Towards globo sapiens : transforming learners in higher education

Global and local studies show that the present growth-based approach to development is unsustainable. If we are serious about surviving the 21st century we will need graduates who are not simply 'globally portable' or even 'globally competent', but also wise global citizens, Globo sapiens. This book contributes to what educators need to know, do and be in order to support transformative learning. The book is based on work with large, socially and culturally diverse, first-year engineering students at an Australian university of technology. It shows that reflective journals, with appropriate planning and support, can be one pillar of a transformative pedagogy which can encourage significant and even transformative attitude change in relation to gender, culture and the environment. It also offers evidence of improved communication skills and other tangible changes to counter common criticisms that such work is "airy-fairy" and irrelevant. The author combines communication theory with critical futures thinking to provide layered understandings of how transformative learning affected students' thinking, learning and behaviour. So the book is both a case-study and a detailed response to the personal and professional challenges that educators all over the world will face as they try to guide students in sustainable directions. It will be useful to teachers in higher education, especially those interested in internationalisation of the curriculum, transformative learning and values change for sustainable futures.

Education for the creative economy : innovation, transdisciplinarity, and networks

The question posed in this chapter is: To what extent does current education theory and practice prepare graduates for the creative economy? We first define what we mean by the term creative economy, explain why we think it is a significant point of focus, derive its key features, describe the human capital requirements of these features, and then discuss whether current education theory and practice are producing these human capital requirements. The term creative economy can be critiqued as a shibboleth, but as a high level metaphor, it nevertheless has value in directing us away from certain sorts of economic activity and toward other kinds. Much economic activity is in no way creative. If I have a monopoly on some valued resource, I do not need to be creative. Other forms of economic activity are intensely creative. If I have no valued resources, I must create something that is valued. At its simplest and yet most profound, the idea of a creative economy suggests a capacity to compete based on engaging in a gainful activity that is different from everyone else’s, rather than pursuing the same endeavor more competitively than everyone else. The ability to differentiate on novelty is key to the concept of creative economy and key to our analysis of education for this economy. Therefore, we follow Potts and Cunningham (2008, p. 18) and Potts, Cunningham, Hartley, and Ormerod (2008) in their discussion of the economic significance of the creative industries and see the creative economy not as a sector but as a set of economic processes that act on the economy as a whole to invigorate innovation based growth. We see the creative economy as suffused with all industry rather than as a sector in its own right. These economic processes are essentially concerned with the production of new ideas that ultimately become new products, service, industry sectors, or, in some cases, process or product innovations in older sectors. Therefore, our starting point is that modern economies depend on innovation, and we see the core of innovation as new knowledge of some kind. We commence with some observations about innovation.

The role of academic community in higher learning : Alternatives to a drive-thru education

The purpose of our paper is to illustrate the fundamental importance of developing academic community among first year students. We argue that a sense of academic community is of fundamental importance in combating the effects of the neo-liberal economic discourse on higher education, and that the values of higher education are incongruent with those of economic rationalism. The discursive commodification of the student, and of education itself, works against the formation of community, both within the university environment and in the wider society. We argue that, at present, the dominant discourse shaping the social practice of higher education is that of neo-liberal economics. Community values stand in opposition to the dominant discourse, and are integral to the long-term survival of a socially critical and socially responsive society. We conclude that the importance of establishing a sense of academic community during the first year of university is justified by its ultimate value to society.

Library and information science education 2.0: guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Sue Reynolds.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS educative practice in helping to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Health Librarianship Workforce and Education : Research to plan the future. Final Report.

In late 2009, Health Libraries Australia (HLA) received a small grant to undertake a national research project to determine the future requirements for health librarians in the workforce in Australia and develop a structured, modular education framework (post-graduate qualification and continuing professional development structure) to meet these requirements. The main objective was to consider the education and professional development framework that would ensure that health librarians have a clearly defined scope of practice and the specific competency based knowledge and skills that enable them to contribute to the design and delivery of high quality health services in this country. The final report presents a detailed discussion of the changing Australian healthcare environment and the resulting impact on the health library sector, as well as an overview of international trends in health libraries and the implications for Australian health librarianship education. The research methodology is outlined, followed by an analysis of the findings from the two surveys with health librarians and health library managers and the semi-structured interviews conducted with employers. The Medical Library Association (MLA) in the United States had developed a policy document detailing the competencies required by health librarians. It was found that the MLA competencies represented an accepted professional framework of skills which could be used objectively in the survey instrument to measure the areas of professional knowledge and responsibilities that were relevant in the current workplace, and to identify how these requirements might change in the next three to five years. The research results underscore the imperative for health librarians to engage in regular, relevant professional development activities that will enable them to stay abreast with the rapid contextual changes impacting on their practice. In order to be accepted as key members of the multi-disciplinary health professional team, it is strongly believed that health librarians should commit to establishing the mechanisms for specialist certification maintained through compulsory CPD in an ongoing three-year cycle of revalidation. This development would align ALIA and health librarians with other health sector professional associations which are responsible for the self regulation of entry to and continuation in their profession.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Bob Pymm.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Jake Wallis.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Lyn Hay.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Roy Crotty.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Mary Anne Kennan.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Huan Vo-Tran.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice ALTC Fellowship Report

This ALTC Teaching Fellowship aimed to establish Guiding Principles for Library and Information Science Education 2.0. The aim was achieved by (i) identifying the current and anticipated skills and knowledge required by successful library and information science (LIS) professionals in the age of web 2.0 (and beyond), (ii) establishing the current state of LIS education in Australia in supporting the development of librarian 2.0, and in doing so, identify models of best practice. The fellowship has contributed to curriculum renewal in the LIS profession. It has helped to ensure that LIS education in Australia continues to meet the changing skills and knowledge requirements of the profession it supports. It has also provided a vehicle through which LIS professionals and LIS educators may find opportunities for greater collaboration and more open communication. This will help bridge the gap between LIS theory and practice and will foster more authentic engagement between LIS education and other parts of the LIS industry in the education of the next generation of professionals. Through this fellowship the LIS discipline has become a role model for other disciplines who will be facing similar issues in the coming years. Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups exploring the current and anticipated skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in the web 2.0 world and beyond. Whilst each focus group tended to draw on specific themes of interest to that particular group of people, there was a great deal of common ground. Eight key themes emerged: technology, learning and education, research or evidence-based practice, communication, collaboration and team work, user focus, business savvy and personal traits. It was acknowledged that the need for successful LIS professionals to possess transferable skills and interpersonal attributes was not new. It was noted however that the speed with which things are changing in the web 2.0 world was having a significant impact and that this faster pace is placing a new and unexpected emphasis on the transferable skills and knowledge. It was also acknowledged that all librarians need to possess these skills, knowledge and attributes and not just the one or two role models who lead the way. The most interesting finding however was that web 2.0, library 2.0 and librarian 2.0 represented a ‘watershed’ for the LIS profession. Almost all the focus groups spoke about how they are seeing and experiencing a culture change in the profession. Librarian 2.0 requires a ‘different mindset or attitude’. The Levels of Perspective model by Daniel Kim provides one lens by which to view this finding. The focus group findings suggest that we are witnessing a re-awaking of the Australian LIS profession as it begins to move towards the higher levels of Kim’s model (ie mental models, vision). Thirty-six LIS educators participated in telephone interviews aimed at exploring the current state of LIS education in supporting the development of librarian 2.0. Skills and knowledge of LIS professionals in a web 2.0 world that were identified and discussed by the LIS educators mirrored those highlighted in the focus group discussions with LIS professionals. Similarly it was noted that librarian 2.0 needed a focus less on skills and knowledge and more on attitude. However, whilst LIS professionals felt that there was a paradigm shift within the profession. LIS educators did not speak with one voice on this matter with quite a number of the educators suggesting that this might be ‘overstating it a bit’. This study provides evidence for “disparate viewpoints” (Hallam, 2007) between LIS educators and LIS professionals that can have a significant implications for the future of not just LIS professional education specifically but for the profession generally. Library and information science education 2.0: guiding principles and models of best practice 1 Inviting the LIS academics to discuss how their teaching and learning activities support the development of librarian 2.0 was a core part of the interviews conducted. The strategies used and the challenges faced by LIS educators in developing their teaching and learning approaches to support the formation of librarian 2.0 are identified and discussed. A core part of the fellowship was the identification of best practice examples on how LIS educators were developing librarian 2.0. Twelve best practice examples were identified. Each educator was recorded discussing his or her approach to teaching and learning. Videos of these interviews are available via the Fellowship blog at .The LIS educators involved in making the videos felt uncomfortable with the term ‘best practice’. Many acknowledged that there simply seeking to do the best by their students and that there was always room for improvement. For this reason these videos are offered as examples of “great practice”. The videos are a tool for other educators to use, regardless of discipline, in developing their teaching and learning approaches to supporting web 2.0 professionals. It has been argued that the main purpose of professional education is transformation (Dall’ Alba, 2009; Dall’Alba & Barnacle, 2007). As such professional education should focus not just on skills and knowledge acquisition but also on helping students to develop ways of being the professionals in question (ie LIS professionals, teachers, lawyers, engineers).The aim of this fellowship was to establish Guidelines for Library and Information Science Education 2.0 it has however become apparent that at this point in time it is not yet possible to fulfil this aim. The fellowship has clearly identified skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in web 2.0 world (and beyond). It has also identified examples of ‘great practice’ by LIS educators as they endeavour to develop LIS professionals who will be successful in a web 20 world. The fellowship however has also shown that the LIS profession is currently undergoing significant attitudinal and conceptual change. Consequently, before a philosophy of LIS education 2.0 can be expressed, the Australian LIS profession must first explore and articulate what it means to be an LIS professional in the 21st century (ie a world of web 2.0 and beyond). In short, the LIS profession in Australia must take stock not of “what we know and can do” but on “who we are becoming” (Dall’Alba, 2009, p 34).

Reshaping Doctoral Education : International Approaches and Pedagogies

The number of doctorates being awarded around the world has almost doubled over the last ten years, propelling it from a small elite enterprise into a large and ever growing international market. Within the context of increasing numbers of doctoral students this book examines the new doctorate environment and the challenges it is starting to face. Drawing on research from around the world the individual authors contribute to a previously under-represented focus of theorising the emerging practices of doctoral education and the shape of change in this arena. Key aspects, expertly discussed by contributors from the UK, USA, Australia, New Zealand, China, South Africa, Sweden and Denmark include: -the changing nature of doctoral education -the need for systematic and principled accounts of doctoral pedagogies -the importance of disciplinary specificity -the relationship between pedagogy and knowledge generation -issues of transdisciplinarity. Reshaping Doctoral Education provides rich accounts of traditional and more innovative pedagogical practices within a range of doctoral systems in different disciplines, professional fields and geographical locations, providing the reader with a trustworthy and scholarly platform from which to design the doctoral experience. It will prove an essential resource for anyone involved in doctorate studies, whether as students, supervisors, researchers, administrators, teachers or mentors.

Pathways for developing a 'smart' workforce : does the achievement of formal workplace qualifications encourage participation in higher education?

The purpose of this paper is to investigate a public workforce education initiative in the context of State and agency policies designed to enhance employee capabilities to adapt to a volatile and changing environment. In particular, we are concerned with public employees’ experience of a higher educational pathway that resulted in their obtaining a Diploma level qualification. In addition to understanding the employees’ experience of this pathway we were interested in whether the experience contributed to their openness to the prospect of university level education. We conducted telephone interviews with a sample of participants from the program. Employees reported very positive experience of the program; in particular employees reported enhanced efficacy beliefs, a strong sense of achievement, and a feeling of recognition. This experience is explained by four main factors; (1) a program design that was well aligned with the employees learning needs, (2) strong support by organisational staff who delivered and assessed participants on capability criteria, (3) strong management support for employees’ participation, (4) an academic ceremony that provided participants with public recognition of their achievement by valued others. Participants’ motivation to participate was primarily intrinsic rather than extrinsic. Participants in the study reported that their experience in this educational pathway gave them the confidence to consider the possibility of university level education. The paper also discusses the practitioner-academic collaboration that led to the development of this paper.

Navigating in a sea of change : second set of working papers of the higher education policy project

This volume represents teh second collection of working papers and articles by participants in the Higher Education Policy Project (HEPP), a project funded by the Australian Research Council and based in the Graduate School of Education at the University of Queensland. The first volume, 'Higher Education in Transition: Working Papers of the Higher Education Policy Project (Bella, McCollow and Knight, 1993), took the broad theme of "higher education in transition" in order to introduce readers the HEPP and give them some idea of the breadth of the research being pursued by the HEPP research team itself and by the cohort of post-graduate students also associated with the project. Since then, higher education has remained in transition. Stubborn and resurgent questions continue: such as what a university ought to be, what forms of research should be supported in a mass system, and how institutional accountability can be demonstrated. In differing ways and using a variety of research perspectives and methodologies, the contributors to this volume explore these and other questions of relevance to higher education today.