The five myths of academic standards

This script provided the basis for a short DVD produced in 2010. The script and DVD were products of research into the introduction of 'minimum threshold' academic standards to Australian Universities. Learning and teaching academic standards are publicly defensible statements about academic standards in all disciplines, intended to establish 'baseline expectations' for undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. The script was developed using an 'anti-model' approach to character and narrative. This produced a set of deliberately skewed perspectives on the standards initiative, which are intended stimulate discussion and debate on the topic. The DVD has been shown to a range of stakeholder audiences in a variety of academic forums.

The emergence of JD in the Australian Legal Education marketplace and its impact on academic standards

Over the last decade there has been an expansion in the number of Juris Doctor (JD) courses in the Australian legal education marketplace. Across the board it is graduate-entry, but it is currently offered in undergraduate, postgraduate and ‘hybrid’ forms. In this article we will discuss recent research conducted as part of an Australian Learning and Teaching Council grant. This project included an exploration of whether JD courses in Australia were applying different and higher level academic standards to those operating in Bachelor of Laws degrees. Our research findings reveal justification for concerns about the academic standards of some JD courses, particularly where masters level students were being taught alongside their undergraduate counterparts. They also provide some insights into perceptions in the marketplace of JD graduates. Finally, we will discuss the future viability of such courses in light of recent revisions to the Australian Qualifications Framework.

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.

Using technology to improve peer review and collaborative conversations to benchmark academic standards

In 2010 the Australian government commissioned the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) to undertake a national project to facilitate disciplinary development of threshold learning standards. The aim was to lay the foundation for all higher education providers to demonstrate to the new national higher education regulator, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), that graduates achieved or exceeded minimum academic standards. Through a yearlong consultative process, representatives of employers, professional bodies, academics and students, developed learning standards applying to any Australian higher education provider. Willey and Gardner reported using a software tool, SPARKPLUS, in calibrating academic standards amongst teaching staff in large classes. In this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of this technology to promote calibrated understandings with the national accounting learning standards. We found that integrating the software with a purposely designed activity provided significant efficiencies in calibrating understandings about learning standards, developed expertise and a better understanding of what is required to meet these standards and how best to demonstrate them. The software and supporting calibration and assessment process can be adopted by other disciplines, including engineering, seeking to provide direct evidence about performance against learning standards. © 2012 IEEE.

Preliminary draft : Illinois academic standards : for public review and comment.

Mode of access: Internet.

Attribution of words versus attribution of responsibilities : Academic plagiarism and university practice

This paper examines a case of academic plagiarism and the subsequent treatment of the issues across several academic institutions. It calls for academic leaders in universities to act on what constitutes a serious breach of standards, engendered in part by broader institutional norms and values promoting the need for publications in a ‘publish or perish’ environment. While universities often promote high-sounding ideals and would generally wish to be seen to uphold high academic standards, it is argued that silence and complicity surround the way in which instances of plagiarism in academic publications are often dealt with. Actions (and inaction) by academic leaders in universities in dealing with cases of academic plagiarism speak volumes in terms of the values academic institutions profess, and those they actually uphold. The paper prompts readers to consider the need for a more consistent and proactive stance on the part of their own institutions to exercise ethical leadership in identifying and addressing academic plagiarism when it occurs.

Accountability, quality assurance and performativity : the changing role of the academic board

This article undertakes a review of Australian and international literature and higher education policy in response to the changing nature of university academic boards (also known as academic senates or faculty senates). It shows that governance has become an issue for both the state and for universities and that within this context risk management and accountability mechanisms such as academic quality assurance are taking an increasingly prominent role. These developments have altered the form and function of academic governance and have fundamentally affected the academic board. For example, some literature reports that the role of Australian academic boards now largely revolves around academic quality assurance and it is argued that this is potentially problematic because of a focus on audit-driven accountability mechanisms. However, the article concludes by suggesting that as part of a broader quality assurance framework there is also an opportunity for academic boards to have a central role in the development of academic standards that focus on enhancing learning outcomes rather than on compliance.

Skills in LLB threshold learning outcomes and competency standards for entry-level lawyers – a comparison using CAQDAS

This exploratory study analysed the Threshold Learning Outcomes ("TLOs") specified in the Bachelor of Laws Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement December 2010, and the Competency Standards for Entry-Level Lawyers for Practical Legal Training, as updated by the Australasian Professional Legal Education Council and Law Admissions Consultative Committee in February 2002 ("NCS"). The qualitative analysis was undertaken using the NVivo computer assisted qualitative data analysis software ("CAQDAS"), to investigate how skills were categorised and defined in each of the documents. The results were then analysed to compare the respective categorisation and definition of skills, and to point to potential complements, overlaps, conflicts, gaps, or blind spots, between the TLOs and the NCS. The findings, and the methodology adopted, might provide insights for future instructional design, content, and delivery of Practical Legal Training programs, and for future reviews of the TLOs and NCS.

Widening participation in Australia: lessons on equity, standards, and institutional leadership

Widening participation movements inevitably give rise to discussions of the false dichotomy between equity and standards. The assumption is that by allowing differently prepared students into university and thereby improving equity, standards are somehow compromised. A recent national Australian study examined effective teaching and support of university students from low socio-economic status (LSES) backgrounds from the conceptual framework of bridging sociocultural incongruity rather than from a deficit perspective that assumes lower standards are operating. This chapter outlines the findings from that study of relevance to institutional leaders and policy makers. It draws on the rich qualitative data to show that, contrary to claims of lowered standards, students from low socio-economic backgrounds are high achievers who both expect and want high academic standards. It argues that the dichotomy between equity and standards is premised on an assumption of deficit in, and fundamental lack of respect for, students from diverse backgrounds which undermines the widening participation agenda. Where the false dichotomy exists in institutions, a situation is created which mitigates against LSES students feeling empowered to achieve high academic standards and overall success. It presents the key factors for empowering students from low socio-economic backgrounds to achieve academic success of the highest standard.

Processing load and the use of concrete representations and strategies for solving linear equations

This paper is a report of students' responses to instruction which was based on the use of concrete representations to solve linear equations. The sample consisted of 21 Grade 8 students from a middle-class suburban state secondary school with a reputation for high academic standards and innovative mathematics teaching. The students were interviewed before and after instruction. Interviews and classroom interactions were observed and videotaped. A qualitative analysis of the responses revealed that students did not use the materials in solving problems. The increased processing load caused by concrete representations is hypothesised as a reason.

Experiencing higher degree research supervision as teaching

This article describes research higher degree supervisors’ experiences of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. While research education is considered central to the HDR experience, comparatively little is known to date of the pedagogical lenses adopted by supervisors as they go about their supervision. We worked with 35 supervisors engaged in discipline-specific and interdisciplinary research across architectural design, science, engineering, computer science, information systems and librarianship. Several of these supervisors conducted projects which interfaced with the social sciences and humanities. The pedagogies, constructed through the discussions and phenomenographic analysis, offer a picture of supervisors’ collective awareness of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. Supervision as a teaching and learning practice was experienced as: Promoting the supervisor’s development, Imparting academic expertise, Upholding academic standards, Promoting learning to research, Drawing upon student expertise, Enabling student development, Venturing into unexplored territory, Forming productive communities, and Contributing to society.

Toward a shared understanding of competency in programming : an invitation to the BABELnot Project

The ICT degrees in most Australian universities have a sequence of up to three programming subjects, or units. BABELnot is an ALTC-funded project that will document the academic standards associated with those three subjects in the six participating universities and, if possible, at other universities. This will necessitate the development of a rich framework for describing the learning goals associated with programming. It will also be necessary to benchmark exam questions that are mapped onto this framework. As part of the project, workshops are planned for ACE 2012, ICER 2012 and ACE 2013, to elicit feedback from the broader Australasian computing education community, and to disseminate the project’s findings. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the project to that broader Australasian computing education community and to invite their active participation.

Managing distraction and attention in diverse cohorts : 21st century challenges to law student engagement

It is imperative that we consider the use of current and emerging technologies in terms of the nature of our learners, the physical environment of the lecture theatre, and how technology may help to support appropriate pedagogies that facilitate the capturing of student attention in active engaging learning experiences. It is argued that a re-evaluation of pedagogy is required to address the tech-savy traits of the 21st century learner and the extent to which their mobile devices are capable of not only distracting them from learning but also enhancing face-to-face learning experiences.

The Chemistry Discipline Network: One Year On

The Chemistry Discipline Network was funded in mid-2011, with the aim of improving communication between chemistry academics in Australia. In our first year of operation, we have grown to over 100 members, established a web presence, and produced substantial mapping reports on chemistry teaching in Australia. We are now working on the definition of standards for a chemistry degree based on the Threshold Learning Outcomes published by the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project.