Improving access to quality clinical nurse teaching : a partnership between Australia and Vietnam

Until recently, standards to guide nursing education and practice in Vietnam were nonexistent. This paper describes the development and implementation of a clinical teaching capacity building project piloted in Hanoi, Vietnam. The project was part of a multi-component capacity building program designed to improve nurse education in Vietnam. Objectives of the project were to develop a collaborative clinically-based teaching model that encourages evidence-based, student-centred clinical learning. The model incorporated strategies to promote development of nursing practice to meet national competency standards. Thirty nurse teachers from two organisations in Hanoi participated in the program. These participants attended three workshops, and completed applied assessments, where participants implemented concepts from each workshop. The assessment tasks were planning, implementing and evaluating clinical teaching. On completion of the workshops, twenty participants undertook a study tour in Australia to refine the teaching model and develop an action plan for model implementation in both organisations, with an aim to disseminate the model across Vietnam. Significant changes accredited to this project have been noted on an individual and organisational level. Dissemination of this clinical teaching model has commenced in Ho Chi Minh, with further plans for more in-depth dissemination to occur throughout the country.

The Socratic classroom : reflective thinking through collaborative inquiry

This book was written to serve two functions. First it is an exploration of what I have called Socratic pedagogy, a collaborative inquiry-based approach to teaching and learning suitable not only to formal educational settings such as the school classroom but to all educational settings. The term is intended to capture a variety of philosophical approaches to classroom practice that could broadly be described Socratic in form. The term ‘philosophy in schools’ is ambiguous and could refer to teaching university style philosophy to high school students or to the teaching of philosophy and logic or critical reasoning in senior years of high school. It is also used to describe the teaching of philosophy in schools generally. In the early and middle phases of schooling the term philosophy for children is often used. But this too is ambiguous as the name was adopted from Matthew Lipman’s Philosophy for Children curriculum that he and his colleagues at the Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children developed. In Britain the term ‘philosophy with children’ is sometimes employed to mark two methods of teaching that have Socratic roots but have distinct differences, namely Philosophy for Children and Socratic Dialogue developed by Leonard Nelson. The use of the term Socratic pedagogy and its companion term Socratic classroom (to refer to the kind of classroom that employs Socratic teaching) avoids the problem of distinguishing between various approaches to philosophical inquiry in the Socratic tradition but also separates it from the ‘study of philosophy’, such as university style philosophy or other approaches which place little or no emphasis on collaborative inquiry based teaching and learning. The second function builds from the first. It is to develop an effective framework for understanding the relationship between what I call the generative, evaluative and connective aspects of communal dialogue, which I think are necessary to the Socratic notion of inquiry. In doing so it is hoped that this book offers some way to show how philosophy as inquiry can contribute to educational theory and practice, while also demonstrating how it can be an effective way to approach teaching and learning. This has meant striking a balance between speaking to philosophers and to teachers and educators together, with the view that both see the virtues of such a project. In the strictest sense this book is not philosophy of education, insofar as its chief focus is not on the analysis of concepts or formulation of definitions specific to education with the aim of formulating directives that guide educational practice. It relinquishes the role of philosopher as ‘spectator’, to one of philosopher ‘immersed in matter’ – in this case philosophical issues in education, specifically those related to philosophical inquiry, pedagogy and classroom practice. Put another way, it is a book about philosophical education.

Teaching creatively, teaching for creativity : QUT’s Creative Industries Faculty Showcase Panel

In this panel, we showcase approaches to teaching for creativity in disciplines of the Media, Entertainment and Creative Arts School and the School of Design within the Creative Industries Faculty (CIF) at QUT. The Faculty is enormously diverse, with 4,000 students enrolled across a total of 20 disciplines. Creativity is a unifying concept in CIF, both as a graduate attribute, and as a key pedagogic principle. We take as our point of departure the assertion that it is not sufficient to assume that students of tertiary courses in creative disciplines are ‘naturally’ creative. Rather, teachers in higher education must embrace their roles as facilitators of development and learning for the creative workforce, including working to build creative capacity (Howkins, 2009). In so doing, we move away from Renaissance notions of creativity as an individual genius, a disposition or attribute which cannot be learned, towards a 21st century conceptualisation of creativity as highly collaborative, rhizomatic, and able to be developed through educational experiences (see, for instance, Robinson, 2006; Craft; 2001; McWilliam & Dawson, 2008). It has always been important for practitioners of the arts and design to be creative. Under the national innovation agenda (Bradley et al, 2008) and creative industries policy (e.g., Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2008; Office for the Arts, 2011), creativity has been identified as a key determinant of economic growth, and thus developing students’ creativity has now become core higher education business across all fields. Even within the arts and design, professionals are challenged to be creative in new ways, for new purposes, in different contexts, and using new digital tools and platforms. Teachers in creative disciplines may have much to offer to the rest of the higher education sector, in terms of designing and modelling innovative and best practice pedagogies for the development of student creative capability. Information and Communication Technologies such as mobile learning, game-based learning, collaborative online learning tools and immersive learning environments offer new avenues for creative learning, although analogue approaches may also have much to offer, and should not be discarded out of hand. Each panelist will present a case study of their own approach to teaching for creativity, and will address the following questions with respect to their case: 1. What conceptual view of creativity does the case reflect? 2. What pedagogical approaches are used, and why were these chosen? What are the roles of innovative learning approaches, including ICTs, if any? 3. How is creativity measured or assessed? How do students demonstrate creativity? We seek to identify commonalities and contrasts between and among the pedagogic case studies, and to answer the question: what can we learn about teaching creatively and teaching for creativity from CIF best practice?

De-mystifying [a facet of] mobile learning : collaborative media in studio

“Our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach” (Prensky, 2001, p. 1). The influx of available new technology has helped to democratise knowledge, transforming when, where and how learning takes place, and changing perceptions of traditional learning landscapes (JISC, 2006; Neary et al., 2010). Mobile computers combined with wireless technology, have completely transformed the educational world; students have turned nomad[ic], engaging in conversations and thinking across traditional campus spaces (Alexander, 2004; Fisher, 2005). In this workshop we will be attempting to de-mystify a facet of mobile learning, by working in small groups to set up and kick start a number of social media sites, which can be used for collaboration and information exchange, in the design studio.

Establishing virtual production as a research and teaching activity at QUT

Located within the Creative Industries Faculty, the Animation team at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) recently acquired a full-body inertial motion capture system. Our research to date has been predominantly concerned with interdisciplinary practice and the benefits this could bring to undergraduate teaching. From early experimental tests it was identified that there was a need to develop a framework for best practice and an efficient production workflow to ensure the system was being used to its full potential. Through our ongoing investigation we have identified at least three areas that stand to have long-term benefits from universities engaging in motion capture related research activity. This includes interdisciplinary collaborative research, undergraduate teaching and improved production processes. The following paper reports the early stages of our research, which explores the use of a full-body inertial motion capture (MoCap) solution in collaboration with performing artists.

A model for enhancing assessment and teaching practice at the coalface : Insights from a Fellow-In-Residence engagement program

Australian universities are currently engaging with new governmental policies and regulations that require them to demonstrate enhanced quality and accountability in teaching and research. The development of national academic standards for learning outcomes in higher education is one such instance of this drive for excellence. These discipline-specific standards articulate the minimum, or Threshold Learning Outcomes, to be addressed by higher education institutions so that graduating students can demonstrate their achievement to their institutions, accreditation agencies, and industry recruiters. This impacts not only on the design of Engineering courses (with particular emphasis on pedagogy and assessment), but also on the preparation of academics to engage with these standards and implement them in their day-to-day teaching practice on a micro level. This imperative for enhanced quality and accountability in teaching is also significant at a meso level, for according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, about 25 per cent of teachers in Australian universities are aged 55 and above and more than 54 per cent are aged 45 and above (ABS, 2006). A number of institutions have undertaken recruitment drives to regenerate and enrich their academic workforce by appointing capacity-building research professors and increasing the numbers of early- and mid-career academics. This nationally driven agenda for quality and accountability in teaching permeates also the micro level of engineering education, since the demand for enhanced academic standards and learning outcomes requires both a strong advocacy for a shift to an authentic, collaborative, outcomes-focused education and the mechanisms to support academics in transforming their professional thinking and practice. Outcomes-focused education means giving greater attention to the ways in which the curriculum design, pedagogy, assessment approaches and teaching activities can most effectively make a positive, verifiable difference to students’ learning. Such education is authentic when it is couched firmly in the realities of learning environments, student and academic staff characteristics, and trustworthy educational research. That education will be richer and more efficient when staff works collaboratively, contributing their knowledge, experience and skills to achieve learning outcomes based on agreed objectives. We know that the school or departmental levels of universities are the most effective loci of changes in approaches to teaching and learning practices in higher education (Knight & Trowler, 2000). Heads of Schools are being increasingly entrusted with more responsibilities - in addition to setting strategic directions and managing the operational and sometimes financial aspects of their school, they are also expected to lead the development and delivery of the teaching, research and other academic activities. Guiding and mentoring individuals and groups of academics is one critical aspect of the Head of School’s role. Yet they do not always have the resources or support to help them mentor staff, especially the more junior academics. In summary, the international trend in undergraduate engineering course accreditation towards the demonstration of attainment of graduate attributes poses new challenges in addressing academic staff development needs and the assessment of learning. This paper will give some insights into the conceptual design, implementation and empirical effectiveness to date, of a Fellow-In-Residence Engagement (FIRE) program. The program is proposed as a model for achieving better engagement of academics with contemporary issues and effectively enhancing their teaching and assessment practices. It will also report on the program’s collaborative approach to working with Heads of Schools to better support academics, especially early-career ones, by utilizing formal and informal mentoring. Further, the paper will discuss possible factors that may assist the achievement of the intended outcomes of such a model, and will examine its contributions to engendering an outcomes-focussed thinking in engineering education.

Teaching and learning family and consumer sciences through K-W-L charts

While much of the control and many of the activities found in today’s classrooms have been placed in the hands of the learners and learning has become inquiry-based, there remains a need for teachers to use teaching tools that would facilitate this student-centered teaching process. This article identifies the K-W-L Chart as one such tool and follows a case study of four Kuwaiti ‘Family and Consumer Sciences’ teaching / learning events to evaluate their ability to enhance the learning outcomes of eight students. The research was designed from a qualitative, multi-tiered design approach and was assessed through a constant comparative method of data analysis of interview responses, classroom observations and worksheet-assessments. The results showed that the use of K-W-L Charts influenced the teachers and learners toward a more inquiry-based approach and facilitated a more student-centered and collaborative learning environment, raising the level of interest and the amount of personal input given by the students.

Teaching journalism students how to tell Indigenous stories in an informed way : a work integrated learning approach

Australian journalism schools are full of students who have never met an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Island person and who do not know their history. Journalism educators are ill-equipped to redress this imbalance as a large majority are themselves non-Indigenous and many have had little or no experience with the coverage of Indigenous issues or knowledge of Indigenous affairs. Such a situation calls for educational approaches that can overcome these disadvantages and empower journalism graduates to move beyond the stereotypes that characterize the representation of Indigenous people in the mainstream media. This article will explore three different courses in three Australian tertiary journalism education institutions, which use Work-Integrated Learning Approaches to instil the cultural competencies necessary to encourage a more informed reporting of Indigenous issues. The findings from the three projects illustrate the importance of adopting a collaborative approach by industry, the Indigenous community and educators to encourage students’ commitment to quality journalism practices when covering Indigenous issues.

Connecting across continents : collaborative learning in a Web 2.0 world

Purpose – The article aims to review a university course, offered to students in both Australia and Germany, to encourage them to learn about designing, implementing, marketing and evaluating information programs and services in order to build active and engaged communities. The concepts and processes of Web 2.0 technologies come together in the learning activities, with students establishing their own personal learning networks (PLNs). Design/methodology/approach – The case study examines the principles of learning and teaching that underpin the course and presents the students' own experiences of the challenges they faced as they explored the interactive, participative and collaborative dimensions of the web. Findings – The online format of the course and the philosophy of learning through play provided students with a safe and supportive environment for them to move outside of their comfort zones, to be creative, to experiment and to develop their professional personas. Reflection on learning was a key component that stressed the value of reflective practice in assisting library and information science (LIS) professionals to adapt confidently to the rapidly changing work environment. Originality/value – This study provides insights into the opportunities for LIS courses to work across geographical boundaries, to allow students to critically appraise library practice in different contexts and to become active participants in wider professional networks.

Quality Assessment Matrix : A Collaborative Evaluation Using Multiple Lines of Evidence

Welcome to the Quality assessment matrix. This matrix is designed for highly qualified discipline experts to evaluate their course, major or unit in a systematic manner. The primary purpose of the Quality assessment matrix is to provide a tool that a group of academic staff at universities can collaboratively review the assessment within a course, major or unit annually. The annual review will result in you being read for an external curricula review at any point in time. This tool is designed for use in a workshop format with one, two or more academic staff, and will lead to an action plan for implementation.

Collaborative learning and critical thinking in technology-enhanced environments : an instructional design framework

The nature and characteristics of how learners learn today are changing. As technology use in learning and teaching continues to grow, its integration to facilitate deep learning and critical thinking becomes a primary consideration. The implications for learner use, implementation strategies, design of integration frameworks and evaluation of their effectiveness in learning environments cannot be overlooked. This study specifically looked at the impact that technology-enhanced learning environments have on different learners’ critical thinking in relation to eductive ability, technological self-efficacy, and approaches to learning and motivation in collaborative groups. These were explored within an instructional design framework called CoLeCTTE (collaborative learning and critical thinking in technology-enhanced environments) which was proposed, revised and used across three cases. The field of investigation was restricted to three key questions: 1) Do learner skill bases (learning approach and eductive ability) influence critical thinking within the proposed CoLeCTTE framework? If so, how?; 2) Do learning technologies influence the facilitation of deep learning and critical thinking within the proposed CoLeCTTE framework? If so, how?; and 3) How might learning be designed to facilitate the acquisition of deep learning and critical thinking within a technology-enabled collaborative environment? The rationale, assumptions and method of research for using a mixed method and naturalistic case study approach are discussed; and three cases are explored and analysed. The study was conducted at the tertiary level (undergraduate and postgraduate) where participants were engaged in critical technical discourse within their own disciplines. Group behaviour was observed and coded, attributes or skill bases were measured, and participants interviewed to acquire deeper insights into their experiences. A progressive case study approach was used, allowing case investigation to be implemented in a "ladder-like" manner. Cases 1 and 2 used the proposed CoLeCTTE framework with more in-depth analysis conducted for Case 2 resulting in a revision of the CoLeCTTE framework. Case 3 used the revised CoLeCTTE framework and in-depth analysis was conducted. The findings led to the final version of the framework. In Cases 1, 2 and 3, content analysis of group work was conducted to determine critical thinking performance. Thus, the researcher used three small groups where learner skill bases of eductive ability, technological self-efficacy, and approaches to learning and motivation were measured. Cases 2 and 3 participants were interviewed and observations provided more in-depth analysis. The main outcome of this study is analysis of the nature of critical thinking within collaborative groups and technology-enhanced environments positioned in a theoretical instructional design framework called CoLeCTTE. The findings of the study revealed the importance of the Achieving Motive dimension of a student’s learning approach and how direct intervention and strategies can positively influence critical thinking performance. The findings also identified factors that can adversely affect critical thinking performance and include poor learning skills, frustration, stress and poor self-confidence, prioritisations over learning; and inadequate appropriation of group role and tasks. These findings are set out as instructional design guidelines for the judicious integration of learning technologies into learning and teaching practice for higher education that will support deep learning and critical thinking in collaborative groups. These guidelines are presented in two key areas: technology and tools; and activity design, monitoring, control and feedback.

Science and engineering for whole of life : integrating education, research and public engagement in a collaborative environment

Policy makers increasingly recognise that an educated workforce with a high proportion of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) graduates is a pre-requisite to a knowledge-based, innovative economy. Over the past ten years, the proportion of first university degrees awarded in Australia in STEM fields is below the global average and continues to decrease from 22.2% in 2002 to 18.8% in 2010 [1]. These trends are mirrored by declines between 20% and 30% in the proportions of high school students enrolled in science or maths. These trends are not unique to Australia but their impact is of concern throughout the policy-making community. To redress these demographic trends, QUT embarked upon a long-term investment strategy to integrate education and research into the physical and virtual infrastructure of the campus, recognising that expectations of students change as rapidly as technology and learning practices change. To implement this strategy, physical infrastructure refurbishment/re-building is accompanied by upgraded technologies not only for learning but also for research. QUT’s vision for its city-based campuses is to create vibrant and attractive places to learn and research and to link strongly to the wider surrounding community. Over a five year period, physical infrastructure at the Gardens Point campus was substantially reconfigured in two key stages: (a) a >$50m refurbishment of heritage-listed buildings to encompass public, retail and social spaces, learning and teaching “test beds” and research laboratories and (b) destruction of five buildings to be replaced by a $230m, >40,000m2 Science and Engineering Centre designed to accommodate retail, recreation, services, education and research in an integrated, coordinated precinct. This landmark project is characterised by (i) self-evident, collaborative spaces for learning, research and social engagement, (ii) sustainable building practices and sustainable ongoing operation and; (iii) dynamic and mobile re-configuration of spaces or staffing to meet demand. Innovative spaces allow for transformative, cohort-driven learning and the collaborative use of space to prosecute joint class projects. Research laboratories are aggregated, centralised and “on display” to the public, students and staff. A major visualisation space – the largest multi-touch, multi-user facility constructed to date – is a centrepiece feature that focuses on demonstrating scientific and engineering principles or science oriented scenes at large scale (e.g. the Great Barrier Reef). Content on this visualisation facility is integrated with the regional school curricula and supports an in-house schools program for student and teacher engagement. Researchers are accommodated in a combined open-plan and office floor-space (80% open plan) to encourage interdisciplinary engagement and cross-fertilisation of skills, ideas and projects. This combination of spaces re-invigorates the on-campus experience, extends educational engagement across all ages and rapidly enhances research collaboration.

A grand challenge : reflecting on university science curriculum design, collaborative partnerships and integration of information literacy skills

In 2012, Queensland University of Technology (QUT) committed to the massive project of revitalizing its Bachelor of Science (ST01) degree. Like most universities in Australia, QUT has begun work to align all courses by 2015 to the requirements of the updated Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) which is regulated by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). From the very start of the redesigned degree program, students approach scientific study with an exciting mix of theory and highly topical real world examples through their chosen “grand challenge.” These challenges, Fukushima and nuclear energy for example, are the lenses used to explore science and lead to 21st century learning outcomes for students. For the teaching and learning support staff, our grand challenge is to expose all science students to multidisciplinary content with a strong emphasis on embedding information literacies into the curriculum. With ST01, QUT is taking the initiative to rethink not only content but how units are delivered and even how we work together between the faculty, the library and learning and teaching support. This was the desired outcome but as we move from design to implementation, has this goal been achieved? A main component of the new degree is to ensure scaffolding of information literacy skills throughout the entirety of the three year course. However, with the strong focus on problem-based learning and group work skills, many issues arise both for students and lecturers. A move away from a traditional lecture style is necessary but impacts on academics’ workload and comfort levels. Therefore, academics in collaboration with librarians and other learning support staff must draw on each others’ expertise to work together to ensure pedagogy, assessments and targeted classroom activities are mapped within and between units. This partnership can counteract the tendency of isolated, unsupported academics to concentrate on day-to-day teaching at the expense of consistency between units and big picture objectives. Support staff may have a more holistic view of a course or degree than coordinators of individual units, making communication and truly collaborative planning even more critical. As well, due to staffing time pressures, design and delivery of new curriculum is generally done quickly with no option for the designers to stop and reflect on the experience and outcomes. It is vital we take this unique opportunity to closely examine what QUT has and hasn’t achieved to be able to recommend a better way forward. This presentation will discuss these important issues and stumbling blocks, to provide a set of best practice guidelines for QUT and other institutions. The aim is to help improve collaboration within the university, as well as to maximize students’ ability to put information literacy skills into action. As our students embark on their own grand challenges, we must challenge ourselves to honestly assess our own work.

Literacy in the Middle Years : Learning from Collaborative Classroom Research

Literacy in the Middle Years: Learning from Collaborative Classroom Research, showcases teachers' innovative literacy work across the curriculum. Classroom practice, teacher thinking and collaborative research are highlighted in ways of working with new curricula and rapidly changing literacy modes and platforms. Connections with place, critical engagement with digital literacies, using polymedia with EAL/D learners, and subject-specific literacies are detailed in teachers' stories of practice. Teacher wellbeing, for a sustainable workforce, underpins the case studies, aimed at equipping 'change ready' teachers with positive examples of literacy approaches and inquiry in practice.

Dilemmatic spaces : high-stakes testing and the possibilities of collaborative knowledge work to generate learning innovations

This paper examines collaborative researcher-practitioner knowledge work around assessment data in culturally diverse, low- socioeconomic school communities in Queensland, Australia. Specifically, the paper draws on interview accounts about the work of a bridging knowledge flows between a local university and a cluster of schools. We draw on Bernstein’s (2000) concept of recontextualisation to explore the processes of knowledge mediation in dialogues around student assessment data to design instructional innovations. We argue that critical policy studies need to explore the complex ways in which neoliberal education policies are enacted in local sites. Moreover, we suggest that an analysis of collaborative knowledge work designed to improve student learning outcomes in low-socioeconomic school communities necessitates attention to the principles regulating knowledge flows across boundaries. In addition, it necessitates attention to the ways in which mediators navigate dilemmatic spaces, anxieties and affects/feelings in order to generate innovative learning designs in the current global context of high-stakes national testing and accountability regimes.