A transition pedagogy for student engagement and first-year learning, success and retention

This chapter argues that higher education institutions (HEIs) must direct coordinated, whole-of-institution attention to changing, both culturally and structurally, the fundamental and prevailing character of the first-year experience (FYE). It leverages evidence from the sector(Nelson, Kift and Clarke, 2011), from research-led practice in our institution (for example, Kift, Nelson and Clarke, 2010; Nelson et al.,in press) and from research conducted under an Australian Learning and Teaching Council Senior Fellowship (Kift, 2009a, 2009b, 2009c) to assert that student engagement and success should not be left to chance, particularly those aspects such as curriculum design and enactment that are within our institutional control.

An exploration of the maturity model concept as a vehicle for higher education institutions to assess their capability to address student engagement : a work in progress

Gaining a competitive edge in the area of the engagement, success and retention of commencing students is a significant issue in higher education, made more so currently because of the considerable and increasing pressure on teaching and learning from the new standards framework and performance funding. This paper introduces the concept of maturity models (MMs) and their application to assessing the capability of higher education institutions (HEIs) to address student engagement, success and retention (SESR). A concise description of the features of maturity models is presented with reference to an SESR-MM currently being developed. The SESR-MM is proposed as a viable instrument for assisting HEIs in the management and improvement of their SESR activities.

The maturity model concept as framework for assessing the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention : new horizon or false dawn?

While the engagement, success and retention of first year students are ongoing issues in higher education, they are currently of considerable and increasing importance as the pressures on teaching and learning from the new standards framework and performance funding intensifies. This Nuts & Bolts presentation introduces the concept of a maturity model and its application to the assessment of the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention. Participants will be provided with (a) a concise description of the concept and features of a maturity model; and (b) the opportunity to explore the potential application of maturity models (i) to the management of student engagement and retention programs and strategies within an institution and (ii) to the improvement of these features by benchmarking across 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 heart of quality teaching : a values-based pedagogy for pre-service teacher education

In an ever changing world the adults of the future will be faced with many challenges. To cope with these challenges it seems apparent that values education will need to become paramount within a child.s education. A considerable number of research studies have indicated that values education is a critical component within education (Lovat & Toomey, 2007b). Building on this research Lovat (2006) claimed that values education was the missing link in quality teaching The concept of quality teaching had risen to the fore within educational research literature in the late 20th century with the claim that it is the teacher who makes the difference in schooling (Hattie, 2004). Thus, if teachers make such a difference to student learning, achievement and well-being, then it must hold true that pre-service teacher education programmes are vital in ensuring the development of quality teachers for our schools. The gap that this current research programme addressed was to link the fields of values education, quality teaching and pre-service teacher education. This research programme aimed to determine the impact of a values-based pedagogy on the development of quality teaching dimensions within pre-service teacher education. The values-based pedagogy that was investigated in this research programme was Philosophy in the Classroom. The research programme adopted a nested case study design based on the constructivist-interpretative paradigm in examining a unit within a pre-service teacher education programme at a Queensland university. The methodology utilised was qualitative where the main source of data was via interviews. In total, 43 pre-service teachers participated in three studies in order to determine if their involvement in a unit where the focus was on introducing pre-service teachers to an explicit values-based pedagogy impacted on their knowledge, skills and confidence in terms of quality teaching dimensions. The research programme was divided into three separate studies in order to address the two research questions: 1. In what ways do pre-service teachers perceive they are being prepared to become quality teachers? 2. Is there a connection between an explicit values-based pedagogy in pre-service teacher education and the development of pre-service teachers. understanding of quality teaching? Study One provided insight into 21 pre-service teachers. understandings of quality teaching. These 21 participants had not engaged in an explicit values-based pedagogy. Study Two involved the interviewing of 22 pre-service teachers at two separate points in time . prior to exposure to a unit that employed a values-explicit pedagogy and post this subject.s lecture content delivery. Study Three reported on and analysed individual case studies of five pre-service teachers who had participated in Study Two Time 1 and Time 2, as well as a third time following their field experience where they had practice in teaching the values explicit pedagogy. The results of the research demonstrate that an explicit values-based pedagogy introduced into a teacher education programme has a positive impact on the development of pre-service teachers. understanding of quality teaching skills and knowledge. The teaching and practice of a values-based pedagogy positively impacted on pre-service teachers with increases of knowledge, skills and confidence demonstrated on the quality teaching dimensions of intellectual quality, a supportive classroom environment, recognition of difference, connectedness and values. These findings were reinforced through the comparison of pre-service teachers who had participated in the explicit values-based pedagogical approach, with a sample of pre-service teachers who had not engaged in this same values-based pedagogical approach. A solid values-based pedagogy and practice can and does enhance pre-service teachers. understanding of quality teaching. These findings surrounding the use of a values-based pedagogy in pre-service teacher education to enhance quality teaching knowledge and skills has contributed theoretically to the field of educational research, as well having practical implications for teacher education institutions and teacher educators.

Analysing and improving a recruitment process : a teaching case for developing business process improvement capabilities

The demand for Business Process Management (BPM) is rapidly rising and with that, the need for capable BPM professionals is also rising. Yet, only a very few structured BPM training/ education programs are available, across universities and professional trainers globally. The ‘lack of appropriate teaching resources’ has been identified as a critical issue for BPM educators in prior studies. Case-based teaching can be an effective means of educating future BPM professionals. A main reason is that cases create an authentic learning environment where the complexities and challenges of the ‘real world’ can be presented in a narrative enabling the students to develop crucial skills such as problem solving, analysis and creativity-within-constraints, and to apply the tools and techniques within a richer and real (or proxy to real) context. However, so far well documented BPM teaching cases are scarce. This article aims to contribute to address this gap by providing a comprehensive teaching case and teaching notes that facilitates the education of selected process improvement phases, namely identification, modelling, analysis, and improvement. The article is divided into three main parts: (i) Introductory teaching notes, (ii) The case narrative, and (iii) Student activities from the case and teaching notes.

Can we teach advertising students to think? Strategies to engage student thinking

Understanding and effectively managing students’ engagement in education plays a significant role in enhancing learning processes and outcomes. Research has shown that students learn more when they are actively engaged in their learning. However, as many educators know, this is not as easy as one might expect. Using a range of teaching approaches, we attempt to impart knowledge and develop understanding and comprehension (Angelo 1993; Biggs and Telfer 1987; Patti 2003; Ranburuth and McCormick 2001). These vary from “information dump” or teacher-centric approaches, to those that stimulate more active involvement. From the literature, we know that experiential learning, such as those strategies that help students acquire practice skills, apply critical thought and active learning, are likely to have achieve higher levels of intellectual skill and ability (Benson and Blackman 2003; Hampton and Lawrence 1995; Hopkinson and Hogg 2004; Kolb 1984).

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.

Moving beyond transition pedagogy: Maturity models and student engagement

Australian higher education institutions (HEIs) have entered a new phase of regulation and accreditation which includes performance-based funding relating to the participation and retention of students from social and cultural groups previously underrepresented in higher education. However, in addressing these priorities, it is critical that HEIs do not further disadvantage students from certain groups by identifying them for attention because of their social or cultural backgrounds, circumstances which are largely beyond the control of students. In response, many HEIs are focusing effort on university-wide approaches to enhancing the student experience because such approaches will enhance the engagement, success and retention of all students, and in doing so, particularly benefit those students who come from underrepresented groups. Measuring and benchmarking student experiences and engagement that arise from these efforts is well supported by extensive collections of student experience survey data. However no comparable instrument exists that measures the capability of institutions to influence and/or enhance student experiences where capability is an indication of how well an organisational process does what it is designed to do (Rosemann & de Bruin, 2005). This paper proposes that the concept of a maturity model (Marshall, 2010; Paulk, 1999) may be useful as a way of assessing the capability of HEIs to provide and implement student engagement, success and retention activities. We will describe the Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM), (Clarke, Nelson & Stoodley, 2012; Nelson, Clarke & Stoodley, 2012) we are currently investigating. We will discuss if our research may address the current gap by facilitating the development of an SESR-MM instrument that aims (i) to enable institutions to assess the capability of their current student engagement and retention programs and strategies to influence and respond to student experiences within the institution; and (ii) to provide institutions with the opportunity to understand various practices across the sector with a view to further improving programs and practices relevant to their context. The first aim of our research is to extend the generational approach which has been useful in considering the evolutionary nature of the first year experience (FYE) (Wilson, 2009). Three generations have been identified and explored: First generation approaches that focus on co-curricular strategies (e.g. orientation and peer programs); Second generation approaches that focus on curriculum (e.g. pedagogy, curriculum design, and learning and teaching practice); and third generation approaches—also referred to as transition pedagogy—that focus on the production of an institution-wide integrated holistic intentional blend of curricular and co-curricular activities (Kift, Nelson & Clarke, 2010). The second aim of this research is to move beyond assessments of students’ experiences to focus on assessing institutional processes and their capability to influence student engagement. In essence, we propose to develop and use the maturity model concept to produce an instrument that will indicate the capability of HEIs to manage and improve student engagement, success and retention programs and strategies. References Australian Council for Educational Research. (n.d.). Australasian Survey of Student Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/research/ausse/background Clarke, J., Nelson, K., & Stoodley, I. (2012, July). The Maturity Model concept as framework for assessing the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention: New horizon or false dawn? A Nuts & Bolts presentation at the 15th International Conference on the First Year in Higher Education, “New Horizons,” Brisbane, Australia. Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010) Transition pedagogy - a third generation approach to FYE: A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), pp. 1-20. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (n.d.). The University Experience Survey. Advancing quality in higher education information sheet. Retrieved from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Policy/Documents/University_Experience_Survey.pdf Marshall, S. (2010). A quality framework for continuous improvement of e-Learning: The e-Learning Maturity Model. Journal of Distance Education, 24(1), 143-166. Nelson, K., Clarke, J., & Stoodley, I. (2012). An exploration of the Maturity Model concept as a vehicle for higher education institutions to assess their capability to address student engagement. A work in progress. Submitted for publication. Paulk, M. (1999). Using the Software CMM with good judgment, ASQ Software Quality Professional, 1(3), 19-29. Wilson, K. (2009, June–July). The impact of institutional, programmatic and personal interventions on an effective and sustainable first-year student experience. Keynote address presented at the 12th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, “Preparing for Tomorrow Today: The First Year as Foundation,” Townsville, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.fyhe.com.au/past_papers/papers09/ppts/Keithia_Wilson_paper.pdf

Verifying a Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM): A reality check of the model using data derived from three universities

Australian higher education institutions (HEIs) have entered a new phase of regulation and accreditation which includes performance-based funding relating to the participation and retention of students from social and cultural groups previously underrepresented in higher education. However, in addressing these priorities, it is critical that HEIs do not further disadvantage students from certain groups by identifying them for attention because of their social or cultural backgrounds, circumstances which are largely beyond the control of students. In response, many HEIs are focusing effort on university-wide approaches to enhancing the student experience because such approaches will enhance the engagement, success and retention of all students, and in doing so, particularly benefit those students who come from underrepresented groups. Measuring and benchmarking student experiences and engagement that arise from these efforts is well supported by extensive collections of student experience survey data. However no comparable instrument exists that measures the capability of institutions to influence and/or enhance student experiences where capability is an indication of how well an organisational process does what it is designed to do (Rosemann & de Bruin, 2005). We have proposed that the concept of a maturity model (Marshall, 2010; Paulk, 1999) may be useful as a way of assessing the capability of HEIs to provide and implement student engagement, success and retention activities and we are currently articulating a Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM), (Clarke, Nelson & Stoodley, 2012; Nelson, Clarke & Stoodley, 2012). Our research aims to address the current gap by facilitating the development of an SESR-MM instrument that aims (i) to enable institutions to assess the capability of their current student engagement and retention programs and strategies to influence and respond to student experiences within the institution; and (ii) to provide institutions with the opportunity to understand various practices across the sector with a view to further improving programs and practices relevant to their context. Our research extends the generational approach which has been useful in considering the evolutionary nature of the first year experience (FYE) (Wilson, 2009). Three generations have been identified and explored: First generation approaches that focus on co-curricular strategies (e.g. orientation and peer programs); Second generation approaches that focus on curriculum (e.g. pedagogy, curriculum design, and learning and teaching practice); and third generation approaches—also referred to as transition pedagogy—that focus on the production of an institution-wide integrated holistic intentional blend of curricular and co-curricular activities (Kift, Nelson & Clarke, 2010). Our research also moves beyond assessments of students’ experiences to focus on assessing institutional processes and their capability to influence student engagement. In essence, we propose to develop and use the maturity model concept to produce an instrument that will indicate the capability of HEIs to manage and improve student engagement, success and retention programs and strategies. The issues explored in this workshop are (i) whether the maturity model concept can be usefully applied to provide a measure of institutional capability for SESR; (ii) whether the SESR-MM can be used to assess the maturity of a particular set of institutional practices; and (iii) whether a collective assessment of an institution’s SESR capabilities can provide an indication of the maturity of the institution’s SESR activities. The workshop will be approached in three stages. Firstly, participants will be introduced to the key characteristics of maturity models, followed by a discussion of the SESR-MM and the processes involved in its development. Secondly, participants will be provided with resources to facilitate the development of a maturity model and an assessment instrument for a range of institutional processes and related practices. In the final stage of the workshop, participants will “assess” the capability of these practices to provide a collective assessment of the maturity of these processes. References Australian Council for Educational Research. (n.d.). Australasian Survey of Student Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/research/ausse/background Clarke, J., Nelson, K., & Stoodley, I. (2012, July). The Maturity Model concept as framework for assessing the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention: New horizon or false dawn? A Nuts & Bolts presentation at the 15th International Conference on the First Year in Higher Education, “New Horizons,” Brisbane, Australia. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (n.d.). The University Experience Survey. Advancing quality in higher education information sheet. Retrieved from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Policy/Documents/University_Experience_Survey.pdf Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010) Transition pedagogy - a third generation approach to FYE: A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), pp. 1-20. Marshall, S. (2010). A quality framework for continuous improvement of e-Learning: The e-Learning Maturity Model. Journal of Distance Education, 24(1), 143-166. Nelson, K., Clarke, J., & Stoodley, I. (2012). An exploration of the Maturity Model concept as a vehicle for higher education institutions to assess their capability to address student engagement. A work in progress. Submitted for publication. Paulk, M. (1999). Using the Software CMM with good judgment, ASQ Software Quality Professional, 1(3), 19-29. Wilson, K. (2009, June–July). The impact of institutional, programmatic and personal interventions on an effective and sustainable first-year student experience. Keynote address presented at the 12th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, “Preparing for Tomorrow Today: The First Year as Foundation,” Townsville, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.fyhe.com.au/past_papers/papers09/ppts/Keithia_Wilson_paper.pdf

Integration of medical images to the teaching of systematic pathology : an evaluation of relevance

A sound knowledge of pathological disease processes is required for professional practice within health professions. The project described in this paper reviewed the resources currently available for the delivery of systematic pathology tutorials. Additional complementary resources were developed and the inclusion of these additional learning resources in practical tutorial sessions was evaluated for their impact on student learning. Student evaluation of the learning resources was undertaken across one semester with two different cohorts of health profession students using questionnaires and focus group discussion. Both cohorts reported an enhancement to their understanding of pathological disease processes through the use of the additional resources. Results indicate student perception of the value of the resources correlates with staff perception and is independent of prior experiences.

Teaching design and emotion in the foundation year : an industrial design approach

This paper showcases two design tools; the ‘storyboard’ and ‘a day in the life’ demonstrated to design students in their foundational year (first year) of study. By employing these tools during the design process the aim was to provoke students to consider and design for emotional experiences for potential users. The assessment asked students to design an MP3 player using these tools. This is demonstrated through a student project that successfully used the tools and method introduced. The teaching theory, project context, student outcome as well as challenges faced by students using this approach are discussed. The paper concludes with implications for teaching emotion theory at an undergraduate level and potential future directions.

Interpretations of formative assessment in the teaching of English at two Chinese universities : a sociocultural perspective

Formative assessment is increasingly being implemented through policy initiatives in Chinese educational contexts. As an approach to assessment, formative assessment derives many of its key principles from Western contexts, notably through the work of scholars in the UK, the USA and Australia. The question for this paper is the ways that formative assessment has been interpreted in the teaching of College English in Chinese Higher Education. The paper reports on a research study that utilised a sociocultural perspective on learning and assessment to analyse how two Chinese universities – an urban-based Key University and a regional-based Non-Key University – interpreted and enacted a China Ministry of Education policy on formative assessment in College English teaching. Of particular interest for the research were the ways in which the sociocultural conditions of the Chinese context mediated understanding of Western principles and led to their adaptation. The findings from the two universities identified some consistency in localised interpretations of formative assessment which included emphases on process and student participation. The differences related to the specific sociocultural conditions contextualising each university including geographical location, socioeconomic status, and teacher and student roles, expectations and beliefs about English. The findings illustrate the sociocultural tensions in interpreting, adapting and enacting formative assessment in Chinese College English classes and the consequent challenges to and questions about retaining the spirit of formative assessment as it was originally conceptualised.

Please take out your phones : on the spot solicitation of student feedback in class

The use of mobile devices such as smart phones and tablets in classrooms has been met with mixed sentiments. Some instructors and teachers see them as a distraction and regularly ban their usage. Others who see their potential to enhance learning have started to explore ways to integrate them into their teaching in an attempt to improve student engagement. In this paper we report on a pilot study that forms part of a university-wide project reconceptualising its approach to the student evaluation of learning and teaching. In a progressive decision to embrace mobile technology, the university decided to trial a smart phone app designed for students to check-in to class and leave feedback on the spot. Our preliminary findings from trialling the app indicate that the application establishes a more immediate feedback loop between students and teachers. However, the app’s impact depends on how feedback is shared with students and how the teaching team responds.