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.

Teaching and assessing critical thinking : the interaction of student approaches to learning and teaching approaches

This study explored the relationship among student approaches to learning and teaching methods on critical thinking in two business units. Key findings included differences in critical thinking scores between student approaches to learning and some evidence of an interaction between student approaches to learning and critical thinking teach method (immersion vs. infusion). Possible explanations for the results are examined and implications for developing critical thinking skills across a degree discussed. What is apparent is that as Universities move towards program-wide level assessment of critical thinking, further work is required in terms of the design of critical thinking teaching interventions and assessment at the unit, school, and degree level. The session will discuss the challenges in developing critical thinking programs in individual units and at the Faculty level.

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.

Paramedic empathy levels : results from seven Australian universities

Purpose Evidence suggests that improved empathy behaviours among healthcare professionals directly impacts on healthcare outcomes. However, the ‘nebulous’ properties of empathic behaviour often means that healthcare profession educators fail to incorporate the explicit teaching and assessment of empathy within the curriculum. This represents a potential mismatch between what is taught by universities and what is actually needed in the healthcare industry. The objective of this study was to assess the extent of empathy in paramedic students across seven Australian universities. Methods A cross-sectional study using a paper-based questionnaire employing a convenience sample of first, second, and third year undergraduate paramedic students. Student empathy levels were measured using a standardised self-reporting instrument: Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy – Health Profession Students (JSPE-HPS). Findings A total of 783 students participated in the study of which 57% were females. The overall JSPE-HPS mean score was 106.74 (SD=14.8). Females had greater mean empathy scores than males 108.69 v 103.58 (p=0.042). First year undergraduate paramedic mean empathy levels were the lowest, 106.29 (SD=15.40) with second years the highest at 107.17 (SD=14.90). Value The overall findings provide a framework for educators to begin constructing guidelines focusing on the need to incorporate, promote and instil empathy into paramedic students in order to better prepare them for future out-of-hospital healthcare practice.

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

Changing the culture of teaching and learning in ICT and engineering : facilitating research professors to be teaching and learning leaders

This is the project report of a leadership project undertaken jointly by the Queensland University of Technology, University of Technology Sydney, and Monash University. Specific project objectives were to: -To build leadership capacity in teaching and learning, and to improve teaching quality in ICT and Engineering disciplines at three leading Australian universities, and -To facilitate the transference of research leadership to T&L leadership, and disseminate this transference model developed through the project within the Engineering and ICT domains to other disciplines and universities.

How can universities support beginning teachers?

Many beginning teachers struggle in teaching, consequently, tertiary education has been criticised for not preparing preservice teachers well enough. This qualitative study uses interviews and questionnaires to investigate 10 first-year teachers’ understandings of how universities can support them more effectively. The findings indicated that university preparation needed more literacy (particularly reading and spelling), numeracy, catering for lower socio-economic students, understanding behaviour differentiation, and communicating with parents. A two-prong approach may support beginning teachers: (1) timely induction and mentoring within school settings, and (2) research for advancing teacher education coursework to ensure currency of addressing beginning teachers’ needs.

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.

The enactment of formative assessment in English language classrooms in two Chinese universities : teacher and student responses

The College English Curriculum Requirements (CECR), announced by the Chinese Ministry of Education in 2007, recommended the inclusion of formative assessment into the existing summative assessment framework of College English. This policy had the potential to fundamentally change the nature of assessment and its role in the teaching and learning of English in Chinese universities. In order to document and analyse these changes, case studies involving English language teachers and learners were undertaken in two Chinese Universities: one a Key university in the national capital; the other a non-Key university in a western province. The case study design incorporated classroom observations and interviews with English language teachers and their students. The type and focus of feedback and the engagement of students in assessment were analysed in the two contexts. Fundamental to the analysis was the concept of enactment, with the focus of this study on the ways that policy ideas and principles were enacted in the practices of the Chinese university classroom. Understandings of formative assessment as applied in contexts other than the predominantly Western, Anglophone contexts from where many of its principles derive, are offered.

Cultivating creative ecologies : creative teaching and teaching for creativity

Australian universities now commonly list creativity amongst the generic attributes that graduates are expected to have achieved or demonstrated upon graduation. While this reflects emerging local and global trends to encourage creativity at every educational level, creativity as a generic capability has special difficulties. These include problems of definition, its perceived value, the gap between espoused beliefs and practice, and tensions between standards and accreditation agendas and the desire to embed creative outcomes in the curriculum. Contextual and disciplinary differences also shape the expression of creative teaching and teaching for creativity. This paper explores these issues, acknowledging the role of information and communications technologies in shaping the technology-enhanced learning spaces where creativity may emerge. Csikszentmihalyi’s model of creativity as a system of interactions is presented as a useful foundation for furthering the discourse in this domain, along with the notion of creative ecologies as spaces for effecting change.

Kaleidoscope : illuminating learning and teaching evaluation for a shared stakeholder lens

Within the Australian higher education sector, institutions are required to evaluate teaching, units and courses to assure the quality of the student learning experience, however with hardly any regulatory parameters guiding institutions, and with disparate practices, there are few opportunities to benchmakr across institutions or the sector. QUT has received interest and requests from national and international universities on accessing Reframe: QUT's Evaluation Framework.

Could MOOCs answer the problems of teaching AQF required skills in Australian tertiary programmes?

From 2015, Australian universities will be required to demonstrate that their programmes explicitly teach, and assess achievement of, knowledge and skills and the application of both as specified by the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF). Over the last twenty years, the sector has applied significant effort and resource to embedding the development of skills through tertiary programmes. Despite these national and institutional efforts, employer and industry concerns remain about the quality of graduate skills. The authors propose a ‘massive open online course’ (MOOC) approach to teaching and assessing AQF required skills. As an example the paper identifies the skills modules that would need to be developed by experts in each skill area for AQF level 9 master’s by coursework programmes. The proposed MOOC would include assessment tasks and rubrics allowing students to develop and demonstrate achievement of the AQF required skills. The assessment tasks could be used by institutions to provide evidence of attainment of coursework master’s standards.

Examining workload models in online and blended teaching

Over the past decade, most Australian universities have moved increasingly towards online course delivery for both undergraduate and graduate programs. In almost all cases, elements of online teaching are part of routine teaching loads. Yet detailed and accurate workload data are not readily available. As a result, institutional policies on academic staff workload are often guided more by untested assumptions about reduction of costs per student unit, rather than being evidence-based, with the result that implementation of new technologies for online teaching has resulted in poorly defined workload expectations. While the academics in this study often revealed a limited understanding of their institutional workload formulas, which in Australia are negotiated between management and the national union through their local branches, the costs of various types of teaching delivery have become a critical issue in a time of increasing student numbers, declining funding, pressures to increase quality and introduce minimum standards of teaching and curriculum, and substantial expenditure on technologies to support e-learning. There have been relatively few studies on the costs associated with workload for online teaching, and even fewer on the more ubiquitous ‘blended’, ‘hybrid’ or ‘flexible’ modes, in which face-to-face teaching is supplemented by online resources and activities. With this in mind the research reported here has attempted to answer the following question: What insights currently inform Australian universities about staff workload when teaching online?