Sustainability into the engineering curriculum

Higher education institutions have made some progress towards Engineering Education for Sustainable Development (EESD). There is however a ‘time lag dilemma’ facing engineering educators, where the pace of traditional curriculum renewal may not be sufficient to keep up with potential market,regulatory and institutional shifts.

Mainstreaming EESD: Elements of rapid curriculum renewal

This keynote paper provides an overview of opportunities to rapidly renew curriculum to EESD, to meet the scale and pace of change required, in order to address the issues of our time – in time. The authors outline the key arguments of the six papers that will comprise the March 2009 special issue of the International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, on a proposed preliminary framework for rapid curriculum renewal to EESD. The authors invite conference delegates to provide feedback on these papers, and to consider how other concepts and methodologies presented at EESD08 might also be rapidly mainstreamed, to contribute to systemic integration of sustainability content throughout engineering education, in every engineering department.

NAPLAN, MySchool and accountability: Teacher perceptions of the effects of testing

This paper explores Rizvi and Lingard’s (2010) idea of the “local vernacular” of the global education policy trend of using high-stakes testing to increase accountability and transparency, and by extension quality, within schools and education systems in Australia. In the first part of the paper a brief context of the policy trajectory of National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) is given in Australia. In the second part, empirical evidence drawn from a survey of teachers in Western Australia (WA) and South Australia (SA) is used to explore teacher perceptions of the impacts a high-stakes testing regime is having on student learning, relationships with parents and pedagogy in specific sites. After the 2007 Australian Federal election, one of Labor’s policy objectives was to deliver an “Education Revolution” designed to improve both the equity and excellence in the Australian school system1 (Rudd & Gillard, 2008). This reform agenda aims to “deliver real changes” through: “raising the quality of teaching in our schools” and “improving transparency and accountability of schools and school systems” (Rudd & Gillard, 2008, p. 5). Central to this linking of accountability, the transparency of schools and school systems and raising teaching quality was the creation of a regime of testing (NAPLAN) that would generate data about the attainment of basic literacy and numeracy skills by students in Australian schools.

The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on physical education teacher education students’ intrinsic motivation

Background: Providing motivationally supportive physical education experiences for learners is crucial since empirical evidence in sport and physical education research has associated intrinsic motivation with positive educational outcomes. Self-determination theory (SDT) provides a valuable framework for examining motivationally supportive physical education experiences through satisfaction of three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence and relatedness. However, the capacity of the prescriptive teaching philosophy of the dominant traditional physical education teaching approach to effectively satisfy the psychological needs of students to engage in physical education has been questioned. The constraints-led approach (CLA) has been proposed as a viable alternative teaching approach that can effectively support students’ self-motivated engagement in physical education. Purpose: We sought to investigate whether adopting the learning design and delivery of the CLA, guided by key pedagogical principles of nonlinear pedagogy (NLP), would address basic psychological needs of learners, resulting in higher self-reported levels of intrinsic motivation. The claim was investigated using action research. The teacher/researcher delivered two lessons aimed at developing hurdling skills: one taught using the CLA and the other using the traditional approach. Participants and Setting: The main participant for this study was the primary researcher and lead author who is a PETE educator, with extensive physical education teaching experience. A sample of 54 pre-service PETE students undertaking a compulsory second year practical unit at an Australian university was recruited for the study, consisting of an equal number of volunteers from each of two practical classes. A repeated measures experimental design was adopted, with both practical class groups experiencing both teaching approaches in a counterbalanced order. Data collection and analysis: Immediately after participation in each lesson, participants completed a questionnaire consisting of 22 items chosen from validated motivation measures of basic psychological needs and indices of intrinsic motivation, enjoyment and effort. All questionnaire responses were indicated on a 7-point Likert scale. A two-tailed, paired-samples t-test was used to compare the groups’ motivation subscale mean scores for each teaching approach. The size of the effect for each group was calculated using Cohen’s d. To determine whether any significant differences between the subscale mean scores of the two groups was due to an order effect, a two-tailed, independent samples t test was used. Findings: Participants’ reported substantially higher levels of self-determination and intrinsic motivation during the CLA hurdles lesson compared to during the traditional hurdles lesson. Both groups reported significantly higher motivation subscale mean scores for competence, relatedness, autonomy, enjoyment and effort after experiencing the CLA than mean scores reported after experiencing the traditional approach. This significant difference was evident regardless of the order that each teaching approach was experienced. Conclusion: The theoretically based pedagogical principles of NLP that inform learning design and delivery of the CLA may provide teachers and coaches with tools to develop more functional pedagogical climates, which result in students exhibiting more intrinsically motivated behaviours during learning.

Holistically approaching curriculum renewal: A case study of the Queensland University of Technology

There are still many programs in Australia and overseas where curricula comprise largely 20th Century-relevant graduate outcomes, framed in 20th Century learning and teaching approaches. A ‘Dynamic and Deliberative Model for Curriculum Renewal’ (DDMCR) model exists for undertaking such curriculum renewal that draws on the experiences of educators around the world, however there are few experiences to date in applying this model. At the Queensland University of Technology, the 2012 accreditation by Engineers Australia observed that, despite being exposed to relevant discipline-specific engineering curriculum and practice, students did not seem to be aware of the relevance of sustainable development to their degree, beyond first year exposure. In addressing this feedback, level 8 Australian Qualifications Framework, and drawing ideas from the DDMCR model, faculty senior management undertook a full review of the engineering curriculum.

Mathematics knowledge for teaching and the classroom environment

This study investigated the classroom environment in an underperforming mathematics classroom. The objectives were: (1) to investigate the classroom environment and identify influences upon it, and (2) to further explore those influences (i.e., teacher knowledge). This was completed using a diachronic case study approach in which data were gathered during lesson observations and coaching sessions. These data were analysed to describe and exemplify the classroom environment, then further described against forms of teacher knowledge. Conjectures regarding the importance of teacher knowledge of content were made which formed a base for developing a model of teacher planning and pedagogy.

Problem solving in a 21st century mathematics curriculum

Research on problem solving in the mathematics curriculum has spanned many decades, yielding pendulum-like swings in recommendations on various issues. Ongoing debates concern the effectiveness of teaching general strategies and heuristics, the role of mathematical content (as the means versus the learning goal of problem solving), the role of context, and the proper emphasis on the social and affective dimensions of problem solving (e.g., Lesh & Zawojewski, 2007; Lester, 2013; Lester & Kehle, 2003; Schoenfeld, 1985, 2008; Silver, 1985). Various scholarly perspectives—including cognitive and behavioral science, neuroscience, the discipline of mathematics, educational philosophy, and sociocultural stances—have informed these debates, often generating divergent resolutions. Perhaps due to this uncertainty, educators’ efforts over the years to improve students’ mathematical problem-solving skills have had disappointing results. Qualitative and quantitative studies consistently reveal mathematics students’ struggles to solve problems more significant than routine exercises (OECD, 2014; Boaler, 2009)...