Sessional Academic Success : A distributed framework for academic support and development

With approximately half of Australian university teaching now performed by sessional academics, there has been growing recognition of the contribution they make to student learning. At the same time, sector-wide research and institutional audits continue to raise concerns about academic development, quality assurance, recognition and belonging. In response, universities have increasingly begun to offer academic development programs for sessional academics. However, such programs may be centrally delivered, generic in nature, and contained within the moment of delivery, while the Faculty contexts and cultures that sessional academics work within are diverse, and the need for support unfolds in ad-hoc and often unpredictable ways. In this paper we present the Sessional Academic Success (SAS) program–a new framework that complements and extends the central academic development program for sessional academic staff at Queensland University of Technology. This program recognises that experienced sessional academics have much to contribute to the advancement of learning and teaching, and harnesses their expertise to provide school-based academic development opportunities, peer-to-peer support, and locally contextualized community building. We describe the program’s implementation and explain how Sessional Academic Success Advisors (SASAs) are employed, trained and supported to provide advice and mentorship and, through a co-design methodology, to develop local development opportunities and communities of teaching practice within their schools. Besides anticipated benefits to new sessional academics in terms of timely and contextual support and improved sense of belonging, we explain how SAS provides a pathway for building leadership capacity and academic advancement for experienced sessional academics. We take a collaborative, dialogic and reflective practice approach to this paper, interlacing insights from the Associate Director, Academic: Sessional Development who designed the program, and two Sessional Academic Success Advisors who have piloted it within their schools.

Diffusion of extreme weather-proofing technology in the built environment

This study addresses the research question: ‘What are the diffusion determinants for extreme weather-proofing technology in the Australian built environment?’ In order to effectively identify diffusion determinants, a synthesis of literature in both technical and management fields was conducted from a system-wide perspective. Review results where then interpreted through an innovation system framework, drawn from innovation systems literature, in order to map the current state of extreme weather-proofing technology diffusion in the Australian built environment industry. Drivers and obstacles to optimal diffusion are presented. Results show the important role to be played by Australian governments in facilitating improved weather proofing technology diffusion. This applies to governments in their various roles, but particularly as regulators, clients/owners and investors in research & development and education. In the role as regulators, findings suggest Australian governments should be encouraging the application of innovative finance options and positive end-user incentives to promote the uptake of weather proofing technology. Additionally, in their role as clients/owners, diffusion can be improved by adjusting building and infrastructure specifications to encourage designers and constructors to incorporate extreme weather proofing technology in new and redeveloped built assets. Finally, results suggest greater investment is required in research and development and improved knowledge sharing across the construction supply chain to further mitigate risks associated with greater incidences of extreme weather events.

The seventh 48 hour game making challenge (2013)

The 48 hour game making challenge has been running since 2007. In recent years, we have not only been running a 'game jam' for the local community but we have also been exploring the way in which the event itself and the place of the event has the potential to create its own stories. Game jams are the creative festivals of the game development community and a game jam is very much an event or performance; its stories are those of subjective experience. Participants return year after year and recount personal stories from previous challenges; arrival in the 48hr location typically inspires instances of individual memory and narration more in keeping with those of a music festival or an oft frequented holiday destination. Since its inception, the 48hr has been heavily documented, from the photo-blogging of our first jam and the twitter streams of more recent events to more formal interviews and documentaries (see Anderson, 2012). We have even had our own moments of Gonzo journalism with an on-site press room one year and an ‘embedded’ journalist another year (Keogh, 2011). In the last two years of the 48hr we have started to explore ways and means to collect more abstract data during the event, that is, empirical data about movement and activity. The intent behind this form of data collection was to explore graphic and computer generated visualisations of the event, not for the purpose of formal analysis but in the service of further story telling. [exerpt from truna aka j.turner, Thomas & Owen, 2013) See: truna aka j.turner, Thomas & Owen (2013) Living the indie life: mapping creative teams in a 48 hour game jam and playing with data, Proceedings of the 9th Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment, IE'2013, September 30 - October 01 2013, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Co-production of actions and activities at airport security screening

In this paper we will examine passenger actions and activities at the security screening points of Australian domestic and international airports. Our findings and analysis provide a more complete understanding of the current airport passenger security screening experience. Data in this paper is comprised of field studies conducted at two Australian airports, one domestic and one international. Video data was collected by cameras situated either side of the security screening point. A total of one hundred and ninety-six passengers were observed. Two methods of analysis are used. First, the activities of passengers are coded and analysed to reveal the common activities at domestic and international security regimes and between quiet and busy periods. Second, observation of passenger activities is used to reveal uncommon aspects. The results show that passengers do more at security screening that being passively scanned. Passengers queue, unpack the required items from their bags and from their pockets, walk through the metal-detector, re-pack and occasionally return to be re-screened. For each of these activities, passengers must understand the procedures at the security screening point and must co-ordinate various actions and objects in time and space. Through this coordination passengers are active participants in making the security checkpoint function – they are co-producers of the security screening process.

The Effective and The Evocative : A Spectrum of Creative Practice Research

In the expanding literature on creative practice research, art and design are often described as a unified field. They are bracketed together (art-and-design), referred to as interchangeable terms (art/design), and nested together, as if the practices of one domain encompass the other. However it is possible to establish substantial differences in research approaches. In this chapter we argue that core distinctions arise out of the goals of the research, intentions invested in the resulting “artefacts” (creative works, products, events), and the knowledge claims made for the research outcomes. Moreover, these fundamental differences give rise to a number of contingent attributes of the research such as the forming contexts, methodological approaches, and ways of evidencing and reporting new knowledge. We do not strictly ascribe these differences to disciplinary contexts. Rather, we use the terms effective practice research and evocative practice research to describe the spirit of the two distinctive research paradigms we identify. In short, effective practice research (often pursued in design fields) seeks a solution (or resolution) to a problem identified with a particular community, and it produces an artefact that addresses this problem by effecting change (making a situation, product or process more efficient or effective in some way). On the other hand, evocative practice research (often pursued by creative arts fields) is driven by individual pre-occupations, cultural concerns or human experience more broadly. It produces artefacts that evoke affect and resonance, and are poetically irreducible in meaning. We cite recent examples of creative research projects that illustrate the distinctions we identify. We then go on to describe projects that integrate these modes of research. In this way, we map out a creative research spectrum, with distinct poles as well as multiple hybrid possibilities. The hybrid projects we reference are not presented as evidence an undifferentiated field. Instead, we argue that they integrate research modes in deliberate, purposeful and distinctive ways: employing effective practice research methods in the production of evocative artefacts or harnessing evocative (as well as effective) research paradigms to effect change.

Developing sustainable ‘liveable’ buildings, cities and communities for a sub-tropical context : residents’ perspectives

A key challenge for the 21st Century is to make our cities more liveable and foster economically sustainable, environmentally responsible, and socially inclusive communities. Design thinking, particularly a human-centred approach, offers a way to tackle this challenge. Findings from two recent Australian research projects highlight how facilitating sustainable, liveable communities in a humid sub-tropical environment requires an in-depth understanding of people’s perspectives, experiences and practices. Project 1 (‘Research House’) documents the reflections of a family who lived in a ‘test’ sustainable house for two years, outlining their experience and evaluations of universal design and sustainable technologies. The study family was very impressed with the natural lighting, natural ventilation, spaciousness and ease of access, which contributed significantly to their comfort and the liveability of their home. Project 2 (‘Inner-Urban High Density Living’) explored Brisbane residents’ opinions about high-density living, through a survey (n=636), interviews (n=24), site observations (over 300 hours) and environmental monitoring, assessing opinions on the liveability of their individual dwelling, the multi-unit host building and the surrounding neighbourhood. Nine areas, categorised into three general domains, were identified as essential for enhancing high density liveability. In terms of the dwelling, thermal comfort/ventilation, natural light, noise mitigation were important; shared space, good neighbour protocols, and support for environmentally sustainable behaviour were desired in the building/complex; and accessible/sustainable transport, amenities and services, sense of community were considered important in the surrounding neighbourhood. Combined, these findings emphasise the importance and complexity associated with designing liveable building, cities and communities, illustrating how adopting a design thinking, human-centred approach will help create sustainable communities that will meet the needs of current and future generations.

Building distributed leadership for effective supervision of creative practice higher research degrees : final report 2014

Building distributed leadership for effective supervision of creative practice higher research degrees is an Office for Learning and Teaching (OLT) funded project, conducted in partnership between Queensland University of Technology, The University of Melbourne, Auckland University of Technology, University of New South Wales and University of Western Sydney. The project was initiated to develop a cooperative approach to establishing an understanding of the contextual frameworks of the emergent field of creative practice higher degrees by research (HDRs); capturing early insights of administrators and supervisors; gathering exemplars of good practices; and establishing an in-common understanding of effective approaches to supervision. To this end, the project has produced: • A literature review, to provide a research foundation for creative practice higher research degree supervision (Chapter 3). • A contextual review of disciplinary frameworks for HDR programs, produced through surveys of postgraduate research administrators (Section 4.1), and an analysis of institutional materials and academic development programs for supervisors (Section 4.2). • A National Symposium, Effective Supervision of Creative Arts Research Degrees (ESCARD), at QUT in Brisbane in February 2013, with 62 delegates from 20 Australasian Universities, at which project findings were disseminated, and delegates presented case studies and position papers, and participated in discussions on key issues for supervisors (Appendix 1). • Resources, including a booklet for supervisors: 12 Principles for the Effective Supervision of Creative Practice Higher Research Degrees, which encapsulates attitudes, insights and good practices of experienced and new supervisors. It was produced through a content analysis of interviews with twenty-five supervisors in creative disciplines (visual and performing arts, music, new media, creative writing and design) (Printed booklet, PDF, Appendix 3). • A project website to disseminate project outcomes , which holds project findings, relevant references, and a repository of case studies and position papers by supervisors and program administrators. • A call for papers for a special issue ‘Supervising Practice: Perspectives on the Supervision of Creative Practice Research Higher Degrees’ of ACCESS Journal: Critical Perspectives on Communication, Cultural & Policy Studies (ERA ranked A quality) in 2014 (Appendix 2). • A community of supervisory practice initiated through project partnerships, a national symposium where supervisors from across Australasia met in dialogue for the first time, resource sharing, and joint publishing opportunities. • A set of recommendations for supervision capacity building and academic development, produced through the triangulation of literature and contextual reviews, analysis of institutional frameworks, interviews with supervisors and national dialogues. It is anticipated that the project’s outcomes will support experienced and new supervisors in this emergent field, and so benefit HDR students, and will enable creative disciplines to build supervision capacity, and so to accommodate growth in postgraduate enrolments. Funded as a pilot project, the project set out to establish a robust research base to provide a foundation for future work involving sharing good practices, resource building, and designing effective approaches to academic development for supervisors. Recommendations that were produced out of this project include the need to extend beyond generic, formal training for supervisors to academic development that harnesses and extends distributed leadership; focuses on local, disciplinary contexts; has a strong emphasis on case studies; provides diverse resources; and facilitates dialogue between supervisors. Recommendations also include developing frameworks for mentoring new supervisors and building a national network to facilitate cross-institutional discourse, disseminate good practices, and share insights into the management of risk factors, ethical issues, and preparing candidates for examination. As a pilot investigation, the outcomes of this project lay the ground for this future work.

12 principles for the effective supervision of creative practice higher research degrees, dispatches from the field

In late 2012 and early 2013 we interviewed 25 experienced and early career supervisors of creative practice higher research degrees. This journey spanned five universities and a broad range of disciplines including visual art, music, performing art, new media, creative writing, fashion, graphic design, interaction design and interior design. Some of the supervisors we interviewed were amongst the first to complete and supervise practice-led and practice-based PhDs; some have advocated for and defined this emergent field; and some belong to the next generation of supervisors who have confidently embarked on this exciting and challenging path. Their reflections have brought to light many insights gained over the past decade. Here we have drawn together common themes into a collection of principles and best practice examples. We present them as advice rather than rules, as one thing that the supervisors were unanimous about is the need to avoid proscriptive models and frameworks, and to foster creativity and innovation in what is still an emergent field of postgraduate supervision. It is with thanks to all of the supervisors who contributed to these conversations, and their generosity in sharing their practices, that we present their advice, exemplars and case studies.