this is 126% of the word limit, therefore you would lose a total of 10% off your original assignment mark, which equates to two letter grades. In this situation, if your assignment was worth a B+, it would be reduced down to a B-.

Late Submission
Late submission of assignments will attract a loss of marks. In the case of extenuating circumstances, an application can be made on the "Application for Late Submission" form and given to the Registrar. If this application is granted, then there will be no loss of marks.

Please note that no assignment will be accepted later than 3 weeks after the due date. This means that unless you submit all assignments within 3 weeks of the due date, you will fail the subject under assessment. Late submission will attract the penalty of 5% off your assignment mark for each week that your assignment was handed in late.

Remarking
If an assignment is awarded a fail, it will automatically be remarked by a second marker. The higher mark will be the one awarded.

If you pass an assignment but feel that a remark is justified, then you may request one. The request should be made in writing and, together with the assignment, should be given to the Registrar within one week of the assignment having been returned.

Resubmission of assignments
It is recommended that if you fail an assignment it should be revised and then re-submitted. A resubmission can be made no later than 2 weeks after the assignment has been returned. The assignment will not be awarded higher than a C+ grade.

Subjects with both exams and assignments
The assignment and exam components are each worth 50%, and require a total of 4,000 words. The exam will be 80 minutes long, and is the equivalent of 2,000 words.

Subjects with assignments only
These subjects are assessed by completing a minimum of two pieces of written work totalling 4,000 words.

From 2009, all Old Testament and New Testament exegesis subjects (OT205-OT208 and NT205-NT208) will be assessed at Mary Andrews College by assignments only. An exam is no longer compulsory for exegesis subjects.

Pass / fail subjects
The following subjects are assessed on a pass / fail basis only.

Passing grades
All pieces of assessment for a subject must be completed in order to pass that subject. You do not necessarily need to pass every individual assignment or the exam, as long as you pass the subject overall. In all subjects, 50% overall is needed to record a passing grade.

Attendance at lectures is compulsory. Therefore, you may not miss more than 20% of classes per subject per semester, which works out to be no more than one class.

If you are absent from more than 20% of classes in a subject, you must apply for a 'special circumstance' exemption in order to be allowed to continue that subject. This must be done in writing to the Registrar.

15.5 Variation of enrolment policy
After initial enrolment in subjects with the Australian College of Theology, you may vary your enrolment by adding or withdrawing from subjects. To vary your enrolment you should use the 'Variation of Enrolment' form provided by Mary Andrews College and return it to the Registrar along with any payment required (see below).

A set of critical dates relate to these actions. The dates are set for each subject. These dates are detailed in the student information given to you after your enrolment in subjects for the coming semester / year. The 2010 dates are also listed in this handbook on the following pages.

Approved addition or withdrawal from a subject after the Administrative Date and before the Census Date will attract a Variation of Enrolment fee (Addition: $110 per subject; Withdrawal: $330 per subject). The Variation of Enrolment fee is payable to Mary Andrews College. Should you be permitted to commence enrolment at this time, each subject added will attract the fee. Should you withdraw from a subject at this time, withdrawal from each subject will attract the fee. If you withdraw from a subject before the Census Date, that subject will not attract any up-front payment(s) or a FEE-HELP liability.

After the Census Date, no subjects may be added and withdrawal from a subject will not normally result in the refund of any up-front payments or the re-crediting of a FEE-HELP liability. Withdrawal from a subject after the Withdrawal Date will normally attract a failure to withdraw grade (FW). (You would need to speak to the Registrar if you wanted to enquire about a compassionate withdrawal after the Withdrawal Date.)

Should you consider that "special circumstances" prevailed at the time of withdrawal from a subject after the Census Date, you may request re-crediting of your FEE-HELP balance and/or refunding of any up-front payment(s) made in relation to the subject by writing a letter to be lodged with the Registrar.

If you fail to submit any work but do not formally withdraw, you will incur an academic penalty of fail (F). In that case all FEE-HELP and/or up-front payment liabilities remain.

For more information, speak to the Registrar. Further information is located on the Australian College of Theology website at: www.actheology.edu.au/students_enrol.php#VOE

See the tables on the following pages for a summary of this policy and a list of the 2010 dates relevant to this policy.

Administration, census and withdrawal dates for 2010
Under The Australian College of Theology's 'Variation of Enrolment Policy', we are required to inform you of the various dates relating to your chosen subject(s). Below is a list of the important dates for each of the subjects offered at Mary Andrews College in 2010. (Please note that full year subjects enrol with the Australian College of Theology in Semester 1.)

If you need to withdraw your Australian College of Theology enrolment but does not do so until after the withdrawal date for your subject has passed, then you will have a FW (Failure to Withdraw) recorded on your transcript. The subject can be taken again at a later date.

Semester 1 subjects and full year subjects

Subject Code	Start Date	Administration Date	Census Date	Withdrawal Date	End Date
OT201	4 Feb	19 Feb	31 Mar	30 Apr	17 Jun
OT202	1 Feb	19 Feb	31 Mar	21 May	21 Jun
OT208	10 Feb	26 Feb	31 Mar	7 May	2 Jun
NT201 (City)	1 Feb	19 Feb	31 Mar	21 May	21 Jun
NT201 (Dapto)	9 Feb	26 Feb	31 Mar	7 May	15 Jun
TH210	3 Feb	19 Feb	31 Mar	14 May	16 Jun
TH212	1 Feb	19 Feb	31 Mar	21 May	21 Jun
CH205	2 Feb	5 Mar	31 Aug	22 Oct	16 Nov
EM220	8 Feb	26 Feb	31 Mar	14 May	7 Jun
PC207 (City)	5 Feb	19 Feb	31 Mar	7 May	4 Jun
PC207 (Ryde)	9 Feb	26 Feb	31 Mar	7 May	1 Jun
PC227	8 Feb	26 Feb	31 Mar	14 May	7 Jun
MAP21	12 Feb	26 Feb	31 Mar	14 May	11 Ju

Semester 2 subjects

Subject Code	Start Date	Administration Date	Census Date	Withdrawal Date	End Date
OT201	23 Jul	6 Aug	31 Aug	17 Sep	19 Nov
NT202	26 Jul	13 Aug	31 Aug	24 Sep	22 Nov
NT205	21 Jul	6 Aug	31 Aug	17 Sep	10 Nov
CH205	19 Jul	6 Aug	31 Aug	15 Oct	22 Nov
PC219	19 Jul	6 Aug	31 Aug	15 Oct	8 Nov
PC221	27 Jul	13 Aug	31 Aug	24 Sep	9 Nov
PC235	26 Jul	13 Aug	31 Aug	24 Sep	15 Nov
MAP22	22 Jul	6 Aug	31 Aug	17 Sep	11 Nov

In line with tertiary institutions throughout Australia, The Australian College of Theology regards academic misconduct as a serious matter. Australian College of Theology-approved colleges are responsible for rigorously pursuing the highest possible standards of academic honesty and integrity.

Academic misconduct may encompass the following actions:

Students are expected to acknowledge the source of their ideas and expressions used in their written work. To provide adequate documentation is not only an indication of academic honesty but also a courtesy enabling the marker to consult sources with ease. Deliberate failure to do so may constitute plagiarism, which is subject to a charge of academic misconduct.

Plagiarism might be defined as the wilful reproduction or paraphrasing of substantial unacknowledged written passages in a student's work, or pretending that a scholar's ideas are the student's own. Students are required to acknowledge by the use of footnotes the origin of extracts, quotes and paraphrases contained in their work. Quotation marks are to be inserted around quoted material.

Except in the case of Australian College of Theology-approved study and assessment schemes, students ought not to assist other students in the writing of individual assessments, such as providing written material to be copied. Material for assessment in one subject of study may not be submitted for assessment in any other subject of the award.

In the case of inadvertent academic dishonesty resulting from misunderstanding of academic conventions rather than deliberate deception, the marker shall deduct marks from the assessment and counsel the student concerning the academic conventions prevailing in the Australian College of Theology.

Wilful academic misconduct may result in the following penalties:

• the awarding of a fail grade for the whole subject of which the assessment is a part,
• the awarding of a 0% for the assessment or thesis or project with or without the opportunity to redeem the assignment,
• the student's exclusion from the award in which he or she is enrolled for a period not exceeding two years,
• exclusion from any award of The Australian College of Theology, or
• another outcome appropriate to the case but with an impact less serious than exclusion from enrolment in any award of The Australian College of Theology.

For coursework subjects the matter may be referred in writing to the Dean of the Australian College of Theology and the academic boards for decision.

For domestic students enrolled in a coursework subject, any appeal against an outcome will be dealt with in accordance with the Australian College of Theology's 'Dispute Resolution Policy for Domestic Students', which is contained in the following section of this handbook.

The Australian College of Theology provides processes for the handling of grievances brought by prospective, enrolled and former domestic students regarding academic and non-academic decisions.

General feedback and comment from students about administration, academic programs and services will not be treated by the Australian College of Theology as a grievance unless action or a response is required under the policies or regulations of the Australian College of Theology.

For the purposes of this policy, academic decisions include:

For the purposes of this policy all other academic decisions, including those relating to student admission or progression, curriculum and awards in a course of study, shall be dealt with in the manner of non-academic decisions.

Whenever possible, grievances will be handled at the affiliated college level and within the Australian College of Theology. Formal procedures for the resolution of grievances will normally only be invoked when a matter cannot be resolved by informal means. However, should these internal processes not resolve the matter, provision is made for external independent grievance handling / dispute resolution by reference to the Council of Private Higher Education (COPHE). If the Council of Private Higher Education makes recommendations in relation to a grievance they have reviewed, they will forward those recommendations within 10 working days of the decision to the Australian College of Theology Dean, who will ensure that the recommendations are implemented within 25 working days.

Affiliated colleges are obliged to provide students with the information contained in this policy statement on request or, for enrolling students, at initial enrolment or within seven days of starting an award course at an affiliated college of the Australian College of Theology. Continuing students should have this policy brought to their attention at the commencement of each subsequent year of enrolment in subjects of their course.

Affiliated colleges must report formal complaints, and decisions reached, in their Annual Report to the Board of Directors of the Australian College of Theology. A grievance is deemed formal when it is lodged in writing. The Australian College of Theology Board has appointed the Dean of the Australian College of Theology as the review officer in relation to outcome of appeals to the Director of Studies of affiliated colleges.

If the Dean of the Australian College of Theology was involved in making the original decision that becomes the matter in dispute or the Dean is unavailable to participate in any resolution process below, another person of appropriate rank and expertise shall be appointed by the Australian College of Theology Board Chair as the review officer in place of the Dean of the Australian College of Theology.

Appeals against academic decisions
Students concerned about an academic decision concerning curriculum / assessment in a subject of study or final grade for a subject should initially discuss the concern informally with the relevant lecturer at their college of enrolment. In particular, following the release of results of intra-semester assessments (e.g. an essay), students may informally request that an assessment be reviewed by the lecturer of the subject of study. This should be done within 25 working days of the particular academic decision being made. The lecturer should deal with the issue promptly, giving a full explanation to the student of the reasons for the academic decision.

If the student's concerns cannot be resolved by the relevant lecturer, and/or the student alleges failure to follow published procedures, the student may then choose to approach the Director of Studies of the affiliated college. The student may approach the Director of Studies on an informal basis, or else make the complaint formal by putting the grievance in writing, specifying the nature of the complaint and the grounds for their appeal. The student should do either of these things within 15 working days of the outcome of discussions with the lecturer.

Informal complaints
If the student chooses to approach the Director of Studies informally, this does not preclude later lodgement of the grievance formally in writing to the Director of Studies.

The Director of Studies should deal with informal complaints promptly, giving a full explanation to the student of the reasons for the academic decision.

Formal complaints
While not limited to the following, a student may normally appeal formally against the award of a grade only where:

1. the lecturer did not provide a subject outline as required; or
2. the assessment requirements as specified in the unit outcome were varied in an unreasonable way; or
3. the examiner's judgement was not objectively applied because of prejudice against the individual student; or
4. a student is of the view that a clerical error has occurred in the computation of the grade; or
5. due regard has not been paid to the evidence of illness or misadventure if submitted by the specified date; or
6. a student is of the view that they have been disadvantaged in some way due to the conduct of their final exam.

The Director of Studies must acknowledge receipt of a formal complaint in writing within five working days of receipt.

The Director of Studies must try to resolve the complaint within 15 working days of receiving the complaint. The Director of Studies may discuss the matter with both the student and the relevant lecturer in attendance. If the complaint relates to the mark for an intra-semester assessment, the Director of Studies may arrange for the assessment script to be marked by another lecturer in the student's college of enrolment.

Following investigation of the matter, the Director of Studies will advise the student in writing of her decision:

Reference to the Dean of the Australian College of Theology
If the student's concerns cannot be resolved by the Director of Studies of an affiliated college, and/or the student alleges a failure to follow published procedures, the student may formally approach the Dean of the Australian College of Theology by putting the complaint in writing and lodging it within 15 working days of receipt of the written response by the Director of Studies. Again the nature of the complaint and the grounds for appeal should be detailed.

The Dean of the Australian College of Theology must acknowledge receipt of the formal complaint in writing within five working days of receipt.

The Dean of the Australian College of Theology must try to resolve the complaint within 15 working days of receiving the complaint. If the complaint relates to the mark for an intra-semester assessment, the Dean may appoint an independent assessor who will remark the assessment script under dispute. A fee may be charged if the student had been awarded a passing grade or higher for the assessment script under dispute.

Following investigation of the matter, the Dean of the Australian College of Theology will advise the student in writing of his/her decision:

1. setting out the reasons for the awarding of the final grade for the subject;
2. advising that if the student does not agree with the decision, then the student has the right of formal appeal to an independent external agency; and
3. giving the student a copy of this policy, if the student does not already have a copy.

Appeals regarding other academic and non-academic / administrative decisions
Other academic and non-academic / administrative decisions are not limited to, but include, matters related to fees, withdrawals, etc., and other decisions students may consider are interfering with the progress of their studies or with issuing of an award of the Australian College of Theology.

In the first instance, a student who is concerned about a decision made or action taken by their affiliated college should discuss their grievance with the Registrar at their college of enrolment. The Registrar will promptly notify the student of any action taken or any decision made by them in relation to the grievance.

If, following the notification from the Registrar, the student's grievance is not resolved to their satisfaction or the student alleges a failure to follow published procedure, the student should seek advice from the Registrar concerning to whom the student may next address their grievance. If the matter relates to the affiliated college, the student may address their grievance to the Director of Studies; if the matter relates to Australian College of Theology policy or regulations, the student may address their grievance to the Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator. The Registrar will give the student a copy of this policy.

If the student's concerns cannot be resolved by the Registrar of an affiliated college, and/or the student alleges a failure to follow published procedures, the student may formally approach the Director of Studies of the affiliated college by putting the complaint in writing and lodging it within 15 working days of receipt of the notification from the Registrar. Again the nature of the complaint and the grounds for appeal should be detailed.

If the Director of Studies was involved in making the original decision that becomes the matter in dispute or the Director of Studies in unavailable to participate in the resolution process, another person of appropriate rank and expertise shall be appointed by the Chair of the affiliated college Council (or equivalent) as the review officer in place of the Director of Studies.

The Director of Studies must acknowledge receipt of the formal complaint in writing within five working days of receipt. The Director of Studies must try to resolve the complaint within 15 working days of receiving the complaint.

Following investigation of the matter, the Director of Studies will advise the student in writing of her decision:

1. setting out the reasons;
2. advising that if the student does not agree with the decision, then the student has the right of formal appeal to the Dean of the Australian College of Theology; and
3. giving the student a copy of this policy, if the student does not already have a copy.

Reference to the Australian College of Theology
If the student's concerns relate to Australian College of Theology policy or regulations and have not been resolved by the Registrar of the affiliated college, or the student alleges a failure to follow procedures, the student may choose to formally approach the Academic Administrator of the Australian College of Theology. The student should put the complaint in writing to the Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator within 15 working days of the outcome of discussions with the Registrar, specifying the nature of the complaint and the grounds for their appeal.

The Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator must acknowledge receipt of a formal complaint in writing within five working days of receipt.

The Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator must try to resolve the complaint within 15 working days of receiving the complaint.

Following investigation of the matter, the Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator will advise the student in writing of his/her decision

1. setting out the reasons;
2. advising that if the student does not agree with the decision, then the student has the right of formal appeal to the Dean of the Australian College of Theology; and
3. giving the student a copy of this policy, if the student does not already have a copy.

Contact details for the Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator:

If the student's concerns cannot be resolved by the Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator, or the student alleges a failure to follow procedures, the student may formally approach the Dean of the Australian College of Theology by putting the complaint in writing and lodging it within 15 working days of receipt of the written response by the Australian College of Theology Academic Administrator. Again the nature of the complaint and the grounds for appeal should be detailed.

The Dean of the Australian College of Theology must acknowledge receipt of the formal complaint in writing within five working days of receipt.

The Dean of the Australian College of Theology must try to resolve the complaint within 15 working days of receiving the complaint.

Following investigation of the matter, the Dean will advise the student in writing of his/her decision

1. setting out the reasons;
2. advising that if the student does not agree with the decision, then the student has the right of formal appeal to an independent external agency; and
3. giving the student a copy of this policy, if the student does not already have a copy.

Contact details for the Australian College of Theology Dean:

External dispute resolution
Students who remain dissatisfied with the outcome of any appeal, except those related to a mark for an intra-semester assessment, can make a final appeal free of charge to the Council of Private Higher Education (COPHE), c/- the Executive Officer, PO Box 4210, Castlecrag NSW 2068 ((02) 9417-0834). Such appeals should be in writing. The staff at affiliated colleges and the Australian College of Theology are also able to make representation to the Council Of Private Higher Education regarding the matter. Students can include a nominee in this process if they so choose. Decisions of the Council Of Private Higher Education shall be final and binding on all parties.

External formal concern
Notwithstanding the above, in matters of dispute resolution, students may exercise their rights to other legal remedies and may contact the higher education authority in their state. Contact details for the higher education authority in NSW, where the Australian College of Theology is the registered provider, are listed below. Students can include a nominee to represent them in this process if they so choose.

If a domestic student is concerned about the Australian College of Theology's actions at any stage on any issue, the student may raise concerns with respect to the Australian College of Theology's registration as an education and course provider to students with the higher education authority in the state in which their enrolling college is located.

In New South Wales:

In each state the Director-General (or equivalent) has the power to suspend or cancel the provider's registration or a course if a breach of the requirements of registration provision is proved.

Census dates and FEE-HELP debt
If a student who has requested FEE-HELP assistance withdraws from a subject of study on or before the census date for that subject of study, the student will not incur a FEE-HELP debt for that subject of study.

If a student who has requested FEE-HELP assistance withdraws from a subject of study after the census date for that subject of study, the student will incur a FEE-HELP debt for that subject of study.

Census dates for semester-length subjects are 31st March (semester one) and 31st August (semester two). The census date for full year subjects is 31st August. (The dates for intensive mode subjects are set individually and students should obtain the due dates from their college of enrolment.)

Re-crediting a person's FEE-HELP balance
The student may apply after the census date to have their FEE-HELP balance re-credited if the student has been unable to complete the requirements of a subject of study and the student believes that this was due to special circumstances. Where a request to re-credit a person's FEE-HELP balance is granted, a student's FEE-HELP debit is removed and the amount of FEE-HELP paid to the Australian College of Theology on behalf of the student will be refunded.

A person can apply to the Australian College of Theology to have their FEE-HELP balance re-credited if he or she withdraws from his or her studies after the census date and/or the person has not completed the requirements for the subject of study. The person must apply in writing within 12 months of the withdrawal date or, if the student has not withdrawn, within 12 months of the end of the period of study in which the subject of study was or was to be undertaken. The Australian College of Theology can exercise the discretion to waive this requirement if it is satisfied that the application could not be made within the time limit.

The Australian College of Theology's FEE-HELP Re-Crediting Officer will consider the student's application within 28 days of receiving the student's written application.

The Australian College of Theology will re-credit a person's FEE-HELP balance if it is satisfied that special circumstances apply to the person that:

• are beyond the person's control;
• do not make their full impact on the person until on, or after, the census date; and
• make it impracticable for the person to complete the requirements for the subject during the period in which the person undertook, or was to undertake, the subject.

The Australian College of Theology will be satisfied that the person's circumstances are beyond the person's control if a situation occurs which a reasonable person would consider is not due to the person's action or inaction, either direct or indirect, and for which the person is not responsible. The situation must be unusual, uncommon or abnormal.

The Australian College of Theology will be satisfied that a person's circumstances did not make their full impact until on or after the census date for the subject of study if the person's circumstances occur:

• before the census date, but worsen after that day; or
• before the census date, but the full effect or magnitude does not become apparent until on or after that day; or
• on or after the census date.

Special circumstances that would make it impracticable for the person to complete the requirements for the subject of study would include:

• medical circumstances; or
• family circumstances; or
• personal circumstances; or
• employment related circumstances; or
• course of study related circumstances.

Each application will be examined and determined on its merits. The FEE-HELP Re-crediting Officer will consider a person's claims, together with independent supporting documentary evidence that substantiates these claims.

The FEE-HELP Re-crediting Officer will notify the person of the decision and the reasons for making the decision. The Officer will advise the applicant of their rights for a review of the decision if the applicant is unsatisfied with the outcome.

If the decision is made to re-credit the FEE-HELP balance, the Australian College of Theology will notify DEST, and will repay to the Commonwealth any FEE-HELP assistance received from it on the person's behalf. DEST will inform the Australian Taxation Office that the debt has been removed.

Review of the original decision
Where a student is not satisfied with the decision made by the FEE-HELP Re-crediting Officer, they may apply in writing for a review of the decision. The Review Officer, appointed by the Board of Directors, is the Dean of the Australian College of Theology.

The time limit for applying for a review of the decision is 28 days from the person receiving notice of the decision. The person must state the reasons why he or she is applying for a review. The Review Officer will notify the applicant of his decision and the reasons for making the decision.

The Review Officer's available options are to:

• confirm the decision; or
• vary the decision; or
• set the decision aside and substitute a new decision.

The Review Officer will advise the applicant of his or her right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for a review of the Reviewer's decision if the applicant is unsatisfied with the outcome and will provide the applicant with contact details and address of the nearest Administrative Appeals Tribunal registry.

The Review Officer must acknowledge receipt of an application for a review of a decision in writing and will inform the applicant that, if the Reviewer has not advised the applicant of a decision within 45 days of receiving the application for review, the Reviewer is taken to have confirmed the original decision.

Where a student is not satisfied with the reviewed decision made by the Review Officer, they may apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a further review of the decision not to re-credit a person's FEE-HELP balance. The student may supply additional information to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that he or she did not previously supply to the Australian College of Theology (including the Australian College of Theology's Review Officer).

Contact persons
The current FEE-HELP Re-crediting Officer is the Academic Administrator of the Australian College of Theology, Ms Anne Bates. Her contact details are:

The Board of Directors of the Australian College of Theology has appointed the Dean of the Australian College of Theology, the Rev. Dr Mark Harding, as the Review Officer of decisions made by the Academic Administrator. His contact details are:

This policy has been designed by the Boards of the Australian College of Theology in order that students at all levels, as well as teachers, examiners and supervisors, will avoid discriminating language. By discriminating language we mean speaking or writing in a way that discriminates against, vilifies or denigrates individuals on the basis of their gender, colour, ethnicity, age, disability, race, or religion.

The recommendations below concerning avoidance of male-oriented language in generic contexts (see point 5 below) are intended for use in language about people only.

Departures from the policy need to be justified by the student, especially if he or she is writing a thesis or a major project.

1. All people are created in the image of God and all are equally found wanting before the justice of God. This revealed truth should motivate us to respect all people since Christ identified with and died for all. Inspired by the gospel of Jesus Christ, St Paul sought to establish in the church a new vision of humankind in which the conventional social divisions between male and female, slave and free, and Jew and Greek were broken down and overcome (Gal 3:28). Linguistic discrimination, and its more acute forms of vilification and denigration, culpably undermine and compromise the apostolic vision and should therefore be avoided by those who are committed to caring for all people, including Christians who are committed to showing unconditional love.
2. The issue of linguistic discrimination in our society is a serious one, which we do well to address, and to do all in our power to avoid and eradicate. Australia's commitment to eliminating discrimination can be measured, for example, by the number of federal acts that have been enacted—including the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 , the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 and the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act 1986 —to make it unlawful to discriminate against others on the basis of race, colour, national or ethnic origin, and gender.
3. Linguistic discrimination, as well as vilification and denigration, may occur by means of the language used to refer to or address others, and may take verbal or written form. Linguistic discrimination against people may occur in various ways, whether by ignoring their presence, excluding them, portraying them in the light of irrelevant characteristics or in an unbalanced way, or using language that is insulting, harassing, or based on a stereotype.
4. The means by which and the contexts in which this avoidance of linguistic discrimination should be achieved will vary according to the context of language and culture in which speaking and writing takes place. In working with already published works, such as the Bible, the issue of being faithful to the original intended meaning of a text will need to be addressed in the context of the need to avoid linguistic discrimination. The balance and tension between these two valid concerns (i.e. faithfulness to original meaning and avoiding linguistic discrimination) will vary between published works.
5. In relation to avoiding gender linguistic discrimination, it is recommended that women be made more visible in language by avoiding an older linguistic usage in which 'male-specific' and 'male-identified' terms were used in a generic sense. The use of the word 'man' should also be avoided in idioms and phrases when the speaker or author clearly intends to refer to both men and women. The same applies to pronouns such as 'he' and 'she', occupational nouns and job titles, and other titles and naming practices. Stereotyped images of women or men should also be avoided. It is recommended that a number of alternatives proposed in the Australian Government Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers (5th edition; 1994; see pp. 126-35) ought to be adopted as far as possible.
6. Language which is racist should be avoided, and especially with respect to people who are especially vulnerable in the Australian context, such as indigenous peoples.
7. Further, language which vilifies or denigrates certain ethnolinguistic groups on the basis of their language or ethnic background should be avoided as forms of such linguistic discrimination.
8. Linguistic discrimination and denigration should be avoided also in the case of people with disabilities or for people of certain ages.

Full copies of other Australian College of Theology policies not included in this handbook can be found on the Australian College of Theology website: www.actheology.edu.au