The five myths of academic standards

This script provided the basis for a short DVD produced in 2010. The script and DVD were products of research into the introduction of 'minimum threshold' academic standards to Australian Universities. Learning and teaching academic standards are publicly defensible statements about academic standards in all disciplines, intended to establish 'baseline expectations' for undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. The script was developed using an 'anti-model' approach to character and narrative. This produced a set of deliberately skewed perspectives on the standards initiative, which are intended stimulate discussion and debate on the topic. The DVD has been shown to a range of stakeholder audiences in a variety of academic forums.

The emergence of JD in the Australian Legal Education marketplace and its impact on academic standards

Over the last decade there has been an expansion in the number of Juris Doctor (JD) courses in the Australian legal education marketplace. Across the board it is graduate-entry, but it is currently offered in undergraduate, postgraduate and ‘hybrid’ forms. In this article we will discuss recent research conducted as part of an Australian Learning and Teaching Council grant. This project included an exploration of whether JD courses in Australia were applying different and higher level academic standards to those operating in Bachelor of Laws degrees. Our research findings reveal justification for concerns about the academic standards of some JD courses, particularly where masters level students were being taught alongside their undergraduate counterparts. They also provide some insights into perceptions in the marketplace of JD graduates. Finally, we will discuss the future viability of such courses in light of recent revisions to the Australian Qualifications Framework.

Australian Learning and Teaching Council, Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Architecture

The development of the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Architecture (the Statement) centred on requirements for the Master of Architecture and proceeded alongside similar developments in the building and construction discipline under the guidance and support of the Australian Deans of Built Environment and Design (ADBED). Through their representation of Australian architecture programs, ADBED have provided high-level leadership for the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project in Architecture (LTAS Architecture). The threshold learning outcomes (TLOs), the description of the nature and extent of the discipline, and accompanying notes were developed through wide consultation with the discipline and profession nationally. They have been considered and debated by ADBED on a number of occasions and have, in their fi nal form, been strongly endorsed by the Deans. ADBED formed the core of the Architecture Reference Group (chaired by an ADBED member) that drew together representatives of every peak organisation for the profession and discipline in Australia. The views of the architectural education community and profession have been provided both through individual submissions and the voices of a number of peak bodies. Over two hundred individuals from the practising profession, the academic workforce and the student cohort have worked together to build consensus about the capabilities expected of a graduate of an Australian Master of Architecture degree. It was critical from the outset that the Statement should embrace the wisdom of the greater ‘tribe’, should ensure that graduates of the Australian Master of Architecture were eligible for professional registration and, at the same time, should allow for scope and diversity in the shape of Australian architectural education. A consultation strategy adopted by the Discipline Scholar involved meetings and workshops in Perth, Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra and Brisbane. Stakeholders from all jurisdictions and most universities participated in the early phases of consultation through a series of workshops that concluded late in October 2010. The Draft Architecture Standards Statement was formed from these early meetings and consultation in respect of that document continued through early 2011. This publication represents the outcomes of work to establish an agreed standards statement for the Master of Architecture. Significant further work remains to ensure the alignment of professional accreditation and recognition procedures with emerging regulatory frameworks cascading from the establishment of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). The Australian architecture community hopes that mechanisms can be found to integrate TEQSA’s quality assurance purpose with well-established and understood systems of professional accreditation to ensure the good standing of Australian architectural education into the future. The work to build renewed and integrated quality assurance processes and to foster the interests of this project will continue, for at least the next eighteen months, under the auspices of Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC)-funded Architecture Discipline Network (ADN), led by ADBED and Queensland University of Technology. The Discipline Scholar gratefully acknowledges the generous contributions given by those in stakeholder communities to the formulation of the Statement. Professional and academic colleagues have travelled and gathered to shape the Standards Statement. Debate has been vigorous and spirited and the Statement is rich with the purpose, critical thinking and good judgement of the Australian architectural education community. The commitments made to the processes that have produced this Statement reflect a deep and abiding interest by the constituency in architectural education. This commitment bodes well for the vibrancy and productivity of the emergent Architecture Discipline Network (ADN). Endorsement, in writing, was received from the Australian Institute of Architects National Education Committee (AIA NEC): The National Education Committee (NEC) of the Australian Institute of Architects thank you for your work thus far in developing the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards for Architecture In particular, we acknowledge your close consultation with the NEC on the project along with a comprehensive cross-section of the professional and academic communities in architecture. The TLOs with the nuanced levels of capacities – to identify, develop, explain, demonstrate etc – are described at an appropriate level to be understood as minimum expectations for a Master of Architecture graduate. The Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA) has noted: There is a clear correlation between the current processes for accreditation and what may be the procedures in the future following the current review. The requirement of the outcomes as outlined in the draft paper to demonstrate capability is an appropriate way of expressing the measure of whether the learning outcomes have been achieved. The measure of capability as described in the outcome statements is enhanced with explanatory descriptions in the accompanying notes.

Attribution of words versus attribution of responsibilities : Academic plagiarism and university practice

This paper examines a case of academic plagiarism and the subsequent treatment of the issues across several academic institutions. It calls for academic leaders in universities to act on what constitutes a serious breach of standards, engendered in part by broader institutional norms and values promoting the need for publications in a ‘publish or perish’ environment. While universities often promote high-sounding ideals and would generally wish to be seen to uphold high academic standards, it is argued that silence and complicity surround the way in which instances of plagiarism in academic publications are often dealt with. Actions (and inaction) by academic leaders in universities in dealing with cases of academic plagiarism speak volumes in terms of the values academic institutions profess, and those they actually uphold. The paper prompts readers to consider the need for a more consistent and proactive stance on the part of their own institutions to exercise ethical leadership in identifying and addressing academic plagiarism when it occurs.

Processing load and the use of concrete representations and strategies for solving linear equations

This paper is a report of students' responses to instruction which was based on the use of concrete representations to solve linear equations. The sample consisted of 21 Grade 8 students from a middle-class suburban state secondary school with a reputation for high academic standards and innovative mathematics teaching. The students were interviewed before and after instruction. Interviews and classroom interactions were observed and videotaped. A qualitative analysis of the responses revealed that students did not use the materials in solving problems. The increased processing load caused by concrete representations is hypothesised as a reason.

Experiencing higher degree research supervision as teaching

This article describes research higher degree supervisors’ experiences of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. While research education is considered central to the HDR experience, comparatively little is known to date of the pedagogical lenses adopted by supervisors as they go about their supervision. We worked with 35 supervisors engaged in discipline-specific and interdisciplinary research across architectural design, science, engineering, computer science, information systems and librarianship. Several of these supervisors conducted projects which interfaced with the social sciences and humanities. The pedagogies, constructed through the discussions and phenomenographic analysis, offer a picture of supervisors’ collective awareness of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. Supervision as a teaching and learning practice was experienced as: Promoting the supervisor’s development, Imparting academic expertise, Upholding academic standards, Promoting learning to research, Drawing upon student expertise, Enabling student development, Venturing into unexplored territory, Forming productive communities, and Contributing to society.

Toward a shared understanding of competency in programming : an invitation to the BABELnot Project

The ICT degrees in most Australian universities have a sequence of up to three programming subjects, or units. BABELnot is an ALTC-funded project that will document the academic standards associated with those three subjects in the six participating universities and, if possible, at other universities. This will necessitate the development of a rich framework for describing the learning goals associated with programming. It will also be necessary to benchmark exam questions that are mapped onto this framework. As part of the project, workshops are planned for ACE 2012, ICER 2012 and ACE 2013, to elicit feedback from the broader Australasian computing education community, and to disseminate the project’s findings. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the project to that broader Australasian computing education community and to invite their active participation.

Managing distraction and attention in diverse cohorts : 21st century challenges to law student engagement

It is imperative that we consider the use of current and emerging technologies in terms of the nature of our learners, the physical environment of the lecture theatre, and how technology may help to support appropriate pedagogies that facilitate the capturing of student attention in active engaging learning experiences. It is argued that a re-evaluation of pedagogy is required to address the tech-savy traits of the 21st century learner and the extent to which their mobile devices are capable of not only distracting them from learning but also enhancing face-to-face learning experiences.

The Chemistry Discipline Network: One Year On

The Chemistry Discipline Network was funded in mid-2011, with the aim of improving communication between chemistry academics in Australia. In our first year of operation, we have grown to over 100 members, established a web presence, and produced substantial mapping reports on chemistry teaching in Australia. We are now working on the definition of standards for a chemistry degree based on the Threshold Learning Outcomes published by the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project.

Faculty mentoring, evidence-based assessment, and student learning : an Australian exploration of American initiatives

There have been many improvements in Australian engineering education since the 1990s. However, given the recent drive for assuring the achievement of identified academic standards, more progress needs to be made, particularly in the area of evidence-based assessment. This paper reports on initiatives gathered from the literature and engineering academics in the USA, through an Australian National Teaching Fellowship program. The program aims to establish a process to help academics in designing and implementing evidence-based assessments that meet the needs of not only students and the staff that teach them, but also industry as well as accreditation bodies. The paper also examines the kinds and levels of support necessary for engineering academics, especially early career ones, to help meet the expectations of the current drive for assured quality and standards of both research and teaching. Academics are experiencing competing demands on their time and energy with very high expectations in research performance and increased teaching responsibilities, although many are researchers who have not had much pedagogic training. Based on the literature and investigation of relevant initiatives in the USA, we conducted interviews with several identified experts and change agents who have wrought effective academic cultural change within their institutions and beyond. These reveal that assuring the standards and quality of student learning outcomes through evidence-based assessments cannot be appropriately addressed without also addressing the issue of pedagogic training for academic staff. To be sustainable, such training needs to be complemented by a culture of on-going mentoring support from senior academics, formalised through the university administration, so that mentors are afforded resources, time, and appropriate recognition.

A model for enhancing assessment and teaching practice at the coalface : Insights from a Fellow-In-Residence engagement program

Australian universities are currently engaging with new governmental policies and regulations that require them to demonstrate enhanced quality and accountability in teaching and research. The development of national academic standards for learning outcomes in higher education is one such instance of this drive for excellence. These discipline-specific standards articulate the minimum, or Threshold Learning Outcomes, to be addressed by higher education institutions so that graduating students can demonstrate their achievement to their institutions, accreditation agencies, and industry recruiters. This impacts not only on the design of Engineering courses (with particular emphasis on pedagogy and assessment), but also on the preparation of academics to engage with these standards and implement them in their day-to-day teaching practice on a micro level. This imperative for enhanced quality and accountability in teaching is also significant at a meso level, for according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, about 25 per cent of teachers in Australian universities are aged 55 and above and more than 54 per cent are aged 45 and above (ABS, 2006). A number of institutions have undertaken recruitment drives to regenerate and enrich their academic workforce by appointing capacity-building research professors and increasing the numbers of early- and mid-career academics. This nationally driven agenda for quality and accountability in teaching permeates also the micro level of engineering education, since the demand for enhanced academic standards and learning outcomes requires both a strong advocacy for a shift to an authentic, collaborative, outcomes-focused education and the mechanisms to support academics in transforming their professional thinking and practice. Outcomes-focused education means giving greater attention to the ways in which the curriculum design, pedagogy, assessment approaches and teaching activities can most effectively make a positive, verifiable difference to students’ learning. Such education is authentic when it is couched firmly in the realities of learning environments, student and academic staff characteristics, and trustworthy educational research. That education will be richer and more efficient when staff works collaboratively, contributing their knowledge, experience and skills to achieve learning outcomes based on agreed objectives. We know that the school or departmental levels of universities are the most effective loci of changes in approaches to teaching and learning practices in higher education (Knight & Trowler, 2000). Heads of Schools are being increasingly entrusted with more responsibilities - in addition to setting strategic directions and managing the operational and sometimes financial aspects of their school, they are also expected to lead the development and delivery of the teaching, research and other academic activities. Guiding and mentoring individuals and groups of academics is one critical aspect of the Head of School’s role. Yet they do not always have the resources or support to help them mentor staff, especially the more junior academics. In summary, the international trend in undergraduate engineering course accreditation towards the demonstration of attainment of graduate attributes poses new challenges in addressing academic staff development needs and the assessment of learning. This paper will give some insights into the conceptual design, implementation and empirical effectiveness to date, of a Fellow-In-Residence Engagement (FIRE) program. The program is proposed as a model for achieving better engagement of academics with contemporary issues and effectively enhancing their teaching and assessment practices. It will also report on the program’s collaborative approach to working with Heads of Schools to better support academics, especially early-career ones, by utilizing formal and informal mentoring. Further, the paper will discuss possible factors that may assist the achievement of the intended outcomes of such a model, and will examine its contributions to engendering an outcomes-focussed thinking in engineering education.

Outcomes of the Chemistry Discipline Network Mapping Exercises: Are the Threshold Learning Outcomes met?

The Chemistry Discipline Network has recently completed two distinct mapping exercises. The first is a snapshot of chemistry taught at 12 institutions around Australia in 2011. There were many similarities but also important differences in the content taught and assessed at different institutions. There were also significant differences in delivery, particularly laboratory contact hours, as well as forms and weightings of assessment. The second mapping exercise mapped the chemistry degrees at three institutions to the Threshold Learning Outcomes for chemistry. Importantly, some of the TLOs were addressed by multiple units at all institutions, while others were not met, or were met at an introductory level only. The exercise also exposed some challenges in using the TLOs as currently written.

Creative entrepreneurship education for graduate employability in the creative arts

The higher education sector in Australia is under increasing pressure to prove quality and efficacy of education provision, including graduate outcomes. One of the central tasks of higher education has become to prepare nascent professionals as far as possible for initial employment and future working lives beyond this (Boden & Nedeva, 2010). Tertiary educators in the creative arts face significant and distinctive challenges in demonstrating graduate employability, and creative graduates consistently have the poorest outcomes of any subject grouping. In part, this is because the national graduate destinations survey (Graduate Careers Council of Australia, 2012) does not cater to the distinctive ‘portfolio’ nature of creative careers, or take account of the fact that creative careers can take concerted effort over several years to establish (e.g., McCowan & Wyganowska, 2010). However, it is worth asking whether we as tertiary arts educators are doing enough to prepare creative arts students for the world of work, particularly given that the majority of them will be self-employed to some degree (Bureau of Labour Statistics, 2011, Throsby & Zednik, 2010), and will be challenged to build their own careers without recourse to the support of HR departments or intra-firm promotion schemes. It has been demonstrated empirically that career management and creative enterprise skills are among the most important graduate capabilities in determining early creative career success (Bridgstock, 2011), although these skills do not appear in the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards for the Creative and Performing Arts (2010). This paper explores the nature and development of enterprise capabilities for creative arts students (as distinct from students of the business school), examines best practice in the field internationally, and proposes a theoretically-driven creative arts-specific enterprise curriculum model which commences in first year, for demonstrable impact on student enterprise behaviours (such as grant seeking, professional networking and intention to start an enterprise) and employability.

Implementing the self-management threshold learning outcome for law : some intentional design strategies from the current curriculum toolbox

There is a growing awareness of the high levels of psychological distress being experienced by law students and the practising profession in Australia. In this context, a Threshold Learning Outcome (TLO) on self-management has been included in the six TLOs recently articulated as minimum learning outcomes for all Australian graduates of the Bachelor of Laws degree (LLB). The TLOs were developed during 2010 as part of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council’s (ALTC’s) project funded by the Australian Government to articulate ‘Learning and Teaching Academic Standards’. The TLOs are the result of a comprehensive national consultation process led by the ALTC’s Discipline Scholars: Law, Professors Sally Kift and Mark Israel.1 The TLOs have been endorsed by the Council of Australian Law Deans (CALD) and have received broad support from members of the judiciary and practising profession, representative bodies of the legal profession, law students and recent graduates, Legal Services Commissioners and the Law Admissions Consultative Committee. At the time of writing, TLOs for the Juris Doctor (JD) are also being developed, utilising the TLOs articulated for the LLB as their starting point but restating the JD requirements as the higher order outcomes expected of graduates of a ‘Masters Degree (Extended)’, this being the award level designation for the JD now set out in the new Australian Qualifications Framework.2 As Australian law schools begin embedding the learning, teaching and assessment of the TLOs in their curricula, and seek to assure graduates’ achievement of them, guidance on the implementation of the self-management TLO is salient and timely.