Conceptualising and teaching discursive and performative reflection in higher education

The importance of reflection in higher education, and across disciplinary fields is widely recognised. It is generally embedded in university graduate attributes, professional standards and course objectives. Furthermore, reflection is commonly included in assessment requirements in higher education subjects, often without necessary scaffolding or clear expectations for students. It is essential that academic staff have substantive knowledge and clear expectations about the aims of reflective activities, the most effective mode of representation, and appropriate teaching strategies to support students in deep, critical reflection. The paper argues the case for reflection to be represented in different modes, using discursive (language) or performative (symbolic practice) forms of expression according to disciplinary context and individual communicative strengths. It introduces key discursive and expressive elements that constitute different modes of representation in reflective tasks. This functional analysis of textual elements provides explicit knowledge for teaching and assessing multiple modes of reflection in higher education.

Moral and social development : teachers’ knowledge of learning and teaching strategies in the early years

The intention of the analysis in this paper was to determine, from interviews with eleven early years’ teachers, what knowledge guided their teaching of moral behaviour. Six of the teachers defined moral behaviour in terms of social conventions only. Children’s learning was attributed by five of the teachers to incidental/contextual issues. Nine of the teachers used discussion of issues, in various contexts, as a way of teaching about social and moral issues. The majority of the teachers (n=7) gave the source of their knowledge of pedagogy as practical as opposed to theoretically informed. There was no clear relationship between their definitions, understanding of children’s learning, pedagogy or source of knowledge. Most of the teachers were using discussion, negotiation and reflection to develop the children’s moral and social behaviour. This is probably effective; however, it suggests a strong need for teaching of moral development to be given more prominence and addressed directly in in-service courses so that teachers are clear about their intentions and the most effective ways of achieving them.

An innovative design and studio-based CS degree

The University of Queensland has recently established a new design-focused, studio-based computer science degree. The Bachelor of Information Environments degree augments the core courses from the University's standard CS degree with a stream of design courses and integrative studio-based projects undertaken every semester. The studio projects integrate and reinforce learning by requiring students to apply the knowledge and skills gained in other courses to open-ended real-world design projects. The studio model is based on the architectural studio and involves teamwork, collaborative learning, interactive problem solving, presentations and peer review. This paper describes the degree program, its curriculum and rationale, and reports on experiences in the first year of delivery.

Moral and social development: teachers’ knowledge of children’s learning and teaching strategies in the early years

The intention of the analysis in this paper was to determine, from interviews with 11 early years’ teachers, what informed their knowledge of children’s learning and teaching strategies regarding moral development. Overall, the analysis revealed four main categories: definitions of moral behaviour, understanding of children’s learning, pedagogy for moral learning, and the source of knowledge for moral pedagogy. Children’s learning was attributed by five of the teachers to incidental/contextual issues. Nine of the teachers reported using pedagogies that involved discussion of issues, in various contexts, as a way of teaching about social and moral issues. The majority of the teachers (n = 7) described the source of their knowledge of pedagogy as practical/observed as opposed to being theoretically informed. There was no clear relationship between teachers’ definitions, understanding of children’s learning, pedagogy or source of knowledge. These results suggests a strong need for the teaching of moral development to be given more prominence and addressed directly in in-service courses so that teachers are clear about their intentions and the most effective ways of achieving them.

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.

Reframing evaluation of learning and teaching: An approach to change

Evaluation practices in the Higher Education sector have been criticised for having unclear purpose and principles; ignoring the complexity and changing nature of learning and teaching and the environments in which they occur; relying almost exclusively on student ratings of teachers working in classroom settings; lacking reliability and validity; using data for inappropriate purposes; and focusing on accountability and marketing rather than the improvement of learning and teaching. In response to similar criticism from stakeholders, in 2011 Queensland University of Technology (QUT) began a project which aims to reframe the organisation’s approach to the evaluation of learning and teaching. This paper describes the existing evaluation system; the emergence and early development of the project; and formulation of a conceptual framework identifying key dimensions of evaluation. It then compares the draft framework with other conceptualisations and models of evaluation identified in the literature, to determine its validity and suitability for supporting QUT’s plans for the future. Overall, the paper represents a structured evaluation of the REFRAME project at a particular point in its lifecycle. Given that the project follows an evidence based, practice-led process and applies an ongoing action research cycle, the findings are presented in the belief that QUT’s experience is broadly applicable to other institutions which may be contemplating change in relation to evaluation of learning and teaching.

The Development of Competency Standards for Specialist Critical Care Nurses

In defining the contemporary role of the specialist nurse it is necessary to challenge the concept of nursing as merely a combination of skills and knowledge. Nursing must be demonstrated and defined in the context of client care and include the broader notions of professional development and competence. This qualitative study sought to identify the competency standards for nurse specialists in critical care and to articulate the differences between entry-to-practice standards and the advanced practice of specialist nurses. Over 800 hours of specialist critical care nursing practice were observed and grouped into 'domains' or major themes of specialist practice using a constant comparison qualitative technique. These domains were further refined to describe attributes of the registered nurses which resulted in effective and/or superior performance (competency standards) and to provide examples of performance (performance criteria) which met the defined standard. Constant comparison of the emerging domains, competency standards and performance criteria to observations of specialist critical care practice, ensured the results provided a true reflection of the specialist nursing role. Data analysis resulted in 20 competency standards grouped into six domains: professional practice, reflective practice, enabling, clinical problem solving, teamwork, and leadership. Each of these domains is comprised of between two and seven competency standards. Each standard is further divided into component parts or 'elements' and the elements are illustrated with performance criteria. The competency standards are currently being used in several Australian critical care educational programmes and are the foundation for an emerging critical care credentialling process. They have been viewed with interest by a variety of non-critical care specialty groups and may form a common precursor from which further specialist nursing practice assessment will evolve.

Australian learning and teaching council projects in the mathematical sciences : a retrospective

Since 2004, the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) and its predecessor, the Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, have funded numerous teaching and educational research-based projects in the Mathematical Sciences. In light of the Commonwealth Government’s decision to close the ALTC in 2011, it is appropriate to take account of the ALTCs input into the Mathe- matical Sciences in higher education. Here we present an overview of ALTC projects in the Mathematical Sciences, as well as report on the contributions they have made to the Discipline.

Learning and teaching reflection : developing capacities for lifelong learning

Reflection is an essential part of being an effective learner and working as a productive teacher. It enables the learner or teacher to deliberate about the factors that lead to successful learning and teaching for them and/or their students, in a particular place and for a specific purpose, so they can make reasoned and effective choices. This chapter introduces important frameworks that cover a century of thinking around reflection in education, and illustrates how preservice teachers can use these ideas across three phases. First, becoming a reflective learner as a university student to enhance learning and assessment outcomes; second, becoming a reflective teacher to improve classroom teaching and learning outcomes; and third, developing the reflective capacities of primary students so they can enhance their skills for lifelong learning.