Scam at Holmesglen Institute – Chandstoine Melbourne

1.Issues:
• Mismanaged, academic programs, issuing 4 years degree certificates without validation
of sufficient knowledge, just accumulate money from student, especially from overseas
students without giving any value.
• Mismanaged and controlled by a white collar gang of academics/ senior management for
more than 5 years . They protect and guard all issues raised from mismanagement from
the government and accreditation bodies, community and continue to get their financial
benefits each end of the month.

2.Faculty:
Program: Faculty of Building, Construction and Engineering Holmesglen -Chadstone

Program: Built Environment Degree Programs (BEDP) Department of Applied Building Technology

• Responsible faculty dean: Mr Ross Digby

• Responsible other deans: Maxine Courtier: Dean, Higher Education and Strategic
Partnerships, Holmesglen Institute
• Responsible other deans: Leone English – higher education academic

Complained to :
CEO
Board of directors
Chairman of board

Other authorities :
1. TEQSA - Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency
2. AQSA - Australian Skills Quality Authority
3. AIB - Australian Institute of Building
4. AIBS Australian Institute of Building Surveyors
5. The Australian Human Rights Commission - complained against
Ross Digby for unfair , unreasonable comments, discriminatively
treating academia Sudarshana Udayaratna.
 6. Senator the Hon Michaela Cash - Minister for Small and Family
Business, Skills and. Vocational Education
7. Secretary of the Department of Education and Training. ---
Dr Michele Bruniges
8. Deputy Secretary ----Nadine Williams

I undersigned Sudarshana Udayaratna hereby request you to carry out an urgent investigation of
professional and criminal negligence of not managing the above program with adequate control
measures. As a result of it under qualified or not qualified graduates passing out with a four-year
degree certificate and join the construction industry in Australia as a result of Holmesglen senior
management gross negligence.

Danger- If authorities do not take action to stop this malpractice , the community will have a
risk of these professionals finally get to the construction industry. Their inadequate competency
level can create a threat to the construction industry and danger for human life.

Issue01
Request to investigate the illegal, unethical, substandard program construction and passing all
students without having required knowledge as four-year degree certificate graduates . This has
been going on for many years, and Holmesglen used the program as a cash cow to just to collect
money and keep it as an under-covered program.

Issue 02 : Behaviour of CEO and faculty of deans who pretend that there is no issue or problem
in the program as it has been conducted over more than 5 years and it has been a good cash cow to
Holmesglen Institute. The last Audit conducted by accreditation authority failed. All academic staff
protested for teaching the poor substandard program and subjects. Head of the department wanted
to revise the program, but deans/ CEO do not want to make any changes. All grievances highlighted
shortcoming suppressed by faculty dean like white-collar criminal thug using his authority.

Issue 03:
The CEO/ Faculty dean did not take any corrective action as all above-mentioned group of senior
managers( CEO+ Deans) has an iron griped, tightly controlled arrangement abusive, autocratic way
of managing the institute. No one took any measures to make any changes for the last five years
irrespective of many warning from staff and students.
Issue 04:
I would like to give the following evidence under oath.

1. Suda Uday was hired on a mutually agreed following conditions with HOD Dr Adil Abbas.
2. Semester 1 to deliver a 3 rd year degree subject .Feb 25 the 15th June)
3. Suda finds the same subject content , same questions paper, same assignment have been
repeated over more than 5 years. Raised the issue with HOD . Hod asked Suda to revised
the questions and assessment matrix.
4. Next week Ross Digby issues a direction to Suda and other staff not to make any changes to
existing course materials.
5. Assessment 80% marks given to group assignment and only 20% given to individual
evaluation. It is inevitable to asses their single learning outcome and nowhere in the
academic world set up the assessment on a scale like this unless it is a scam to pass all
learners.
6. Some students get through the subject with no subject knowledge as they get behind the
group assessment team marks. ( please review Suda Udaya academic review paper)
7. Other subjects have the same similar issue.
8. Most of the subjects contents are obsolete and never been revised over the last five years.
9. Student attrition is more than 50%
10. Staff bitterness/ unrest and attrition is more than 50%
11. All these issues highlighted and requested to revise the program or discontinue and
introduce a new program for accreditation as the program accreditation is mandatory in
16 months. The last accreditation audit was failed, and now program runs on an extension
for reaudit. But dean/CEO never give any direct answer at least their thinking which way to
go.
12. All above deans/CEO of the faculties said all had been taken care and nothing wrong with
the program.
13. Then Suda Udaya escalated the issue to the Human resource director, and she
acknowledged that there are many issues in the department over the last two years.
14. She assured to appoint an outside leadership and management consultant to the
department to investigate.
15. Before the investigator arrives dean Ross Digby discontinued Suda Udaya service without
any reasons saying that department does not require his service any more.
16. He abused, insulted, bullied Staff Suda Udaya who worked as a whistleblower. A separate
complaint has been submitted to the Human resource director of Holmesglen Institute and
human right commission for discrimination against Suda Udaya ethnic , background and for
highlighting the shortcomings in the program.
17. All CEO and the deans of the faculty has never taken any steps to investigate the above
issues over the last many years irrespective of all academic staff, and head of the
department repeat complain about the poor state of the program and importance of
replacing it with a new program.
18. As a result of this negligence, Student attrition is more than 50% in the degree program —
staff unhappiness in 100% more . When the staff complained about the toxic environment
department function 18 months ago, the dean’s solution was to relocate the staff to
another department to sit and work but never addressed the real issue. ( Mr Mark Jordan )
When this Suda Udaya brings these issues to his notice and cc to CEO, he abused him with
 racial remarks and just abruptly instantly denied access to the learning management system.
He is still not aware of why he was treated disrespectfully. BUT the HR director informed
Suda Udaya that Dean decided he does not need his service any longer without reason. But
Suda Udaya had HOD repeat assurance as he was performing and contributing to uplift the
program; nonetheless, all his the students were satisfied with his teaching ability. Suda
Udaya was assured of having ongoing full-time workload. On HOD request, Suda Udaya did
upgrade in teaching qualifications at his own personal expenses and got it completed.
Dean Ross Digby illtreated Suda Udaya and discriminated on his ethnic background, and Mr
Ross verbally abused and tried to bully him in his office room. This issue now have been
forwarded to Human right commissioner as a complain and copy to HR director at
Holmesglen.

Copy of letters submitted to CEO/ Chairman and directors. Since 15th June to 30th June 2019.

Board Chairman – Holmesglen Institute Peter Lewinsky

and board member Chairman of Holmgren Board
I wish to bring to your notice the following issue recuring more than two years in faculty of building
construction at Chadstone campus Holmesglen. I have tried my best to find a resolution, and I got
discontinued my service as a punishment for high lighting above issue, which was recurring for
more than two years. I at this moment request your intervention to resolve the issue even now I am
not with Holmesglen Institute. I am just making this request behalf of behalf of all students, staff and
communities and all taxpayers. The HR director acknowledged that there is an ongoing issue in the
faculty. She appointed an external investigator/ consultant MR Andrew Schuette, to find specific
route course of the problems, in Holmesglen. The current culture in Holmesglen from senior
management and highly rigid departmental bureaucratic structure covered with smoked glass
around each faculty and tightly controlled by each dean of the faculty. The operating culture is to
you do not shoot me; I do not kill you. You do not criticise me; I do not see crises. You do not find
fault with me, so we all coexist and gain all benefits from the government funds. So all issues and
unresolved issues never get reached any reasonable solution instead of circulating within the
system. When an issue raises up to the CEO, she sends it back to the same dean who created the
problem, to find a resolution. Then dean discontinues the personnel who raised the issue as a
solution for the challenge and presumed the issue is resolved. I was a victim of this saga. This style of
management, keep all problems within the system as strictly tightly controlled guarded confidential
while senior management gang of CEO/ deans team has no genuine intention of listening or resolve
any chronic issues. I like to take this issue to the government to investigate how this mob keep
wasting for all public money and do not care about the students/ staff/ or community what they
deliver. I have accumulated all empirical data to prove this case beyond any doubt. AS a result of it,
Holmesglen has student attrition more than 50%, and staff attrition more than 50% ( building
construction department) and the program has become a hoax and no value created out of massive
expenditure of public funds.
The following subject review report gives you the status of the ongoing program from one subject
which I delivered, and you may read the reports of other subjects to understand the state of the
whole program.

Subject review: BBE 302 sustainable housing development

To- Faculty: Faculty of Building, Construction and Engineering

Holmesglen -Chadstone Campus
Program: Built Environment Degree Programs (BEDP) Department of Applied Building
Technology (DABT)

HOD- DrAdil Abbas - please review and advice.

Dean of the faculty: Mr Ross Digby

Subject : BBE 302 Sustainable housing development -- end of
semester teaching and learning review
From Suda Uday – subject Leader Subject description as per given current approved curriculum:
Quote from the present subject guideline BBE302, sustainable housing development.

You will need to achieve the following learning outcomes of this subject: a) Understanding of the
evolving environmental the debate as it applies to housing development, the concept of
‘sustainability’ and its relation to the built environment b) Ability to apply the principles of
ecologically sustainable development to hypothetical large-scale housing development,
understanding of the implications of sustainability principles in construction projects c)
Understanding the range of assessment instruments that can be used in the planning and
monitoring of sustainable housing projects d) Understanding of legislative requirements for
undertaking sustainable housing development “

Unquote.
My critics, Please find my the professional opinion given below after delivering the subject over
the last 13 weeks, 1. Course content outline and modules uploaded in Brightspace LMS, not
property articulated to build up the subject knowledge from the foundation to its anatomy structure
and the filling up the necessary expertise to meet the required above learning outcome.

2. Bright space LMS is full of many years accumulated 100+ information scattered all over without
having any structure. I need permission to edit it and reprogram.
3. LMS full capacity has never utilised to make even a simple assessment tool. I could not use a
quizzes test to carry out in class to assess learning and teaching to establish the volume of learning
by individual students while the program was delivering. I need permission to introduce simple
assessment tools such as a test bank with a short answer through LMS.

4. Without number 3, students can't be given feedback on how they learn their subject until the
end of the semester.

5. There is no teaching and learning feedback and monitoring system between the teacher and the
learner. LMS has not utilised its full capability and its capacity for teaching, communicating two way
between the teacher and the student. I need permission to utilise the full capacity of the bright
space learning management system developed to enable effective teacher-learner dialogue and
two-way communication system, particularly with online students. I need permission to empower
the students to carry out their routing test against a timeline using the auto-correction facility to get
marked for the student to understand their own volume of learning. This is, in fact, the prime duty of
care of the teacher's and sole ethical responsibility.

Part 2

Current assessment method.

1. 80% marks given to on two major assignment for a group assignment.

2. 20% QA session restricted to 10 to 15 minutes as individual

My critics. 1. I found a few students with no adequate knowledge of the subject fail QA session.
But as per the program structure even if they get zero marks for QA, they pass the subject base on
the assessment structure; 80% on team assessment. This assessment has taken away the responsibly
of the student to exhibit and prove learning volume of the subject. There is no way for the teacher
to establish the knowledge of the learner by 20% allocated marks for just one individual assessment.
The assessment system is a complete hoax. (with all the respect to Prof Chen who set up the
problem-based learning ) Finally, the program becomes just a paper certificate with no value and
damaging the Holmesglen high brand image when incompetent graduates enter into the market.

2. Shocking and Demeaning experience: The weakest student tried to gift me two liquor bottles
with a request to pass the exam. When I refused and gave him stern advice about his behaviour, he
commented no one had declined in the past. I have officially informed HOD my daunting experience;
I never had this experience in my 30-years career life as an academic. How this student progress to
the third year is a question! The assessment process should clearly reject these students as they can
eventually get graduated with zero knowledge or no anywhere close to any degree level.
3. The teaching material, assessment tasks need to be modified entirely as they are not adequately
appropriately structured. The same assessment has been repeated over the last 5 years without one
single letter changed; examination papers are the same. Never been moderated or keep repeating
the same question over and over again.

4. Under the HOD request, I started rewriting the subject and the assessment to a degree
equivalent level maintaining the required curriculum conditions, but once reached 100 questions
test bank out of targeted 250 question test bank to program the LMS, I got strict instructions not to
change anything. I had to put all my work on hold. All my time I invested voluntarily to lift the
subject up to this point just wasted. I am waiting for further direction to decide whether to modify
the topics with the right content to suit market needs or just follow as the old script.

5. It is my opinion that the program needs to be revised and bring it up to required AQF standard
or scarp the entire program and rewrite the program to suit the current market needs.