Health Librarianship Workforce and Education : Research to plan the future. Final Report.

In late 2009, Health Libraries Australia (HLA) received a small grant to undertake a national research project to determine the future requirements for health librarians in the workforce in Australia and develop a structured, modular education framework (post-graduate qualification and continuing professional development structure) to meet these requirements. The main objective was to consider the education and professional development framework that would ensure that health librarians have a clearly defined scope of practice and the specific competency based knowledge and skills that enable them to contribute to the design and delivery of high quality health services in this country. The final report presents a detailed discussion of the changing Australian healthcare environment and the resulting impact on the health library sector, as well as an overview of international trends in health libraries and the implications for Australian health librarianship education. The research methodology is outlined, followed by an analysis of the findings from the two surveys with health librarians and health library managers and the semi-structured interviews conducted with employers. The Medical Library Association (MLA) in the United States had developed a policy document detailing the competencies required by health librarians. It was found that the MLA competencies represented an accepted professional framework of skills which could be used objectively in the survey instrument to measure the areas of professional knowledge and responsibilities that were relevant in the current workplace, and to identify how these requirements might change in the next three to five years. The research results underscore the imperative for health librarians to engage in regular, relevant professional development activities that will enable them to stay abreast with the rapid contextual changes impacting on their practice. In order to be accepted as key members of the multi-disciplinary health professional team, it is strongly believed that health librarians should commit to establishing the mechanisms for specialist certification maintained through compulsory CPD in an ongoing three-year cycle of revalidation. This development would align ALIA and health librarians with other health sector professional associations which are responsible for the self regulation of entry to and continuation in their profession.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice ALTC Fellowship Report

This ALTC Teaching Fellowship aimed to establish Guiding Principles for Library and Information Science Education 2.0. The aim was achieved by (i) identifying the current and anticipated skills and knowledge required by successful library and information science (LIS) professionals in the age of web 2.0 (and beyond), (ii) establishing the current state of LIS education in Australia in supporting the development of librarian 2.0, and in doing so, identify models of best practice. The fellowship has contributed to curriculum renewal in the LIS profession. It has helped to ensure that LIS education in Australia continues to meet the changing skills and knowledge requirements of the profession it supports. It has also provided a vehicle through which LIS professionals and LIS educators may find opportunities for greater collaboration and more open communication. This will help bridge the gap between LIS theory and practice and will foster more authentic engagement between LIS education and other parts of the LIS industry in the education of the next generation of professionals. Through this fellowship the LIS discipline has become a role model for other disciplines who will be facing similar issues in the coming years. Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups exploring the current and anticipated skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in the web 2.0 world and beyond. Whilst each focus group tended to draw on specific themes of interest to that particular group of people, there was a great deal of common ground. Eight key themes emerged: technology, learning and education, research or evidence-based practice, communication, collaboration and team work, user focus, business savvy and personal traits. It was acknowledged that the need for successful LIS professionals to possess transferable skills and interpersonal attributes was not new. It was noted however that the speed with which things are changing in the web 2.0 world was having a significant impact and that this faster pace is placing a new and unexpected emphasis on the transferable skills and knowledge. It was also acknowledged that all librarians need to possess these skills, knowledge and attributes and not just the one or two role models who lead the way. The most interesting finding however was that web 2.0, library 2.0 and librarian 2.0 represented a ‘watershed’ for the LIS profession. Almost all the focus groups spoke about how they are seeing and experiencing a culture change in the profession. Librarian 2.0 requires a ‘different mindset or attitude’. The Levels of Perspective model by Daniel Kim provides one lens by which to view this finding. The focus group findings suggest that we are witnessing a re-awaking of the Australian LIS profession as it begins to move towards the higher levels of Kim’s model (ie mental models, vision). Thirty-six LIS educators participated in telephone interviews aimed at exploring the current state of LIS education in supporting the development of librarian 2.0. Skills and knowledge of LIS professionals in a web 2.0 world that were identified and discussed by the LIS educators mirrored those highlighted in the focus group discussions with LIS professionals. Similarly it was noted that librarian 2.0 needed a focus less on skills and knowledge and more on attitude. However, whilst LIS professionals felt that there was a paradigm shift within the profession. LIS educators did not speak with one voice on this matter with quite a number of the educators suggesting that this might be ‘overstating it a bit’. This study provides evidence for “disparate viewpoints” (Hallam, 2007) between LIS educators and LIS professionals that can have a significant implications for the future of not just LIS professional education specifically but for the profession generally. Library and information science education 2.0: guiding principles and models of best practice 1 Inviting the LIS academics to discuss how their teaching and learning activities support the development of librarian 2.0 was a core part of the interviews conducted. The strategies used and the challenges faced by LIS educators in developing their teaching and learning approaches to support the formation of librarian 2.0 are identified and discussed. A core part of the fellowship was the identification of best practice examples on how LIS educators were developing librarian 2.0. Twelve best practice examples were identified. Each educator was recorded discussing his or her approach to teaching and learning. Videos of these interviews are available via the Fellowship blog at .The LIS educators involved in making the videos felt uncomfortable with the term ‘best practice’. Many acknowledged that there simply seeking to do the best by their students and that there was always room for improvement. For this reason these videos are offered as examples of “great practice”. The videos are a tool for other educators to use, regardless of discipline, in developing their teaching and learning approaches to supporting web 2.0 professionals. It has been argued that the main purpose of professional education is transformation (Dall’ Alba, 2009; Dall’Alba & Barnacle, 2007). As such professional education should focus not just on skills and knowledge acquisition but also on helping students to develop ways of being the professionals in question (ie LIS professionals, teachers, lawyers, engineers).The aim of this fellowship was to establish Guidelines for Library and Information Science Education 2.0 it has however become apparent that at this point in time it is not yet possible to fulfil this aim. The fellowship has clearly identified skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in web 2.0 world (and beyond). It has also identified examples of ‘great practice’ by LIS educators as they endeavour to develop LIS professionals who will be successful in a web 20 world. The fellowship however has also shown that the LIS profession is currently undergoing significant attitudinal and conceptual change. Consequently, before a philosophy of LIS education 2.0 can be expressed, the Australian LIS profession must first explore and articulate what it means to be an LIS professional in the 21st century (ie a world of web 2.0 and beyond). In short, the LIS profession in Australia must take stock not of “what we know and can do” but on “who we are becoming” (Dall’Alba, 2009, p 34).

Responding to rapid change in higher education : enabling university departments responsible for work related programs through boundary spanning

Boundary spanning links organisations to one another in order to create mutually beneficial relationships; it is a concept developed and used in organisational theory but rarely used to understand organisational structures in higher education (Pruitt & Schwartz, 1999). Yet understanding boundary spanning activity has the capacity to help universities respond to demands for continuous quality improvement, and to increase capacity to react to environmental uncertainty. At a time of rapid change characterised by a fluctuating economic environment, globalisation, increased mobility, and ecological issues, boundary spanning could be viewed as a key element in assisting institutions in effectively understanding and responding to such change. The literature suggests that effective boundary spanning could help universities improve organisational performance, use of infrastructure and resources, intergroup relations, leadership styles, performance and levels of job satisfaction, technology transfer, knowledge creation, and feedback processes, amongst other things. Our research aims to put a face on boundary spanning (Miller, 2008) by contextualising it within organisational systems and structures in university departments responsible for work related programs i.e. Work Integrated Learning (WIL) and Co-operative Education (Co-op). In this paper these approaches are referred to collectively as work related programs. The authors formed a research team in Victoria, British Columbia in 2009 at a sponsored international research forum, Two Days in June. The purpose of the invitation-only forum was to investigate commonalities and differences across programs and to formulate an international research agenda for work related programs over the next five to ten years. Researchers from Queensland University of Technology, University of Cincinnati, Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University, University of Ottawa,and Dublin City University agreed that further research was needed into the impact stakeholders, organisational systems, structures, policies, and practices have on departments delivering work related programs. This paper illustrates how policy and practice across the five institutions can be better understood through the lens of boundary spanning. It is argued that boundary spanning is an area of theory and practice with great applicability to a better understanding of the activity of these departments. The paper concludes by proposing topics for future research to examine how boundary spanning can be used to better understand practice and change in work related programs.

High fidelity simulation; challenges encountered in developing and implementing student learning experiences, staff education and researching approaches to learning

High fidelity simulation as a teaching and learning approach is being embraced by many schools of nursing. Our school embarked on integrating high fidelity (HF) simulation into the undergraduate clinical education program in 2011. Low and medium fidelity simulation has been used for many years, but this did not simplify the integration of HF simulation. Alongside considerations of how and where HF simulation would be integrated, issues arose with: student consent and participation for observed activities; data management of video files; staff development, and conceptualising how methods for student learning could be researched. Simulation for undergraduate student nurses commenced as a formative learning activity, undertaken in groups of eight, where four students undertake the ‘doing’ role and four are structured observers, who then take a formal role in the simulation debrief. Challenges for integrating simulation into student learning included conceptualising and developing scenarios to trigger students’ decision making and application of skills, knowledge and attitudes explicit to solving clinical ‘problems’. Developing and planning scenarios for students to ‘try out’ skills and make decisions for problem solving lay beyond choosing pre-existing scenarios inbuilt with the software. The supplied scenarios were not concept based but rather knowledge, skills and technology (of the manikin) focussed. Challenges lay in using the technology for the purpose of building conceptual mastery rather than using technology simply because it was available. As we integrated use of HF simulation into the final year of the program, focus was on building skills, knowledge and attitudes that went beyond technical skill, and provided an opportunity to bridge the gap with theory-based knowledge that students often found difficult to link to clinical reality. We wished to provide opportunities to develop experiential knowledge based on application and clinical reasoning processes in team environments where problems are encountered, and to solve them, the nurse must show leadership and direction. Other challenges included students consenting for simulations to be videotaped and ethical considerations of this. For example if one student in a group of eight did not consent, did this mean they missed the opportunity to undertake simulation, or that others in the group may be disadvantaged by being unable to review their performance. This has implications for freely given consent but also for equity of access to learning opportunities for students who wished to be taped and those who did not. Alongside this issue were the details behind data management, storage and access. Developing staff with varying levels of computer skills to use software and undertake a different approach to being the ‘teacher’ required innovation where we took an experiential approach. Considering explicit learning approaches to be trialled for learning was not a difficult proposition, but considering how to enact this as research with issues of blinding, timetabling of blinded groups, and reducing bias for testing results of different learning approaches along with gaining ethical approval was problematic. This presentation presents examples of these challenges and how we overcame them.

Re-conceptualising and re-positioning Australian library and information science education for the 21st century [Final Report 2011]

How can Australian library and information science (LIS) education produce, in a sustainable manner, the diverse supply of graduates with the appropriate attributes to develop and maintain high quality professional practice in the rapidly changing 21st century? This report presents the key findings of a project that has examined this question through research into future directions for LIS education in Australia. Titled Re-conceptualising and re-positioning Australian library and information science education for the twenty-first century, the purpose of the project was to establish a consolidated and holistic picture of the Australian LIS profession, and identify how its future education and training can be mediated in a cohesive and sustainable manner. The project was undertaken with a team of 12 university and vocational LIS educators from 11 institutions around Australia between November 2009 and December 2010. Collectively, these eleven institutions represented the broad spectrum and diversity of LIS education in Australia, and enabled the project to examine education for the information profession in a holistic and synergistic manner. Participating institutions in the project included Queensland University of Technology (Project Leader), Charles Sturt University, Curtin University of Technology, Edith Cowan University, Monash University, RMIT University, University of Canberra, University of South Australia, University of Tasmania, University of Technology Sydney and Victoria University. The inception and need for the project was motivated by a range of factors. From a broad perspective several of these factors relate to concerns raised at national and international levels regarding problems with education for LIS. In addition, the motivation and need for the project also related to some unique challenges that LIS education faces in the Australian tertiary education landscape. Over recent years a range of responses to explore the various issues confronting LIS education in Australia have emerged at local and national levels however this project represented the first significant investment of funding for national research in this area. In this way, the inception of the project offered a unique opportunity and powerful mechanism through which to bring together key stakeholders and inspire discourse concerning future education for the profession. Therefore as the first national project of its kind, its intent has been to provide foundation research that will inform and guide future directions for LIS education and training in Australia. The primary objective of the project was to develop a Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia. The purpose of this framework was to provide evidence based strategic recommendations that would guide Australia’s future education for the information professions. Recognising the three major and equal players in the education process the project was framed around three areas of consideration: LIS students, the LIS workforce and LIS educators. Each area of consideration aligned to a research substudy in the project. The three research substudies were titled Student Considerations, Workforce Planning Considerations and Tertiary Education Considerations. The Students substudy provided a profile of LIS students and an analysis of their choices, experiences and expectations in regard to LIS education and their graduate destinations. The Workforce substudy provided an overview and analysis of the nature of the current LIS workforce, including a focus on employer expectations and employment opportunities and comment on the core and elective skill, knowledge and attitudes of current and future LIS professionals. Finally the Tertiary Education substudy provided a profile of LIS educators and an analysis of their characteristics and experiences including the key issues and challenges. In addition it also explored current national and international trends and priorities impacting on LIS education. The project utilised a Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach. This approach involves all members of the community in all aspects of the project. It recognised the unique strengths and perspectives that community members bring to the process. For this project ‘community’ comprised of all individuals who have a role in, or a vested interest in, LIS education and included LIS educators, professionals, employers, students and professional associations. Individuals from these sub-groups were invited to participate in a range of aspects of the project from design through to implementation and evaluation. A range of research methodologies were used to consider the many different perspectives of LIS education, including employers and recruiters, professional associations, students, graduates and LIS teaching staff. Data collection involved a mixed method approach of questionnaires, focus groups, semi-structured interviews and environmental scans. An array of approaches was selected to ensure that broadest possible access to different facets of the information profession would be achieved. The main findings and observations from each substudy have highlighted a range of challenges for LIS education that need to be addressed. These findings and observations have grounded the development of the Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia. The framework presents eleven recommendations to progress the national approach to LIS education and guide Australia’s future education for the information professions. The framework will be used by the LIS profession, most notably its educators, as strategic directions for the future of LIS education in Australia. Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia: Recommendation 1: It is recommended that a broader and more inclusive vocabulary be adopted that both recognises and celebrates the expanding landscape of the field, for example ‘information profession’, ‘information sector’, ‘information discipline’ and ‘information education’. Recommendation 2: It is recommended that a self-directed body composed of information educators be established to promote, support and lead excellence in teaching and research within the information discipline. Recommendation 3: It is recommended that Australia’s information discipline continue to develop excellence in information research that will raise the discipline’s profile and contribute to its prominence within the national and international arena. Recommendation 4: It is recommended that further research examining the nature and context of Australia’s information education programs be undertaken to ensure a sustainable and relevant future for the discipline. Recommendation 5: It is recommended that further research examining the pathways and qualifications available for entry into the Australian information sector be undertaken to ensure relevance, attractiveness, accessibility and transparency. Recommendation 6: It is recommended that strategies are developed and implemented to ensure the sustainability of the workforce of information educators. Recommendation 7: It is recommended that a national approach to promoting and marketing the information profession and thereby attracting more students to the field is developed. Recommendation 8: It is recommended that Australia’s information discipline continues to support a culture of quality teaching and learning, especially given the need to accommodate a focus on the broader information landscape and more flexible delivery options. Recommendation 9: It is recommended that strategies are developed that will support and encourage collaboration between information education within the higher education and VET sectors. Recommendation 10: It is recommended that strategies and forums are developed that will support the information sector working together to conceptualise and articulate their professional identity and educational needs. Recommendation 11: It is recommended that a research agenda be established that will identify and prioritise areas in which further development or work is needed to continue advancing information education in Australia. The key findings from this project confirm that a number of pressing issues are confronting LIS education in Australia. Left unaddressed these issues will have significant implications for the future of LIS education as well as the broader LIS profession. Consequently creating a sustainable and cohesive future can only be realised through cooperation and collaboration among all stakeholders including those with the capacity to enact radical change in university and vocational institutions. Indeed the impending adoption and implementation of the project’s recommendations will fundamentally determine whether Australian LIS education is assured both for the present day and into the future.

Partners in education : the teacher education done differently (TEDD) project

There has been an abundance of education reform recommendations for teaching and teacher education as a result of national and international reviews. A major criticism in education is the lack of connection between theory and practice (or praxis), that is, how the learning at university informs practical applications for teaching in the classroom. This paper presents the Teacher Education Done Differently (TEDD) project, funded by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR). It outlines how it has re-structured its offering of coursework in a Bachelor of Education (BEd) held at an Australian university campus to embrace praxis. Establishing partnerships was crucial to the development of this project. TEDD initially gathered a reference group of educators, which included university staff, school executives, and other key stakeholders, who formed an Advisory Group and Steering Committee. These groups formed a collective vision for TEDD and aimed to motivate others, foster team work, and create leadership roles that would benefit all stakeholders. The paper presents how university units changed to include a stronger praxis development for preservice teachers. Preservice teachers take their learning into schools within lead-up programs such as Ed Start for practicum I, III, and IV; Science in Schools, and Studies of Society and its Environment (SOSE). Findings showed that opportunities for undertaking additional real-world experiences were perceived to assist the preservice teachers’ praxis development. Additional school-based experiences as lead-up days for field experiences and as avenues for exploring the teaching of specific subject areas presented as an opportunity for enhancing education for all.

Entrepreneurship education in non-business schools : best practice for Australian contexts of knowledge and innovation communities (Final Report)

In the current era of global economic instability, business and industry have already identified a widening gap between graduate skills and employability. An important element of this is the lack of entrepreneurial skills in graduates. This Teaching Fellowship investigated two sides of a story about entrepreneurial skills and their teaching. Senior players in the innovation commercialisation industry, a high profile entrepreneurial sector, were surveyed to gauge their needs and experiences of graduates they employ. International contexts of entrepreneurship education were investigated to explore how their teaching programs impart the skills of entrepreneurship. Such knowledge is an essential for the design of education programs that can deliver the entrepreneurial skills deemed important by industry for future sustainability. Two programs of entrepreneurship education are being implemented at QUT that draw on the best practice exemplars investigated during this Fellowship. The QUT Innovation Space (QIS) focuses on capturing the innovation and creativity of students, staff and others. The QIS is a physical and virtual meeting and networking space; a connected community enhancing the engagement of participants. The Q_Hatchery is still embryonic; but it is intended to be an innovation community that brings together nascent entrepreneurial businesses to collaborate, train and support each other. There is a niche between concept product and business incubator where an experiential learning environment for otherwise isolated ‘garage-at-home’ businesses could improve success rates. The QIS and the Q_Hatchery serve as living research laboratories to trial the concepts emerging from the skills survey. The survey of skills requirements of the innovation commercialisation industry has produced a large and high quality data set still being explored. Work experience as an employability factor has already emerged as an industry requirement that provides employee maturity. Exploratory factor analysis of the skills topics surveyed has led to a process-based conceptual model for teaching and learning higher-order entrepreneurial skills. Two foundational skills domains (Knowledge, Awareness) are proposed as prerequisites which allow individuals with a suite of early stage entrepreneurial and behavioural skills (Pre-leadership) to further leverage their careers into a leadership role in industry with development of skills around higher order elements of entrepreneurship, management in new business ventures and progressing winning technologies to market. The next stage of the analysis is to test the proposed model through structured equation modelling. Another factor that emerged quickly from the survey analysis broadens the generic concept of team skills currently voiced in Australian policy documents discussing the employability agenda. While there was recognition of the role of sharing, creating and using knowledge in a team-based interdisciplinary context, the adoption and adaptation of behaviours and attitudes of other team members of different disciplinary backgrounds (interprofessionalism) featured as an issue. Most undergraduates are taught and undertake teamwork in silos and, thus, seldom experience a true real-world interdisciplinary environment. Enhancing the entrepreneurial capacity of Australian industry is essential for the economic health of the country and can only be achieved by addressing the lack of entrepreneurial skills in graduates from the higher education system. This Fellowship has attempted to address this deficiency by identifying the skills requirements and providing frameworks for their teaching.

Navigating in a sea of change : second set of working papers of the higher education policy project

This volume represents teh second collection of working papers and articles by participants in the Higher Education Policy Project (HEPP), a project funded by the Australian Research Council and based in the Graduate School of Education at the University of Queensland. The first volume, 'Higher Education in Transition: Working Papers of the Higher Education Policy Project (Bella, McCollow and Knight, 1993), took the broad theme of "higher education in transition" in order to introduce readers the HEPP and give them some idea of the breadth of the research being pursued by the HEPP research team itself and by the cohort of post-graduate students also associated with the project. Since then, higher education has remained in transition. Stubborn and resurgent questions continue: such as what a university ought to be, what forms of research should be supported in a mass system, and how institutional accountability can be demonstrated. In differing ways and using a variety of research perspectives and methodologies, the contributors to this volume explore these and other questions of relevance to higher education today.

Literacy in Early Childhood and Primary Education : Issues, Challenges and Solutions

Literacy in Early Childhood and Primary Education provides a comprehensive introduction to literacy teaching and learning. The book explores the continuum of literacy learning and children’s transitions from early childhood settings to junior primary classrooms, and then to senior primary and beyond. Reader-friendly and accessible, this book equips pre-service teachers with the theoretical underpinnings and practical strategies and skills needed to teach literacy. It places the ‘reading wars’ firmly in the past as it examines contemporary research and practices. The book covers important topics such as literacy acquisition, family literacies and multiliteracies, foundation skills for literacy learning, reading difficulties, assessment, and supporting diverse literacy learners in early childhood and primary classrooms. It also addresses some of the challenges that teachers may face in the classroom and provides solutions to these. Each chapter includes learning objectives, reflective questions and definitions to key terms to engage and assist readers. Further resources are also available at www.cambridge.edu.au/academic/literacy. Written by an expert author team and featuring real-world examples from literacy teachers and learners. Literacy in Early Childhood and Primary Education will help pre-service teachers feel confident teaching literacy to diverse age groups and abilities.

Intercultural competence in engineering education : who are we teaching?

BACKGROUND There is little doubt that our engineering graduates’ ability to identify cultural differences and their potential to impact on engineering projects, and to work effectively with these differences is of key importance in the modern engineering practice. Within engineering degree programs themselves there is also a significant need to recognise the impact of changing student and staff profiles on what happens in the classroom. The research described in this paper forms part of a larger project exploring issues of intercultural competence in engineering. PURPOSE This paper presents an observational and survey study of undergraduate and postgraduate engineering students from four institutions working in groups on tasks with a purely technical focus, or with a cultural and humanitarian element. The study sought to explore how students rate their own intercultural competence and team process and whether any differences exist depending on the nature of the task they are working on. We also investigated whether any differences were evident between groups of first year, second year and postgraduate students. DESIGN/METHOD The study used the miniCQS instrument (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008) and a Bales Interaction Process Analysis based scale (Bales, 1950; Carney, 1976) to collect students self ratings of group process, task management, and cultural experience and behaviour. The Bales IPA was also used for coding video observations of students working in groups. Survey data were used to form descriptive variables to compare outcomes across the different tasks and contexts. Observations analysed in Nvivo were used to provide commentary and additional detail on the quantitative data. RESULTS The results of the survey indicated consistent mean scores on each survey item for each group of students, despite vastly different tasks, student backgrounds and educational contexts. Some small, statistically significant mean differences existed, offering some basic insights into how task and student group composition could affect self ratings. Overall though, the results suggest minimal shift in how students view group function and their intercultural experience, irrespective of differing educational experience. CONCLUSIONS The survey results, contrasted with group observations, indicate that either students are not translating their experience (in the group tasks) into critical self assessment of their cultural competence and teamwork, or that they become more critical of team performance and cultural competence as their competence in these areas grows, so their ratings remain consistent. Both outcomes indicate that students need more intensive guidance to build their critical self and peer assessment skills in these areas irrespective of their year level of study.

Good practice for safeguarding student learning engagement in higher education institutions : Final Report 2012

The project 'Good practice for safeguarding student learning engagement in higher education institutions' commenced in late 2010 as a Competitive Grant with funding provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council. The project is now overseen by the Office for Learning and Teaching within the Australian Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. The project was completed in December 2012. The project was lead by QUT and comprised of the project team: Professor Karen Nelson, (project leader), Ms Tracy Creagh, (project manager) and Adjunct Professor John Clarke. Commencing in late 2010 the project invited a total of eight institutions across Australia and New Zealand (including QUT) who had either: existing programs and activities that monitored student learning engagement (MSLE); were in the early stages of implementing MSLE programs, or; who were piloting MSLE activities. As well, the project involved an advisory group and project evaluator comprising of academic and professional staff across two additional universities.

Trauma education : a multidisciplinary interface

Trauma education, both formal and informal, is an essential component of professional development for both nursing anf medical staff working in the Emergency Department. Ideally, this education will be multidisciplinary. As a result, the day to day aspects of emergency care such and team work and crew resource management are maintained.

Validation and consistency in the application of a trauma team activation system at a level 1 trauma centre

- The RAH was activated over 2500 trauma calls in 2009. This figure is over twice the number of calls put out by similar services. - Many trauma calls (in particular L2 trauma calls) from the existing system do not warrant activation of the trauma team - Sometimes trauma calls are activated for nontrauma reasons (eg rapid access to radiology, departmental pressures etc) - The excess of trauma calls has several deleterious effects particularly on time management for the trauma service staff: ward rounds/tertiary survey rounds, education, quality improvement, research

Life Drama : an arts education response to social and cultural challenges in Papua New Guinea

The Life Drama program is a theatre-based experiential learning program developed in Papua New Guinea over the past seven years. The Life Drama team recognises that a significant proportion of “education” for learners of all ages takes place outside formal education systems, particularly in developing nations such as Papua New Guinea. If arts education principles and practices are to contribute meaningfully and powerfully to resolving social and cultural challenges, it is important to recognise that many learners and educators will encounter and use these principles and practices outside of school or university settings. This paper briefly describes the Life Drama program and its context, highlights its two streams of operation (community educators and teacher educators) and indicates some ways in which an arts-based education initiative like Life Drama contributes to Goal 3 of the Seoul Agenda:“Apply arts education principles and practices to contribute to resolving the social and cultural challenges facing today‟s world.” In particular, the project addresses sub-goal 3b:“Recognize and develop the social and cultural well-being dimensions of arts education”.

A CLASS act : the teaching team approach to subject coordination

Advancing the development of good practice around the teaching team has been the focus of a recently completed, nationally funded Australian grant entitled Coordinators Leading Advancement of Sessional Staff (CLASS). The project focused on developing leadership capacity of subject coordinators to provide supportive contexts for sessional staff to enhance their knowledge of teaching practice and contribute to subject improvement through a team approach. An action learning approach and notions of distributed leadership underpinned the activities of the teaching teams in the program. This paper provides an overview of a practical approach, led by the subject coordinator, to engaging sessional staff through the facilitation of a supportive network within the teaching team. It addresses some of the gaps identified in the recent literature which includes lack of role clarity for all members of the team and provides some examples of initiatives that teams engaged with to address some of the challenges identified. Resources to support this approach were developed and are shared through the project website. Recommendations for future direction include improved policy and practice at the institutional level, better recognition and reward for subject coordinators and resourcing to support the participation and professional development needs of sessional staff.