Teaching and Assessing Reflective Writing in a Large Undergraduate Core Substantive Law Unit

The focus of higher education has shifted towards building students’ skills and self-awareness for future employment, in addition to developing substantive discipline knowledge. This means that there is an increasing need for embedding approaches to teaching and learning which provide a context for skills development and opportunities for students to prepare for the transition from legal education to professional practice. This chapter reports on a large (500-600 students) core undergraduate Equity law unit in an Australian University. ePortfolio has been embedded in Equity as a means of enabling students to document their reflections on their skill development in that unit. Students are taught, practice and are assessed on their teamwork and letter writing skills in the context of writing a letter of advice to a fictional client in response to a real world problem. Following submission of the team letter, students are asked to reflect on their skill development and document their reflections in ePortfolio. A scaffolded approach to teaching reflective writing is adopted using a blended model of delivery which combines face to face lectures and online resources, including an online module, facts sheets designed to guide students through the process of reflection by following the TARL model of reflection, and exemplars of reflective writing. Although students have engaged in the process of reflective writing in Equity for some years, in semester one 2011 assessment criteria were developed and the ePortfolio reflections were summatively assessed for the first time. The model of teaching and assessing reflective practice was evaluated in a range of ways by seeking feedback from students and academic staff responsible for implementing the model and asking them to reflect on their experiences. This chapter describes why skill development and reflective writing were embedded in the undergraduate law unit Equity; identify the teaching and learning approaches which were implemented to teach reflective writing to online and internal Equity students; explain the assessment processes; analyse the empirical evidence from evaluations; document the lessons learnt and discuss planned future improvements to the teaching and assessment strategies.

Contesting spaces for Indigenous knowledge in university teaching and learning

Teaching and learning indigenous knowledge (as opposed to “modern” knowledge) is inherently a political and moral act. Indigenous Australian knowledges areas are as diverse as its geographical landscape. Making space for Indigenous knowledges in academia should not merely be a question of social justice or equity; the focus needs to shift to restoring pedagogical justice. This chapter provides insights for possible frameworks for embedding Indigenous knowledges and draws from experiences of teaching critical Indigenous Studies at one Australian university.

Dance teaching and learning in context : activating the head, heart and hands

Traditionally, the art of teaching dance has largely been a skill transferred from teacher to student. This master-apprentice paradigm encourages the passing on of technical and artistic traditions associated with the various genres of dance. Whilst this approach supports the passing of the flame of the art form from generation to generation, it has, in part, limited the teaching pedagogy that informs dance as an art form. The future of dance teaching is reliant on teachers’ engagement with the further development of inquiry learning and reflective practice skills within the dance studio. This paper charts one component of a reflective pedagogy, Head, Heart, Hands (Pstalozzi as cited in Rud 2006), developed as a result of an action research project, within a suite of three units across a three-year undergraduate teacher-training course for school, community and studio dance teachers.

Securing Australia's future: The role of science, research and technology in lifting Australian productivity

A three-year research program funded by the Australian Research Council and conducted by the four Learned Academies through the Australian Council of Learned Academies for PMSEIC, through the Office of the Chief Scientist. Securing Australia’s Future delivers research-based evidence and findings to support policy development in areas of importance to Australia’s future.

Enhancing the teaching and learning of mathematical visual images

The literacy demands of mathematics are very different to those in other subjects (Gough, 2007; O'Halloran, 2005; Quinnell, 2011; Rubenstein, 2007) and much has been written on the challenges that literacy in mathematics poses to learners (Abedi and Lord, 2001; Lowrie and Diezmann, 2007, 2009; Rubenstein, 2007). In particular, a diverse selection of visuals typifies the field of mathematics (Carter, Hipwell and Quinnell, 2012), placing unique literacy demands on learners. Such visuals include varied tables, graphs, diagrams and other representations, all of which are used to communicate information.

Socially critical pedagogy and the 'production of skilled performers': Further considerations of teaching and learning in physical education

The growing call for physical educators to move beyond the bounds of performance has been a powerful discourse. However, it is a discourse that has tended to be heavy on theory but light on practical application. This paper discusses recent work in the area of skill acquisition and what this might mean for pedagogical practices in physical education. The acquisition of motor skill has traditionally been a core objective for physical educators, and there has been a perception that child-centred pedagogies have failed in the achievement of this traditional yardstick. However, drawing from the work of Rovegno and Kirk (1995) and Langley (1995; 1997), and making links with current work in the motor learning area, it is possible to show that skill acquisition is not necessarily compromised by child-centred pedagogy. Indeed, working beyond Mosston's discovery threshold and using models such as Games for Understanding, can provide deeper skill-learning experiences as well as being socially just.

Manipulating the data: Teaching and NAPLAN in the control society

High-stakes testing is changing what it means to be a ‘good teacher’ in the contemporary school. This paper uses Deleuze and Guattari's ideas on the control society and dividuation in the context of National Assessment Program Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) testing in Australia to suggest that the database generates new understandings of the ‘good teacher’. Media reports are used to look at how teachers are responding to the high-stakes database through manipulating the data. This article argues that manipulating the data is a regrettable, but logical, response to manifestations of teaching where only the data counts.

Creating a standardised teaching and learning framework for social work field placements

Mapping and evaluating a student's progress on placement is a core element of social work education but there has been scant attention to indicate how to effectively create and assess student learning and performance. This paper outlines a project undertaken by the Combined Schools of Social Work to develop a common learning and assessment tool that is being used by all social work schools in Victoria. The paper describes how the Common Assessment Tool (CAT) was developed, drawing on the Australian Association of Social Work Practice Standards, leading to seven key learning areas that form the basis of the assessment of a student's readiness for practice. An evaluation of the usefulness of the CAT was completed by field educators, liaison staff, and students, which confirmed that the CAT was a useful framework for evaluating students' learning goals. The feedback also identified a number of problematic features that were addressed in a revised CAT and rating scale.

Literacy teaching and learning in a digital world: Challenges of a new era

Teachers the world over are aware of the range of new challenges that arise from this new era. One challenge is the role of digital technologies in literacy learning. Despite its reputation for being engaging, digital technologies do not always enhance learning outcomes. Whilst the concerns vary across time and place, the core issue of what is a highly sought after literacy learning outcome in this new era warrants consideration. This paper introduces Kalantzis and Cope’s (2005) theorisation of eight knowledge processes for literacy learning. They claim that experiencing the known, conceptualising by naming, analysing functionally and applying appropriately, whilst necessary, are not on their own sufficient for the development of high level literacy practices. It is their contention that students must also be able to experience the new, conceptualise by theorising, analyse creatively and apply critically. This theorisation forms an auditing framework for considering the outcomes of different uptakes of digital technologies in a Social Studies and a Science unit.

Entanglements – activism and technology: Editors' introduction

Past issues of Fibreculture have examined activist philosophies from angles such as social justice and networked organisational forms, communication rights and net neutrality debates, and the push back against precarious new media labour. Our issue extends this work by capturing the complexities associated with the use of technology in activist contexts, and offering insights into how practitioners, scholars, and the makers of digital and networked technologies do and might need to work more collaboratively and pragmatically to address social justice issues.

Enterprise technology governance: New information and technology core competencies for boards of directors

Boards of directors have legal and ethical responsibilities to be competent. Yet, in a world where business models and whole sectors are being disrupted by rapid information and technology change, a majority of directors lack IT governance knowledge and skills. Individual IT competency and collective board Enterprise Technology Governance capability is a global problem. Without capability, boards are potentially flying blind, and risk is increased and opportunities to lead and govern digital transformation lost. To address this capability gap, this research provides the first multi-industry validated Enterprise Technology Governance competency set for use in board evaluation, recruitment and professional development.

Editorial - TL Forum 2015: Teaching and learning uncapped

The authors discuss the teaching and learning forum and the number of submissions to its staff from 2006-2015.

Governance of enterprise Information and Technology: A new core competency for boards of directors

With the level of digital disruption that is affecting businesses around the globe, you might expect high levels of Governance of Enterprise Information and Technology (GEIT) capability within boards. Boards and their senior executives know technology is important. More than 90% of boards and senior executives currently identify technology as essential to their current businesses, and to their organization’s future. But as few as 16% have sufficient GEIT capability. Global Centre for Digital Business Transformation’s recent research contains strong indicators of the need for change. Despite board awareness of both the likelihood and impact of digital disruption, things digital are still not viewed as a board-level matter in 45% of companies. And, it’s not just the board. The lack of board attention to technology can be mirrored at senior executive level as well. When asked about their organization’s attitude towards digital disruption, 43% of executives said their business either did not recognise it as a priority or was not responding appropriately. A further 32% were taking a “follower” approach, a potentially risky move as we will explain. Given all the evidence that boards know information and technology (I&T***) is vital, that they understand the inevitably, impact and speed of digital change and disruption, why are so many boards dragging their heels? Ignoring I&T disruption and refusing to build capability at board level is nothing short of negligence. Too many boards risk flying blind without GEIT capability [2]. To help build decision quality and I&T governance capability, this research: • Confirms a pressing need to build individual competency and cumulative, across-board capability in governing I&T • Identifies six factors that have rapidly increased the need, risk and urgency • Finds that boards may risk not meeting their duty of care responsibilities when it comes to I&T oversight • Highlights barriers to building capability details three GEIT competencies that boards and executives can use for evaluation, selection, recruitment and professional development.