English language education in policy studies

Content-based instruction (CBI) is increasingly important in curriculum development for second-language acquisition (SLA), as language and non-language departments in universities are finding the integration of core-content as part of the second language curriculum to be beneficial. With this in mind, this paper describes the English program at Nanzan University’s Faculty of Policy Studies and examines the synergy presently being developed between core-content and English language instruction there. Specifically, this paper seeks to shed light on how instructors can reflect on the meaning of language instruction at higher education through an illustration of our activities.

The performance of South African English first language child speakers on a "low linguistically loaded" central auditory processing test protocol

The lack of standardized tests of central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) in South Africa (SA) led to the formation of a SA CAPD Taskforce, and the interim development of a "low linguistically loaded" CAPD test protocol using test recordings from the 'Tonal and Speech Materials for Auditory Perceptual Assessment Disc 2.0'. This study inferentially compared the performance of 16 SA English first, and 16 SA English second, language adult speakers on this test protocol, and descriptively compared their performances to previously published American normative data. Comparisons between the SA English first and second language speakers showed a poorer right ear performance (p < .05) by the second language speakers on the two-pair dichotic digits test only. Equivalent performances (p < .05) were observed on the left ear performance on the two pair dichotic digits test, and the frequency patterns test, the duration patterns test, the low-pass filtered speech test, the 45% time compressed speech test, the speech masking level difference test, and the consonant vowel consonant (CVC) binaural fusion test. Comparisons between the SA English and the American normative data showed many large differences (up to 37.1% with respect to predicted pass criteria as calculated by mean-2SD cutoffs), with the SA English speakers performing both better and worse depending on the test involved. As a result, the American normative data was not considered appropriate for immediate use as normative data in SA. Instead, the preliminary data provided in this study was recommended as interim normative data for both SA English first and second language adult speakers, until larger scale SA normative data can be obtained.

Closing the gap in curriculum development leadership

“Closing the gap in curriculum development leadership” is a Carrick-funded University of Queensland project which is designed to address two related gaps in current knowledge and in existing professional development programs for academic staff. The first gap is in our knowledge of curriculum and pedagogical issues as they arise in relation to multi-year sequences of study, such as majors in generalist degrees, or core programs in more structured degrees. While there is considerable knowledge of curriculum and pedagogy at the course or individual unit of study level (e.g. Philosophy I), there is very little properly conceptualised, empirically informed knowledge about student learning (and teaching) over, say, a three-year major sequence in a traditional Arts or Sciences subject. The Carrick-funded project aims to (begin to) fill this gap through bottom-up curriculum development projects across the range of UQ’s offerings. The second gap is in our professional development programs and, indeed, in our recognition and support for the people who are in charge of such multi-year sequences of study. The major convener or program coordinator is not as well supported, in Australian and overseas professional development programs, as the lecturer in charge of a single course (or unit of study). Nor is her work likely to be taken account of in workload calculations or for the purposes of promotion and career advancement more generally. The Carrick-funded project aims to fill this gap by developing, in consultation with crucial stakeholders, amendments to existing university policies and practices. The attached documents provide a useful introduction to the project. For more information, please contact Fred D’Agostino at f.dagostino@uq.edu.au.

A methodology for discipline-specific curriculum development

A methodology and framework for discipline-specific curriculum development in a local context is described. These activities, as part of the Thailand-Australia Science and Engineering Assistance Project, were in response to a needs analysis for curriculum assistance to a number of publicly-funded Thai universities in the engineering priority area of Materials Processing and Manufacturing. The paper outlines a strategy for the delivery of a centralised curriculum development workshop for academic staff follow-up visits and local curriculum activities with participating universities, and the presentation of technical short courses as guidance for such activity in other settings and/or discipline areas. This paper is part of a process of documentation so that others can apply the developed methodology and framework for curriculum development. While the paper is a report on curriculum activities in a particular setting, it is written in a manner that allows application of the methodology to other settings. The reader is advised that each curriculum activity needs to adopt a methodology and strategy to fit the particular circumstances being considered To assist in applying this approach elsewhere, a description of the various steps in the curriculum process, and typical responses to some of the more global issues, have been presented. Full details are available in the various TASEAP reports prepared by the authors. Specific detail has been omitted where this detail does not provide any information for generalized consumption.

The Australian Universities Teaching Committee project in 'Learning Outcomes and Curriculum Development in Psychology'

The Australian Universities Teaching Committee (AUTC) funds projects intended to improve the quality of teaching and learning in specific disciplinary areas. The project brief for 'Learning Outcomes and Curriculum Development in Psychology' for 2004/2005 was to 'produce an evaluative overview of courses ... with a focus on the specification and assessment of learning outcomes and ... identify strategic directions for universities to enhance teaching and learning'. This project was awarded to a consortium from The University of Queensland, University of Tasmania, and Southern Cross University. The starting point for this project is an analysis of the scientist-practitioner model and its role in curriculum design, a review of current challenges at a conceptual level, and consideration of the implications of recent changes to universities relating to such things as intemationalisation of programs and technological advances. The project will seek to bring together stakeholders from around the country in order to survey the widest possible range of perspectives on the project brief requirements. It is hoped also to establish mechanisms for fiiture scholarly discussion of these issues, including the establishment of an Australian Society for the Teaching of Psychology and an annual conference.