The Sessional Academic Success (SAS) project

The Sessional Academic Success (SAS) project is a sustainable, distributed model for supporting sessional staff at QUT. Developed by the Learning and Teaching Unit. SAS complements our Sessional Academic Program (SAP): a sequence of formal academic development workshops explained in complementary nomination. SAS recognises that while these programs are very well received and a crucial aspect of preparing and advancing sessional teachers, they are necessarily encapsulated in the moment of their delivery and are generic, as they address all faculties (with their varied cultures, processes and pedagogies). The SAS project extends this formal, centrally offered activity into local, ‘just in time’, ongoing support within schools. It takes a distributed leadership approach. Experienced sessional academics are recruited and employed as Sessional Academic Success Advisors (SASAs). They provide sessional staff in their schools with contextually specific, needs based, peer-to-peer development opportunities; one-on-one advice on classroom management and strategies for success; and help to trouble-shoot challenges. The SASAs are trained by the Learning and Teaching Unit co-ordinator, and ongoing support is provided centrally and by school-based co-ordinators. This team approach situates the SASAs at the centre of an organisation map (see diagram of support relationships below). The SAS project aims to support sessional staff in their professional development by: • Offering contextual, needs-based support at school level by harnessing local expertise; • Providing further development opportunities that are local and focal; SAS aims to retain Sessional Staff by: • Responding to self-nominated requests for support and ‘just in time’, safe and reliable advice in times of need; • Building sessional staff confidence through help with dealing with challenges from a trusted peer; • Building a supportive academic community for sessional staff, which helps them feel a part of faculty life, and a community of teaching practice. SAS aims to support sessional staff in the development of academic teaching careers by: • Recognising the capacity of experienced sessional staff to support their peers in ways that are unique, valuable and valued and providing the agency to do so; • Providing career advancement and leadership opportunities for sessional staff. SAS takes unique approaches within each school using strategies such as: • Welcomes and schools orientation by SASAs; • Regular check ins; face-to-face advice and online support; • Compiling local resources to complement university wide resources. • Sessional-to-sessional ‘just in time’ training (eg. assessment and marking when marking commences); • Peer feedback and mentoring (the opportunities to sit in more experiences sessionals’ classes; • Sessional staff awards (nominated by students); • Communities of practice to discuss topics and issues with a view to (and support for) publishing on learning and teaching. In these ways, SASAs complement support offered by unit coordinators, administrators, and the Learning and Teaching Unit. Pairing senior and ‘understudy’ advisors ensures a line of succession, sustainability and continuity. A pilot program commenced in 2012 involving three schools (Psychology and Social Work; Electrical Engineering and Computer Science; Media, Entertainment and Creative Arts). It will be expanded across schools in 2013.

How useful is expert opinion for predicting the distribution of a species within and beyond the region of expertise? A case study using brush-tailed rock-wallabiesPetrogale penicillata

1. Species' distribution modelling relies on adequate data sets to build reliable statistical models with high predictive ability. However, the money spent collecting empirical data might be better spent on management. A less expensive source of species' distribution information is expert opinion. This study evaluates expert knowledge and its source. In particular, we determine whether models built on expert knowledge apply over multiple regions or only within the region where the knowledge was derived. 2. The case study focuses on the distribution of the brush-tailed rock-wallaby Petrogale penicillata in eastern Australia. We brought together from two biogeographically different regions substantial and well-designed field data and knowledge from nine experts. We used a novel elicitation tool within a geographical information system to systematically collect expert opinions. The tool utilized an indirect approach to elicitation, asking experts simpler questions about observable rather than abstract quantities, with measures in place to identify uncertainty and offer feedback. Bayesian analysis was used to combine field data and expert knowledge in each region to determine: (i) how expert opinion affected models based on field data and (ii) how similar expert-informed models were within regions and across regions. 3. The elicitation tool effectively captured the experts' opinions and their uncertainties. Experts were comfortable with the map-based elicitation approach used, especially with graphical feedback. Experts tended to predict lower values of species occurrence compared with field data. 4. Across experts, consensus on effect sizes occurred for several habitat variables. Expert opinion generally influenced predictions from field data. However, south-east Queensland and north-east New South Wales experts had different opinions on the influence of elevation and geology, with these differences attributable to geological differences between these regions. 5. Synthesis and applications. When formulated as priors in Bayesian analysis, expert opinion is useful for modifying or strengthening patterns exhibited by empirical data sets that are limited in size or scope. Nevertheless, the ability of an expert to extrapolate beyond their region of knowledge may be poor. Hence there is significant merit in obtaining information from local experts when compiling species' distribution models across several regions.

An epistemic community as influencer and implementer in local government accounting in Australia

This paper adopts an epistemic community framework to explicate the dual role of epistemic communities as influencers of accounting policy within regulatory space and as implementers who effect change within the domain of accounting. The context is the adoption and implementation of fair value accounting within local government in New South Wales (NSW). The roles and functions of Australian local government are extensive, and include the development and maintenance of infrastructure, provision of recreational facilities, certain health and community services, buildings, cultural facilities, and in some cases, water and sewerage (Australian Local Government Association, 2009). The NSW state Department of Local Government (DLG) is responsible for legislation and policy development to ensure that local councils are able to deliver ‘quality services to their communities in a sustainable manner’ (DLG, 2008c). These local councils receive revenue from various sources including property rates, government grants and user-pays service provision. In July 2006 the DLG issued Circular 06-453 to councils (DLG, 2006c), mandating the staged adoption of fair value measurement of infrastructure assets. This directive followed the policy of NSW State Treasury (NSW Treasury, 2007),4 and an independent inquiry into the financial sustainability of local councils (LGSA, 2006). It was an attempt to resolve the inconsistency in public sector asset valuation in NSW Local Governments, and to provide greater usefulness and comparability of financial statements.5 The focus of this study is the mobilization of accounting change by the DLG within this wider political context. When a regulatory problem arises, those with political power seek advice from professionals with relevant skill and expertise (Potter, 2005). This paper explores the way in which professionals diffuse accounting ‘problems’ and the associated accounting solutions ‘across time and space’ (Potter, 2005, p. 277). The DLG’s fair value accounting policy emanated from a ‘regulatory space’ (Hancher and Moran, 1989)6 as a result of negotiations between many parties, including accounting and finance professionals. Operating within the local government sector, these professionals were identified by the DLG as being capable of providing helpful input. They were also responsible for the implementation of the new olicy within local councils. Accordingly they have been dentified as an pistemic community with the ability to ranslate regulatory power by changing he domain of ccounting (Potter, 2005, p. 278).7 The paper is organised as follows. The background to the LG’s decision to require the introduction of fair value accounting for infrastructure assets is explored. Following this, the method of the study is described, and the epistemic community framework outlined. In the next sections, evidence of the influencing and implementing roles of epistemic groups is provided. Finally, conclusions are drawn about the significance of these groups both within regulatory space in developing accounting regulation, and in embedding change within the domain of accounting.