Challenging the myths about flexible work in the ADF

In May 2011, the Minister for Defence requested a review into the treatment of women in the ADF following allegations of inappropriate conduct at the Australian Defence Force Academy. The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) initiated the review under the leadership of the Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Elizabeth Broderick, who challenged the ADF to improve its culture and build a more inclusive environment for its members. The need for flexible work arrangements (FWAs) emerged as a central issue in the review, not least as a mechanism for improving the recruitment and retention of women in the ADF. The review, and its subsequent audit report, concluded that flexibility would strengthen the ADF but that there were cultural and structural obstacles. This article addresses the uptake of formal and informal FWAs in the ADF. The study is part of an Australian Research Council funded project, led by Queensland University of Technology, which addresses how the timing, location and tasks of work are negotiated in exchanges between managers and employees.

Reducing grant application numbers : the shame stick or prize carrot?

Researchers spend an average of 38 working days preparing an NHMRC Project Grant proposal, but with success rates of just 15% then over 500 years of researcher went into failed applications in 2014. This time would likely have been better spent on actual research. Many applications are non-competitive and could possibly be culled early, saving time for both researchers and funding agencies. Our analysis of the major health and medical scheme in Australia estimated that 61% of applications were never likely to be funded...

Grant application: QUT Learning and Teaching scheme 2012 Cracking the Code - A checklist to complement CRAs for first year Justice students.

Widening participation brings with it increasing diversity, increased variation in the level of academic preparedness (Clarke, 2011; Nelson, Clarke, & Kift 2010). Cultural capital coupled with negotiating the academic culture creates an environment based on many assumptions about academic writing and university culture. Variations in staff and student expectations relating to the teaching and learning experience is captured in a range of national and institutional data (AUSSE, CEQ, LEX). Nationally, AUSSE data (2009) indicates that communication, writing, speaking and analytic skills, staff expectations are quite a bit higher than students. The research team noted a recognisable shift in the changing cohort of students and their understanding and engagement with feedback and CRAs, as well as variations in teaching staff and student expectations. The current reality of tutor and student roles is that: - Students self select when/how they access lectures and tutorials. - Shorter tutorial times result in reduced opportunity to develop rapport with students. - CRAs are not always used consistently by staff (different marking styles and levels of feedback). - Marking is not always undertaken by the student’s tutor/lecturer. - Student support services might be recommended to students once a poor grade has been given. Students can perceive this as remedial and a further sense of failure. - CRA sheet has a mark /grade attached to it. Stigma attached to low mark. Hard to focus on the CRA feedback with a poor mark etched next to it. - Limited opportunities for sessionals to access professional development to assist with engaging students and feedback. - FYE resources exist, however academic time is a factor in exploring and embedding these resources. Feedback is another area with differing expectations and understandings. Sadler (2009) contends that students are not equipped to decode the statements properly. For students to be able to apply feedback, they need to understand the meaning of the feedback statement. They also need to identify, the particular aspects of their work that need attention. The proposed Checklist/guide would be one page and submitted with each assessment piece thereby providing an interface to engage students and tutors in managing first year understandings and expectations around CRAs, feedback, and academic practice.

Collaborative writing to enhance cross-cultural understanding within the academy

This paper describes the design and implementation of a research writing workshop for postgraduate students. The workshop was developed to respond to two key issues currently on the agenda in Australia’s universities: a push to embed Indigenous perspectives into the curriculum, and a desire to develop creative works as quality research outputs. The workshop was carefully designed to provide opportunities for participants to practise and improve their writing; develop transferable writing skills; develop a culturally safe environment where Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians could work together; provide a place to practise collaborative writing and collaborative facilitating; and provide an opportunity to develop a publication-ready, creative writing piece that was co-developed by participants. In this paper, the authors provide an overview of the literature relevant to Indigenizing a workshop curriculum and reflect on the genre of Indigenous writing in Australia. They also discuss the literature relevant to their collaboration as both writers and facilitators. They conclude that the workshop processes contributed to building a relationship of collaboration and trust between the facilitators and participants, and that these processes directly contributed to the successful workshop outcomes.

The application of learning analytics to improve learning: Questions from the academy

Since 2007, close collaboration between the Learning and Teaching Unit’s Academic Quality and Standards team and the Department of Reporting and Analysis’ Business Objects team resulted in a generational approach to reporting where QUT established a place of trust. This place of trust is where data owners are confident in date storage, data integrity, reported and shared. While the role of the Department of Reporting and Analysis focused on the data warehouse, data security and publication of reports, the Academic Quality and Standards team focused on the application of learning analytics to solve academic research questions and improve student learning. Addressing questions such as: • Are all students who leave course ABC academically challenged? • Do the students who leave course XYZ stay within the faculty, university or leave? • When students withdraw from a unit do they stay enrolled on full or part load or leave? • If students enter through a particular pathway, what is their experience in comparison to other pathways? • With five years historic reporting, can a two-year predictive forecast provide any insight? In answering these questions, the Academic Quality and Standards team then developed prototype data visualisation through curriculum conversations with academic staff. Where these enquiries were applicable more broadly this information would be brought into the standardised reporting for the benefit of the whole institution. At QUT an annual report to the executive committees allows all stakeholders to record the performance and outcomes of all courses in a snapshot in time or use this live report at any point during the year. This approach to learning analytics was awarded the Awarded 2014 ATEM/Campus Review Best Practice Awards in Tertiary Education Management for The Unipromo Award for Excellence in Information Technology Management.