Going live : building academic capacity in blended learning using web-conferencing technologies

This paper reports on a current initiative at Queensland University of Technology to provide timely, flexible and sustainable training and support to academic staff in blended learning and associated techno-pedagogies via a web-conferencing classroom and collaboration tool, Elluminate Live!. This technology was first introduced to QUT in 2008 as part of the university‘s ongoing commitment to meeting the learning needs of diverse student cohorts. The centralised Learning Design team, in collaboration with the university‘s department of eLearning Services, was given the task of providing training and support to academic staff in the effective use of the technology for teaching and learning, as part of the team‘s ongoing brief to support and enhance the provision of blended learning throughout the university. The resulting program, ―Learning Design Live‖ (LDL) is informed by Rogers‘ theory of innovation and diffusion (2003) and structured according to Wilson‘s framework for faculty development (2007). This paper discusses the program‘s design and structure, considers the program‘s impact on academic capacity in blended learning within the institution, and reflects on future directions for the program and emerging insights into blended learning and participant engagement for both staff and students.

LeaD-In : a cultural change model for peer review of teaching in higher education

Peer review of teaching is recognized increasingly as one strategy for academic development even though historically peer review of teaching is often unsupported by policy, action and culture in many Australian universities. Higher education leaders report that academics generally do not engage with peer review of teaching in a systematic or constructive manner, and this paper advances and analyses a conceptual model to highlight conditions and strategies necessary for the implementation of sustainable peer review in higher education institutions. The model highlights leadership, development and implementation, which are critical to the success and formation of a culture of peer review of teaching. The work arises from collaborative research funded by the Office for Learning and Teaching to foster and advance a culture of peer review of teaching across several universities in Australia.

Navigating pathways for academic staff development : implications for institutions and academic ranks

BACKGROUND As engineering schools adopt outcomes - focused learning approaches in response to government expectations and industry requirements of graduates capable of learning and applying knowledge in different contexts, university academics must be capable of developing and delivering programs that meet these requirements. Those academics are increasingly facing challenges in progressing their research and also acquiring different skill sets to meet the learning and teaching requirements. PURPOSE The goal of this study was to identify the types of development and support structures in place for academic staff, especially early career ones, and examine how the type of institution and the rank or role of the staff member affects these structures. DESIGN/METHOD We conducted semi - structured interviews with 21 individuals in a range of positions pertaining to teaching and learning in engineering education. Open coding was used to identify main themes from the guiding questions raised in the interviews and refined to address themes relevant to the development of institutional staff . The interview data was then analysed based on the type of institution and the rank/ role of the participant. RESULTS While development programs that focus on improving teaching and learning are available, the approach on using these types of programs differed based on staff perspective. Fewer academics, regardless of rank/role, had knowledge of support structures related to other areas of scholarship, e.g. disciplinary research, educational research, learning the institutional culture. The type of institution also impacted how they weighted and encouraged multiple forms of scholarship. We found that academic staff holding higher ranking positions, e.g. dean or associate dean, were not only concerned with the success of their respective programs, but also in how to promote other academic staff participation throughout the process. CONCLUSIONS The findings from this stud y extend the premise that developing effective academic staff ultimately leads to more effective institutions and successful graduates and accomplishing this requires staff buy - in at multiple stages of instructional and program development. Staff and administration developing approaches for educational innovation together (Besterfield - Sacre et al., 2014) and getting buy - in from all academic staff to invest in engineering education development will ultimately lead to more successful engineering graduates.