Cracking the language code : NAPLAN numeracy tests in years 7 and 9

Focusing on the use of language is a crucial strategy in good mathematics teaching and a teacher’s guidance can assist students to master the language of mathematics. This article discusses the statements with reference to recent year 7 and 9 NAPLAN numeracy tests. It draws the readers’ attention to the complexities of language in the field of mathematics. Although this article refers to NAPLAN numeracy tests it also offers advice about good teaching practice.

Colin Marsh (2010) Becoming a Teacher : Knowledge, Skills and Issues. 5th edition, Frenchs Forrest : Pearson Education Australia, 459 pages. [Book Review]

In the preface to the fifth edition of Becoming a Teacher, Colin Marsh reminds us that teachers need to have passion, energy and a commitment to enhance students’ learning. This most recent edition certainly provides examples of the author’s wide ranging knowledge and depth of insights that reflect his own commitment to inspirational and dedicated teaching practice. The fifth edition shares those characteristics which made previous editions so worthwhile. Most notable is the subtle but significant dual theme of Marsh’s narrative. That is, first, teaching is a vehicle for increasing the life opportunities of students, and second, teaching is profession that requires continual commitment and critical reflection. These are very important messages for any course that develops teaching methodology. Becoming a Teacher continues to be structured in five readable sections, however the 2010 edition has some exciting new features that warrant the attention of teacher educators and their pre-service students.

Expert science teacher's notion of scientific literacy

This paper will report on the way expert science teachers’ conceive of scientific literacy in their classrooms, the values related to scientific literacy they hold and how this conception and the underpinning values affect their teaching practice. Three perceived expert science teachers who teach both at senior and middle school levels and across the range of sub-disciplines (one senior biology, one senior chemistry and one senior physics) were interviewed about their understanding of scientific literacy and how this influenced their teaching practice. The three teachers were video recorded teaching a junior science class and a senior science class. The data were analysed to identify values that underpin their conceptions of science and science education. The analysis focussed on the matching of the verbalised conceptions and values with their practice of teaching science. This paper will report on these data.

Moving beyond transition pedagogy: Maturity models and student engagement

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

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

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

Tell me what you see : Pre-service teachers' recognition of exemplary digital pedagogy

How do you identify "good" teaching practice in the complexity of a real classroom? How do you know that beginning teachers can recognise effective digital pedagogy when they see it? How can teacher educators see through their students’ eyes? The study in this paper has arisen from our interest in what pre-service teachers “see” when observing effective classroom practice and how this might reveal their own technological, pedagogical and content knowledge. We asked 104 pre-service teachers from Early Years, Primary and Secondary cohorts to watch and comment upon selected exemplary videos of teachers using ICT (information and communication technologies) in Science. The pre-service teachers recorded their observations using a simple PMI (plus, minus, interesting) matrix which were then coded using the SOLO Taxonomy to look for evidence of their familiarity with and judgements of digital pedagogies. From this, we determined that the majority of preservice teachers we surveyed were using a descriptive rather than a reflective strategy, that is, not extending beyond what was demonstrated in the teaching exemplar or differentiating between action and purpose. We also determined that this method warrants wider trialling as a means of evaluating students’ understandings of the complexity of the digital classroom.

Re-imagining STEM : peer scaffolding ICT in initial teacher education

In this paper, we report on how peer scaffolding was used to effect change in tertiary teaching practice and academic disposition in the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Science teaching and learning. We present a small-scale case study investigating the practice of one of this paper’s authors. It is told through two salient episodes which narratively describe the scaffolding used to support a teaching experiment. This was made possible through the national Teaching Teachers for the Future Project (2011-2012) which aimed to enhance the technological pedagogical capability of pre-service teachers across Australia. The outcome was a demonstrable shift in the academic’s disposition towards the use and benefits of ICT in teaching science and an increase in skills and confidence for both the academic and his students. This study and its outcomes fit within the contemporary push to “re-imagine” the teaching of Science, and more broadly of STEM, in schools.

Re-imagining STEM : peer scaffolding ICT in Initial Teacher Education

In this paper, we report on how peer scaffolding was used to effect change in tertiary teaching practice and academic disposition in the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Science teaching and learning. We present a small-scale case study investigating the practice of one of this paper’s authors. It is told through two salient episodes which narratively describe the scaffolding used to support a teaching experiment. This was made possible through the national Teaching Teachers for the Future Project (2011-2012) which aimed to enhance the technological pedagogical capability of pre-service teachers across Australia. The outcome was a demonstrable shift in the academic’s disposition towards the use and benefits of ICT in teaching science and an increase in skills and confidence for both the academic and his students. This study and its outcomes fit within the contemporary push to “re-imagine” the teaching of Science, and more broadly of STEM, in schools.

A critical assessment of the Australian OHS accreditation system's "Body of Knowledge (BoK)"

In response to an increasing perception of poor OHS consultancy quality amongst the Australian public, regulator and OHS professionals, the Safety Institute Australia (SIA) was tasked by the Victorian government to establish an accreditation process for OHS professionals. The OHS accreditation board decided to base its accreditation on a core "body of knowledge" (BoK), against which applicants are assesssed. While the foundation and structure of the BoK is unclear, the BoK consists of a collection of essays from a variety of invited authors. The BoK comprises about 811 pages in 34 chapters, with significant redundancy and considerable subjective components. The SIA BoK is benchmarked against two international best-practices, the German "Core Definition, Object Catalog and Research Domains of Labour Science (Ergonomics)" (Luzcak, Volpert, Raeithel & Schwier, 1989)(100 pages) and the American "Core Competency Model" for the "Master's Degree in Public Health" (Association of Schools of Public Health, 2006) (21 pages). Both "core definition" and "core competency model" are on a comparative level to the BoK. While the German expert panel consisted of 14 eminent professors, the American panel consisted of 135 members, organized in 6 groups chaired by discipline leading academics. The Australian approach employed a broad approach, where 137 professionals, consultants, emerging academics and academics contributed to 8 workshops. Both the German and the American panels maintained an open communication amongst members and with the discipline community throughout the process, whereas SIA applied an open and directed peer-review process. Moreover, the German process involved an analysis of all congress content and journal publications in the scientific domain in a set timeframe, which were then systematically clustered. These results were further expanded by structured interviews with 38 professors in the discpline, grasping their research and teaching practice. The American workgroup however assumed core scientific areas, underlying the domain. Based upon the a-priori assumption, they then established well defined competencies across all areas using a modified Delphi process. Although the BoK attempts to explore the knowledge in the OHS domain without an imposed structure in a bottom-up approach, it does not result in a structured systematic of the science. We conclude that the outcome of the German, rigorous academic approach, and the US American democratic approach under unambiguous academic leadership both outperform the Australian advocacy group approach. This product was determined for both structure and content of the taxonomy delivered through the processes.

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.

Sensing place : embodiment, sensoriality, kinesis, and children behind the camera

This article is a call to literacy teachers and researchers to embrace the possibility of attending more consciously to the senses in digital media production. Literacy practices do not occur only in the mind, but involve the sensoriality, embodiment, co-presence, and movement of bodies. This paper theorises the sensorial and embodied dimension of children’s filmmaking about place in two communities in Australia. The films were created by pre-teen Indigenous and non-Indigenous children in Logan, Queensland, and by Indigenous teenagers at the Warralong campus of the Strelley Community School in remote Western Australia. The films were created through engagement in cross-curricular units that sensitised the students’ experience of local places, gathering corporeal information through their sensing bodies as they interacted with the local ecology. The analysis highlights how the sensorial and bodily nature of literacy practice through documentary filmmaking was central to the children’s formation and representation of knowledge, because knowledge and literacy practices are not only acquired through the mind, but are also reliant on embodiment, sensoriality, co-presence, and kinesics of the body in place.