Using technology to improve peer review and collaborative conversations to benchmark academic standards

In 2010 the Australian government commissioned the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) to undertake a national project to facilitate disciplinary development of threshold learning standards. The aim was to lay the foundation for all higher education providers to demonstrate to the new national higher education regulator, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), that graduates achieved or exceeded minimum academic standards. Through a yearlong consultative process, representatives of employers, professional bodies, academics and students, developed learning standards applying to any Australian higher education provider. Willey and Gardner reported using a software tool, SPARKPLUS, in calibrating academic standards amongst teaching staff in large classes. In this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of this technology to promote calibrated understandings with the national accounting learning standards. We found that integrating the software with a purposely designed activity provided significant efficiencies in calibrating understandings about learning standards, developed expertise and a better understanding of what is required to meet these standards and how best to demonstrate them. The software and supporting calibration and assessment process can be adopted by other disciplines, including engineering, seeking to provide direct evidence about performance against learning standards. © 2012 IEEE.

Accountability, quality assurance and performativity : the changing role of the academic board

This article undertakes a review of Australian and international literature and higher education policy in response to the changing nature of university academic boards (also known as academic senates or faculty senates). It shows that governance has become an issue for both the state and for universities and that within this context risk management and accountability mechanisms such as academic quality assurance are taking an increasingly prominent role. These developments have altered the form and function of academic governance and have fundamentally affected the academic board. For example, some literature reports that the role of Australian academic boards now largely revolves around academic quality assurance and it is argued that this is potentially problematic because of a focus on audit-driven accountability mechanisms. However, the article concludes by suggesting that as part of a broader quality assurance framework there is also an opportunity for academic boards to have a central role in the development of academic standards that focus on enhancing learning outcomes rather than on compliance.

Skills in LLB threshold learning outcomes and competency standards for entry-level lawyers – a comparison using CAQDAS

This exploratory study analysed the Threshold Learning Outcomes ("TLOs") specified in the Bachelor of Laws Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement December 2010, and the Competency Standards for Entry-Level Lawyers for Practical Legal Training, as updated by the Australasian Professional Legal Education Council and Law Admissions Consultative Committee in February 2002 ("NCS"). The qualitative analysis was undertaken using the NVivo computer assisted qualitative data analysis software ("CAQDAS"), to investigate how skills were categorised and defined in each of the documents. The results were then analysed to compare the respective categorisation and definition of skills, and to point to potential complements, overlaps, conflicts, gaps, or blind spots, between the TLOs and the NCS. The findings, and the methodology adopted, might provide insights for future instructional design, content, and delivery of Practical Legal Training programs, and for future reviews of the TLOs and NCS.

Widening participation in Australia: lessons on equity, standards, and institutional leadership

Widening participation movements inevitably give rise to discussions of the false dichotomy between equity and standards. The assumption is that by allowing differently prepared students into university and thereby improving equity, standards are somehow compromised. A recent national Australian study examined effective teaching and support of university students from low socio-economic status (LSES) backgrounds from the conceptual framework of bridging sociocultural incongruity rather than from a deficit perspective that assumes lower standards are operating. This chapter outlines the findings from that study of relevance to institutional leaders and policy makers. It draws on the rich qualitative data to show that, contrary to claims of lowered standards, students from low socio-economic backgrounds are high achievers who both expect and want high academic standards. It argues that the dichotomy between equity and standards is premised on an assumption of deficit in, and fundamental lack of respect for, students from diverse backgrounds which undermines the widening participation agenda. Where the false dichotomy exists in institutions, a situation is created which mitigates against LSES students feeling empowered to achieve high academic standards and overall success. It presents the key factors for empowering students from low socio-economic backgrounds to achieve academic success of the highest standard.

On the governance of public education

Private schools in Australia receive significant public funding, but their determination to concentrate social and cultural capital and consolidate positional advantage ‘denies the possibility of their serving the public interest’. A 1998 study of Victorian private schools has confirmed that they produce above-average academic results and are also concentrated in high socioeconomic geographic areas. The few private schools outside this pattern serve mainly provincial areas or ethnic minority groups. High academic credentials depend at least in part on their scarcity, and ‘the selective function of schools, directed towards establishing a hierarchy of performance, overwhelms the pedagogical function of universal learning and social justice,’ especially at transition points in the education system. The governance procedures of schools typically encourage high academic standards ‘through mechanisms of exclusion’. Private schools in particular, at the secondary level, tend to ‘export failure’ through ‘predatory recruitment and selective dumping practices’, and by arrangements with universities for early placement of high performers into preferred tertiary courses. The broader education system reinforces the competitive processes within schools though competitive examinations. A range of steps can address these equity problems. Curriculum should be made more sensitive to disadvantaged social groups. Secondary schools should be aligned more closely to the social, cultural and economic development of their communities through mechanisms such as VET in schools, linkages with TAFE colleges, and a broadened curriculum that addresses community problems.

`Silly, soft and otherwise suspect`: doctoral education as risky business

This article investigates how certain doctoral practices come to count as scandalous and with what effects on universities. To do so, it engages with a number of recent media allegations that relate to doctoral practice in Australia and elsewhere. The analysis of these allegations is developed in terms of three broad categories, namely allegations of silliness in relation to thesis content, allegations of softness in relation to entry, rigour and assessment, and allegations of suspect conduct and/or credentials. The impact of such allegations on university governance is then addressed.

A doctorate by definition : exploring possibilities and opportunities in education

The author provides a diagram and table which reflect his conceptualisation of issues surrounding the definition of a doctorate. Two broad questions frame this characterisation: (i) what defines the doctorate? and (ii) where to now? In relation to the first question the author contends that the resources available to students, supervisors and institutions significantly influence what is regarded as a 'good' doctorate and the 'protection' of this standard. An overlapping set of issues is identified in response to the question 'where to now'? These are expressed as strategies in negotiating doctorate definitions and futures; some more reminiscent of times past and some cognisant of prevailing conditions, while others offer a qualitatively different strategy that explores (or generates) possibilities and opportunities within the parameters of the doctorate.

The underlying assumption in chemistry education

The underlying assumption in chemistry education is that chemistry is real, distinct discipline, clearly differentiable from other sciences. Chemistry is the study of matter and its interactions with other matter and with energy, but the aspects which distinguish chemistry are: macroscopic observations and descriptions of properties and change; understanding in terms of atoms and molecules; abstract representations to describe and communicate chemical concepts; and occupational health and safety. These aspects are not unique to chemistry, but their combination make chemistry unique. Over the last three years, there have been major reviews of school science education through the formulation of the Australian National Curriculum and of undergraduate education through the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project. In both cases, individual RACI members and chemistry professionals, including school teachers, and RACI working party and workshop, have articulated the unique nature of chemistry and the need for chemistry education as a separate subject.

The signature pedagogy in chemistry education

Laboratories are the signature pedagogy in chemistry education. The chemical sciences are based in investigations that are reproducible, and objectively testable. Some investigations might involve testing a hypothesis – does a carbonate produce carbon dioxide gas when reacted with acid? Other activities may not have an obvious hypothesis – how much salt is in this detergent package? Nevertheless, laboratory work is a distinctive part of science generally, and of chemistry in particular.

Laboratory work is a significant part of working in the chemistry profession. The best way for students to learn what scientists do, is to do what scientists do. The only way to conduct a laboratory investigation is to get into a laboratory and to do it!

Learning and doing chemistry in a laboratory is an important and irreplaceable part of a chemistry education.

Constructing knowledge

The most popular model of how students learn is known as the constructivist model of learning. There are variants of this model, but the main features are that learning occurs in the context of pre-existing experiences and ideas, that new concepts are transformed to fit or build on those existing ideas, and that learning occurs in a social or cultural context. Learners are not empty vessels, into which new knowledge can be injected. New concepts, which are consistent with and extend pre-existing experiences and ideas, are easily and effectively assimilated. Learning is difficult, when learners have pre-existing incorrect ideas or alternative conceptions, as they must first unlearn the misconceptions in order to incorporate the new information. In a different context, it is usually much harder and more expensive to retrofit an existing house than to build from scratch. Similarly, it is very hard to overcome bad habits. A previous column in Chemistry in Australia [July 2013, page 35], noted that we simplify ideas when teaching chemistry to younger students, but warned that over-simplication often results in misconceptions that will hinder future learning. Most chemistry educators favour constructivism, because there are similarities with the process of discovery in science. Firstly, the advancement of scientific knowledge builds on past experiences and knowledge: Isaac Newton famously acknowledged, “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants”. Secondly, observations and data of themselves are not meaningful, until that information has been transformed to extend existing ideas: Nobel Laureate Lawrence Bragg wrote, “the important thing in science is not so much to obtain new facts as to discover new ways of thinking about them”. Science as a Human Endeavour (SHE) is one of the strands in the Australian Curriculum. Similarly, one of the learning outcomes in the Draft Chemistry Academic Standards is that graduates will be able to recognise the creative endeavour involved in the acquiring knowledge and to recognise the testable and contestable nature of chemistry. Science is practiced individually and collectively by people. Human beings, who have human virtues and fallibilities, are responsible for scientific advancements. New knowledge is constructed in the minds of learners and scientists. Just as discussions in work teams, workshops, conferences, and the scientific literature, help scientists to extend and improve scientific understanding, the important role of teachers is to guide students to refine, alter and improve their scientific understanding when extending their scientific boundaries.

Teaching students using technology: Facilitating success for students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds in Australian universities

Australian higher education has adopted a widening participation agenda with a focus on the participation of disadvantaged students, particularly those from low socioeconomic status (LSES) backgrounds. As these students begin to enter university in greater number and proportion than ever before, there is increasing interest in how best to facilitate their success. A recent national study employed semi-structured interviews to ask 89 successful LSES students what had helped them succeed. Twenty-six staff experienced in effectively teaching and supporting LSES students were also interviewed about what approaches they used in their work. Analysis of the study's findings indicates a strong theme related to the use of technology in effectively teaching and supporting LSES students. In particular, the use of a range of resources and media, facilitating interactive and connected learning, enabling personalised learning and assuring high academic standards were found to contribute to student success. The implications of these findings are discussed with a specific focus on promoting effective teaching practice and informing related policy. At a time when the diversity of the student cohort in Australian higher education institutions is increasing, the findings reported in this paper are both timely and critical for educators and institutions.

Big change questions : can we create a form of public education that delivers high standards for all students in the emerging knowledge society?

Within many Anglophone nation states there is significant debate about
the future of public education and its ongoing capacity to provide quality
education. The new knowledge economy not only challenges the position
of educators as the primary producers, disseminators and authorizers of
what is valued knowledge, but also requires them to prepare students for
new ways of working with that knowledge. In the service economies of
post-industrial Western nations, 'knowledge work' is critical to national
productivity and international competitiveness. At the same time, the
globalization logic suggests that the nation state is under threat, and therefore its role as provider of universal services such as education is also threatened.

Establishing quality online: supporting productive academic teams

Quality online education requires successful management of resources and services. This paper examines the increasing need to support productive academic teams and foster collaboration in developing a high quality online environment. The paper is based on a study into academic support services and collaboration at Deakin University. The provision of quality support was found to be increasingly challenging given the complexity of the online university environment. A number of recommendations arise out of the study including some practical changes to service, the need to commit to innovation, the importance of frameworks and standards as well as a range of broader cultural, organisational and political changes.

Academic assessment of arts management journals: a multidimensional rating survey

The authors report the results of a journal rating survey assessing 14 publications dedicated to arts management and related topics. Establishing a rating scheme for journals is an important step in the professionalization of an academic field. The authors argue that the development of a rating system in arts management is in the best interests of the discipline. Academics used weighted multidimensional perceptual ratings to evaluate each journal’s prestige, contribution to theory, contribution to practice and contribution to teaching. Cluster analysis using these four criteria identified three classes of journals: A, B+ and B. The setting of standards serves to identify quality goals for academics and journal editors alike, thus enhancing the standing of arts management as a subdiscipline of management.

Heteroglossic spaces : interrogating academic literacies in teacher education

This paper explores the challenges of implementing critical writing pedagogy in conditions of increasing cultural and textual uniformity of literacy and emphasises the need for a pedagogy that takes into account the heteroglossic nature of writing space and its relation to the multiple textual practices of students. In practical terms, we argue for such literacy practices in teacher education that would require students not only to understand the complexities of language and literacy but to actively engage them in a diverse range of textual practices that would both stretch their repertoires as language users and sensitise them to the cultural-semiotic diversity of contemporary classrooms. This task becomes more urgent in the current era of standards, accountability and classroom pedagogies that are not attuned to the particularities of students’ textual practices and the communication networks in which they participate.