Teaching children who have a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder

Best practice dictates that the Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) diagnostic process is informed by experienced professionals from at least two disciplines, for example psychology or speech pathology, with the diagnosis ultimately provided by a specialist medical practitioner e.g. child psychiatrist, neurologist or paediatrician. Irrespective of a child’s age, diagnosis relies upon information about their early development. Current information and observations on a child’s behaviour, communication and socialisation are considered by the specialist medical practitioner against the signs and symptoms detailed in one of several diagnostic systems. Two recently used classification systems in Australia have been the fourth edition of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) published by the American Psychiatric Association (1994) and the tenth edition of the International Classification of Disease (ICD-10), published by the World Health Organisation (2003).

Learning through writing: Reconceptualising the research supervision process

This paper seeks to re-conceptualize the research supervision relationship. The literature has tended to view doctoral study in four ways: (i) as an exercise in self-management; (ii) as a research experience; (iii) as training for research, or; (iv) as an instance of student-centred learning. Although each of these approaches has their merits, they also suffer from conceptual weaknesses. This paper seeks to harness the merits — and minimize the disadvantages — by re-conceptualizing doctoral research as a ‘writing journey’. The paper utilizes the insights of new rhetoric in linguistic theory to defend a writing-centered conception of supervised research and offers some practical strategies on how it might be put into effect.

Using children's picture books and process drama to develop students' critical literacy responses

This workshop introduces a range of process drama activities to develop students' critical literacy responses. Whilst children's picture books and process drama strategies have not traditionally been seen as sophisticated resources and strategies for developing students' critical literacy responses, this workshop shows teaching strategies that can be used in language instruction in primary classrooms with diverse student groups. The teaching activities include ‘attribute lists’, ‘sculptures’ and ‘freeze frames’.

Why the Constraints-Led Approach is not teaching games for understanding: A clarification

Background There is some apparent confusion regarding similarities and differences between two popular physical education (PE) pedagogical frameworks, that is, the Constraints-Led Approach (CLA) and Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU). Purpose Our aim in this commentary is to detail important theoretical and pedagogical concepts that distinguish these approaches, as well as to recognise where commonalities exist. Findings In particular, we note that TGfU had its roots in the 1960s in the absence of a substantial theoretical framework, although several attempts to retrospectively scaffold theories around TGfU have subsequently emerged in the literature. TGfU is a learner-centred approach to PE in which teachers are encouraged to design modified games to develop the learner's understanding of tactical concepts. In contrast, the CLA has arisen more recently from the umbrella of Nonlinear Pedagogy (NLP), emerging from the empirically rich theoretical framework of ecological dynamics. The CLA adopts a ‘learner–environment’ scale of analysis in which practitioners are encouraged to identify and modify interacting constraints (of task, environment and learner) to facilitate the coupling of each learner's perceptual and action systems during learning. The CLA is a broader framework which has been adapted for the design of (re)learning environments in PE, sport and movement therapy. Other key distinctions between the approaches include: the overall goals; the way in which the learner and the learning process are modelled; the use of questioning as a pedagogical tool; the focus on individual differences vs. generic concepts; and how progressions and skill interjections are planned and implemented. Conclusions Despite such distinctions, the two approaches are somewhat harmonious and key similarities include: their holistic perspective of the learner; the proposed role of the teacher and the design characteristics of learning tasks in each. Both TGfU and the CLA have a powerful central focus on the nature of learning activities undertaken by each individual learner. This clarification of TGFU and the CLA is intended to act as a catalyst for more empirical work into the complementarity of these juxtaposed pedagogical approaches to learning design.

Teaching Entrepreneurship to Postgraduates

The motivation for this work is to provide a distinct sister volume to Teaching Entrepreneurship to Undergraduates. The first volume sought to promote a learner-centred approach to thinking about how to teach entrepreneurship to undergraduates. This volume seeks to define the difference in thinking between teaching entrepreneurship to postgraduates as opposed to undergraduates. Therefore, a common structure is retained across both volumes, with attention given to both subtle and major differences between the motivation and process of learning related to entrepreneurship education for postgraduates and undergraduates. It is hoped that this sister volume will be as distinctive and innovative in terms of its constant focus on challenging issues, possible solutions to those challenges (based both the author’s practice and that of other educators situated in various global contexts), and probing questions to prompt reflection of your own teaching practice.

The Art of Studio Teaching

This project began in 2013, with the award of an internal QUT Teaching and Learning grant. The task we wished to undertake was to document and better understand the role of studio teaching practice in the Creative Industries Faculty. While it was well understood that the Faculty had long used studio pedagogies as a key part of its teaching approach, organizational and other changes made it productive and timely to consider how the various study areas within the Faculty were approaching studio teaching. Chief among these changes were innovations in the use of technology in teaching, and at an organizational level the merging of what were once two schools within different faculties into a newly-structured Creative Industries Faculty. The new faculty consists of two schools, Media, Entertainment and Creative Art (MECA) and Design. We hoped to discover more about how studio techniques were developing alongside an ever-increasing number of options for content delivery, assessment, and interaction with students. And naturally we wanted to understand such developments across the broad range of nineteen study areas now part of the Creative Industries Faculty. This e-book represents the first part of our project, which in the main consisted in observing the teaching practices used in eight units across the Faculty, and then interviews with the unit coordinators involved. In choosing units, we opted for a broad opening definition of ‘studio’ to include not only traditional studios but also workshops and tutorials in which we could identify a component of studio teaching as enumerated by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council’s Studio Teaching Project: • A culture, a creative community created by a group of students and studio teachers working together for periods of time • A mode of teaching and learning where students and studio teachers interact in a creative and reflective process • A program of projects and activities where content is structured to enable ‘learning in action’ • A physical space or constructed environment in which the teaching and learning can take place (Source: http://www.studioteaching.org/?page=what_is_studio) The units we chose to observe, and which we hoped would represent something of the diversity of our study areas, were: • Dance Project 1 • Furniture Studies • Wearable Architecture • Fashion Design 4 • Industrial Design 6 • Advanced Writing Practice 3 • Introduction to Creative Writing • Studio Art Practice 2 Over the course of two semesters in 2013, we attended classes, presentations, and studio time in these units, and then conducted interviews that we felt would give further insight into both individual and discipline-specific approaches to studio pedagogies. We asked the same questions in each of the interviews: • Could you describe the main focus and aims of your unit? • How do you use studio time to achieve those aims? • Can you give us an example of the kind of activities you use in your studio teaching? • What does/do these example(s) achieve in terms of learning outcomes? • What, if any, is the role of technology in your studio teaching practice? • What do you consider distinctive about your approach to studio teaching, or the approach taken in your discipline area? The unit coordinators’ responses to these questions form some of the most interesting and valuable material in this book, and point to both consistencies in approach and teaching philosophies, as well as areas of difference. We believe that both can help to raise our critical awareness of studio teaching, and provide points of comparison for the future development of studio pedagogy in the Creative Industries. In each of the following pages, the interviews are placed alongside written descriptions of the units, their aims and outcomes, assessment models, and where possible photographs and video footage, as well as additional resources that may be useful to others engaged in studio teaching.