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.

Standards that we can 'own' : Threshold Learning Outcomes for Journalism, Public Relations, and Media & Communication Studies

This paper outlines the progress by the JoMeC (Journalism, Media & Communication) Network in developing TLO (Threshold Learning Outcome) statements for Bachelor-level university programs in the disciplines of Journalism, Public Relations and Media & Communications Studies. The paper presents the finalised TLO statement for Journalism, and outlines moves to engage discipline-based groups to further develop preliminary TLOs for Public Relations and Media & Communication Studies. The JoMeC Network was formed in 2011, in response to requirements that from 2014 all degrees and qualifications at Australian universities would be able to demonstrate that they comply with the threshold learning standards set by the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF). The AQF’s threshold standards define the minimum types and levels of knowledge, skills and capabilities that a student must demonstrate in order to graduate. The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) will use the AQF’s threshold standards as a key tool in recording and assessing the performance of higher educational institutions, and determining whether they should be registered as Australian Higher Education Providers under the Higher Education Standards Framework. The Office of Learning & Teaching (OLT) places the onus on discipline communities to collaborate in order to develop and ‘own’ the threshold learning standards that can be considered the minimum learning outcomes of university-level programs in that field. With the support of an OLT Grant, the JoMeC Network’s prime goal has been to develop three sets of discipline-specific TLOs – one each for the Journalism, Public Relations, and Media & Communications Studies disciplines. This paper describes the processes of research, consultation, drafting and ongoing revision of the TLO for Journalism. It outlines the processes that the JoMeC Network has taken in developing a preliminary TLO draft to initiate discussion of Public Relations and Media & Communication Studies. The JoMeC Network plans to hand management of further development of these TLOs to scholars within the discipline who will engage with academics and other stakeholders to develop statements that the respective disciplines can embrace and ‘own’.

Implementing the self-management threshold learning outcome in Australian legal curricula : insights from self-determination theory

In 2010, six Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) for law were developed by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council's Discipline Scholars: Law. The final of these outcomes, TLO 6, concerns self-management. This thesis examines strategies for implementing self-management in Australian legal education by first contextualising the development of TLO 6 in light of other relevant national and international developments in higher education, and secondly, analysing this learning outcome through the lens of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), an influential branch of educational psychology. It is argued that the central concept of autonomous self-regulation in SDT provides insights into factors that are relevant to law students’ capacities for long-term self-management, which is reinforced by analysis of the literature on law students’ distress. Accordingly, curriculum design that supports students’ autonomy may simultaneously promote students’ self-management capacities. The discussion of theoretical and practical perspectives on autonomy supportive curriculum design in this thesis thus illuminates potential pedagogical approaches for the implementation of TLO 6 in Australian legal curricula.

The Threshold Learning Outcome on self-management for the Bachelor of Laws degree : a proposed focus for teaching strategies in the first year law curriculum

The Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) Discipline Scholars for Law, Professors Sally Kift and Mark Israel, articulated six Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) for the Bachelor of Laws degree as part of the ALTC’s 2010 project on Learning and Teaching Academic Standards. One of these TLOs promotes the learning, teaching and assessment of self-management skills in Australian law schools. This paper explores the concept of self-management and how it can be relevantly applied in the first year of legal education. Recent literature from the United States (US) and Australia provides insights into the types of issues facing law students, as well as potential antidotes to these problems. Based on these findings, I argue that designing a pedagogical framework for the first year law curriculum that promotes students’ connection with their intrinsic interests, values, motivations and purposes will facilitate student success in terms of their personal well-being, ethical dispositions and academic engagement.

Incremental and inevitable: Contextualising the Threshold Learning Outcomes for law

This article situates the development of the Threshold Learning Outcomes for law in relation to broader national and international trends in legal education and higher education regulation. It also addresses the significance of recent changes to the Australian higher education regulatory landscape catalysed by the current Government's commitment to reducing regulation and red tape for the sector.

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.

The New Lawyer

This text is designed to implement the Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) for law in the first year, and to incorporate Sally Kift’s First Year Curriculum principles: http://tls.vu.edu.au/portal/site/trans/Resources/KiftTransitonPedagogySixPrinciples_16Nov09.pdf This is a learning-centered text book intentionally designed for first year students and written by experts in legal education and the first year experience. It is written in a tone and style that engages and communicates effectively with first year law students, without compromising its rigour. It provides students with opportunities to contextualise and make sense of their learning by connecting that learning with what they already know, and with current contemporary issues and affairs. This work is designed to ease students through the transition from a diverse variety of backgrounds (such as high school, work or other disciplines) to the first year of law. It provides practical guidance about adjusting to law school and to university. Students are asked to regularly reflect upon why they are studying law. The book also prepares law students for success in their latter year studies in law by ensuring that they are equipped with the necessary threshold concepts and foundational skills to do well: for example, research skills (particularly, online research skills), reasoning skills, written communication skills, negotiation skills, and self-management skills. A range of practical tips on studying law are provided throughout the book. The work also asks students to engage with developing an emergent sense of professional identity – including what it means to ‘think like a lawyer’. In supporting the students to engage with the concept of professional identity, the work begins a process of preparing students for transition from law school to legal practice. This is achieved by providing explanations of how the material being presented relates to the practice of law, as well as practical information relating to employability skills as a new graduate. This work has a number of learning and teaching objectives to enhance the quality of student learning in their first year of law by engaging, motivating and supporting that learning. First, the work is designed to engage first year students with their legal education and with a future sense of professional identity. It does this through its: • Dynamic writing style • Engaging format • Inclusion of contemporary issues and events • Flowcharts, checklists, mind-maps, tables and timelines • Inclusion of real-world problems and dilemmas. Second, the text motivates student learning by promoting active learning. It does this by: • Demonstrating, and asking students to practice, what they need to do – that is, the work is not simply focussed on telling students what they need to know • Including regular self-directed learning exercises throughout each chapter, such as practical exercises for the development of important foundational legal skills • Including exercises that promote student collaboration, and that require students to apply their learning to practical situations, and • Incorporating a range of interesting active thinking points and research activities. Third, the book supports student learning by encouraging reflective learning and independent learning. It does this by including: • Specific content on how to be a reflective practitioner and an independent learner • Exercises that require students to engage in independent learning, particularly in relation to legal research skill development • Exercises requiring students to reflect upon what they have learned, and encouraging students to keep a reflective learning journal • Exercises requiring students to reflect upon their own views and beliefs • Reflection on whether students have achieved the learning objectives articulated at the beginning of the chapter. The work also: • Demonstrates respect for student experiences, views, opinions and values • Acknowledges student diversity • Recognises the importance of being globally minded law students and lawyers • Supports law teachers in using the work in their classrooms through the provision of comprehensive teaching materials.

Journalism, media & communication network: Final report 2015

The JoMeC Network project had three key objectives. These were to: 1. Benchmark the pedagogical elements of journalism, media and communication (JoMeC) programs at Australian universities in order to develop a set of minimum academic standards, to be known as Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs), which would applicable to the disciplines of Journalism, Communication and/or Media Studies, and Public Relations; 2. Build a learning and teaching network of scholars across the JoMeC disciplines to support collaboration, develop leadership potential among educators, and progress shared priorities; 3. Create an online resources hub to support learning and teaching excellence and foster leadership in learning and teaching in the JoMeC disciplines. In order to benchmark the pedagogical elements of the JoMeC disciplines, the project started with a comprehensive review of the disciplinary settings of journalism, media and communication-related programs within Higher Education in Australia plus an analysis of capstone units (or subjects) offered in JoMeC-related degrees. This audit revealed a diversity of degree titles, disciplinary foci, projected career outcomes and pedagogical styles in the 36 universities that offered JoMeC-related degrees in 2012, highlighting the difficulties of classifying the JoMeC disciplines collectively or singularly. Instead of attempting to map all disciplines related to journalism, media and communication, the project team opted to create generalised TLOs for these fields, coupled with detailed TLOs for bachelor-level qualifications in three selected JoMeC disciplines: Journalism, Communication and/or Media Studies, and Public Relations. The initial review’s outcomes shaped the methodology that was used to develop the TLOs. Given the complexity of the JoMeC disciplines and the diversity of degrees across the network, the project team deployed an issue-framing process to create TLO statements. This involved several phases, including discussions with an issue-framing team (an advisory group of representatives from different disciplinary areas); research into accreditation requirements and industry-produced materials about employment expectations; evaluation of learning outcomes from universities across Australia; reviews of scholarly literature; as well as input from disciplinary leaders in a variety of forms. Draft TLOs were refined after further consultation with industry stakeholders and the academic community via email, telephone interviews, and meetings and public forums at conferences. This process was used to create a set of common TLOs for JoMeC disciplines in general and extended TLO statements for the specific disciplines of Journalism and Public Relations. A TLO statement for Communication and/or Media Studies remains in draft form. The Australian and New Zealand Communication Association (ANZCA) and Journalism Education and Research Association of Australian (JERAA) have agreed to host meetings to review, revise and further develop the TLOs. The aim is to support the JoMeC Network’s sustainability and the TLOs’ future development and use.

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.

Applying threshold learning theory to teach sustainable business practice in post-graduate engineering education

This paper presents the results of a qualitative action-research inquiry into how a highly diverse cohort of post-graduate students could develop significant capacity in sustainable development within a single unit (course), in this case a compulsory component of four built environment masters programs. The method comprised applying threshold learning theory within the technical discipline of sustainable development, to transform student understanding of sustainable business practice in the built environment. This involved identifying a number of key threshold concepts, which once learned would provide a pathway to having a transformational learning experience. Curriculum was then revised, to focus on stepping through these targeted concepts using a scaffolded, problem-based-learning approach. Challenges included a large class size of 120 students, a majority of international students, and a wide span of disciplinary backgrounds across the spectrum of built environment professionals. Five ‘key’ threshold learning concepts were identified and the renewed curriculum was piloted in Semester 2 of 2011. The paper presents details of the study and findings from a mixed-method evaluation approach through the semester. The outcomes of this study will be used to inform further review of the course in 2012, including further consideration of the threshold concepts. In future, it is anticipated that this case study will inform a framework for rapidly embedding sustainability within curriculum.

Assessing the structure of learning outcomes from counselling using the SOLO taxonomy: an exploratory study

Thirty-five clients who had received counselling completed a letter to a friend describing in as much detail as possible what they had learned from counselling. The participants' written responses were analysed and classified using the Structure of Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy. The results suggested that an expanded SOLO offers a promising and exciting way to view the outcomes of counselling within a learning framework. If the SOLO taxonomy is found to be stable in subsequent research, and clients are easily able to be classified using the taxonomy, then this approach may have implications for the process of counselling. To maximise the learning outcomes, counsellors could use strategies and techniques to enhance their clients' learning.

Implementation of an integrated, technology-based, discovery mode assessment item involving an incubation period to enhance learning outcomes for engineering maths students

In this paper we discuss our current efforts to develop and implement an exploratory, discovery mode assessment item into the total learning and assessment profile for a target group of about 100 second level engineering mathematics students. The assessment item under development is composed of 2 parts, namely, a set of "pre-lab" homework problems (which focus on relevant prior mathematical knowledge, concepts and skills), and complementary computing laboratory exercises which are undertaken within a fixed (1 hour) time frame. In particular, the computing exercises exploit the algebraic manipulation and visualisation capabilities of the symbolic algebra package MAPLE, with the aim of promoting understanding of certain mathematical concepts and skills via visual and intuitive reasoning, rather than a formal or rigorous approach. The assessment task we are developing is aimed at providing students with a significant learning experience, in addition to providing feedback on their individual knowledge and skills. To this end, a noteworthy feature of the scheme is that marks awarded for the laboratory work are primarily based on the extent to which reflective, critical thinking is demonstrated, rather than the amount of CBE-style tasks completed by the student within the allowed time. With regard to student learning outcomes, a novel and potentially critical feature of our scheme is that the assessment task is designed to be intimately linked to the overall course content, in that it aims to introduce important concepts and skills (via individual student exploration) which will be revisited somewhat later in the pedagogically more restrictive formal lecture component of the course (typically a large group plenary format). Furthermore, the time delay involved, or "incubation period", is also a deliberate design feature: it is intended to allow students the opportunity to undergo potentially important internal re-adjustments in their understanding, before being exposed to lectures on related course content which are invariably delivered in a more condensed, formal and mathematically rigorous manner. In our presentation, we will discuss in more detail our motivation and rationale for trailing such a scheme for the targeted student group. Some of the advantages and disadvantages of our approach (as we perceived them at the initial stages) will also be enumerated. In a companion paper, the theoretical framework for our approach will be more fully elaborated, and measures of student learning outcomes (as obtained from eg. student provided feedback) will be discussed.

Student perceptions of the impact of online discussion forum participation on learning outcomes

Choosing the “right” type of technology, either synchronous or asynchronous, to facilitate learning outcomes is a new challenge as the pace of emerging technologies increases and diversifies. Teachers are encouraged to design courses that require collaboration in online learning communities to facilitate the development of higher order thinking skills for life long learning. It is therefore important to gather evidence of the kinds of opportunities afforded to students and whether the students themselves endorse collaborative online tools as a legitimate method of assisting in their learning. This paper outlines the way in which one secondary school has used an online discussion forum to support students in the International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma Program in enhancing research skills and skills for lifelong learning. The paper considers whether online collaborative tools are perceived by students as a positive way to improve learning outcomes.