The WIL (Work Integrated Learning) Report : A national scoping study [Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) Final report]

This report provides an account of the first large-scale scoping study of work integrated learning (WIL) in contemporary Australian higher education. The explicit aim of the project was to identify issues and map a broad and growing picture of WIL across Australia and to identify ways of improving the student learning experience in relation to WIL. The project was undertaken in response to high levels of interest in WIL, which is seen by universities both as a valid pedagogy and as a means to respond to demands by employers for work-ready graduates, and demands by students for employable knowledge and skills. Over a period of eight months of rapid data collection, 35 universities and almost 600 participants contributed to the project. Participants consistently reported the positive benefits of WIL and provided evidence of commitment and innovative practice in relation to enhancing student learning experiences. Participants provided evidence of strong partnerships between stakeholders and highlighted the importance of these relationships in facilitating effective learning outcomes for students. They also identified a range of issues and challenges that face the sector in growing WIL opportunities; these issues and challenges will shape the quality of WIL experiences. While the majority of comments focused on issues involved in ensuring quality placements, it was recognised that placements are just one way to ensure the integration of work with learning. Also, the WIL experience is highly contextualised and impacted by the expectations of students, employers, the professions, the university and government policy.

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.

Australian learning and teaching council projects in the mathematical sciences : a retrospective

Since 2004, the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) and its predecessor, the Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, have funded numerous teaching and educational research-based projects in the Mathematical Sciences. In light of the Commonwealth Government’s decision to close the ALTC in 2011, it is appropriate to take account of the ALTCs input into the Mathe- matical Sciences in higher education. Here we present an overview of ALTC projects in the Mathematical Sciences, as well as report on the contributions they have made to the Discipline.

Learning and teaching from the edge to centre stage : Critical factors in embedding sustainable university-wide engagement in external awards and grants funding initiatives.

Teaching awards, grants and fellowships are strategies used to recognise outstanding contributions to learning and teaching, encourage innovation, and to shift learning and teaching from the edge to centre stage. Examples range from school, faculty and institutional award and grant schemes to national schemes such as those offered by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC), the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in the United States, and the Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning in higher education in the United Kingdom. The Queensland University of Technology (QUT) has experienced outstanding success in all areas of the ALTC funding since the inception of the Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in 2004. This paper reports on a study of the critical factors that have enabled sustainable and resilient institutional engagement with ALTC programs. As a lens for examining the QUT environment and practices, the study draws upon the five conditions of the framework for effective dissemination of innovation developed by Southwell, Gannaway, Orrell, Chalmers and Abraham (2005, 2010): 1. Effective, multi-level leadership and management 2. Climate of readiness for change 3. Availability of resources 4. Comprehensive systems in institutions and funding bodies 5. Funding design The discussion on the critical factors and practical and strategic lessons learnt for successful university-wide engagement offer insights for university leaders and staff who are responsible for learning and teaching award, grant and associated internal and external funding schemes.

From policy borrowing to implementation : an illuminative evaluation of learning and teaching in higher education in Australia (2002 to 2008)

This study documents and theorises the consequences of the 2003 Australian Government Reform Package focussed on learning and teaching in Higher Education during the period 2002 to 2008. This is achieved through the perspective of program evaluation and the methodology of illuminative evaluation. The findings suggest that the three national initiatives of that time, Learning and Teaching Performance Fund (LTPF), Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC), and Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA), were successful in repositioning learning and teaching as a core activity in universities. However, there were unintended consequences brought about by international policy borrowing, when the short-lived nature of LTPF suggests a legacy of quality compliance rather than one of quality enrichment.

Objectifying the Subjective : Assessment and Feedback in Creative Arts Studio Learning and Teaching

This paper examines the Assessment and Feedback aspects of Studio Teaching as Creative Arts pedagogy. Prompted by USQ’s newly offered Bachelor of Creative Arts (BCA), the author has developed an Assessment Matrix specifically designed to satisfy a number of imperatives, including: • ‘objectifying’ the subjective aspects of creative practice as assessable coursework/research • providing the means by which accurate, detailed, personalised and confidential feedback may be provided to students individually • providing consistent, accurate, meaningful assessment records for student, lecturer, and institution • ensuring consistency, continuity, and transparency of assessment processes and records to satisfy quality audits • minimising marking and assessment time, whilst maximising assessment integrity and depth • requiring only basic level skills and knowledge of a computer application already in common use (Microsoft Excel) • adaptability to a range of creative courses ‐ across disciplines This Assessment Matrix has been in development (and trialled) since January 2009.

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

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

Some reflections on winning an ALTC Teaching Excellence Award

Since 1996, quality teaching has been recognised in the Australian Awards for University Teaching (AAUT), administered first by the Australian government Department of Education, and then from 2000, by the Australian Universities Teaching Committee (AUTC). In 2005, the awards were overseen by the government funded Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education and known as the Carrick Awards for Australian University Teaching. The newly elected Rudd government reconfigured the process and established the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) in 2008 to administer the awards under the AAUT nomenclature. In this edition of Re-Union, Deborah Henderson reflects on receiving an a 2010 ALTC Teaching Excellence Award in the category of Social Sciences (including Education).

Building and sustaining a culture to support peer review of teaching

1. Background/context This presentation will report on emerging results from a two phase project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC). The project was designed in partnership with five universities and aimed to embed peer review within the local teaching and learning culture by using a distributive leadership framework. 2. The initiative/practice The presentation will highlight research outcomes that bring together both the fundamentals of peer review of teaching with the broader contextual elements of Integration, Leadership and Development. It will be demonstrated that peer review of teaching can be implemented and have advantages for academic staff, teaching evaluation and an organisation if attention is given to strategies that influence the contexts and cultures of teaching. Peer review as a strategy to develop excellence in teaching is considered from a holistic perspective that by necessity encompasses all elements of an educational environment. Results demonstrate achievements that can be obtained through working to foster conditions needed for sustainable leadership and change. The work has implications for policy, research, teaching development and student outcomes and has potential application world-wide. 3. Method(s) of evaluative data collection and analysis The 2 phase project collected focus group and questionnaire data to inform research results that were analysed using a thematic qualitative approach and statistical exploration. 4. Evidence of effectiveness The presentation will demonstrate the effectiveness of distributive leadership and strategic approaches to working for cultural change through the presentation of project findings.

The Threshold Learning Outcome on self-management for the Bachelor of Laws degree : a proposed focus for teaching strategies in the first year law curriculum

The Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) Discipline Scholars for Law, Professors Sally Kift and Mark Israel, articulated six Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) for the Bachelor of Laws degree as part of the ALTC’s 2010 project on Learning and Teaching Academic Standards. One of these TLOs promotes the learning, teaching and assessment of self-management skills in Australian law schools. This paper explores the concept of self-management and how it can be relevantly applied in the first year of legal education. Recent literature from the United States (US) and Australia provides insights into the types of issues facing law students, as well as potential antidotes to these problems. Based on these findings, I argue that designing a pedagogical framework for the first year law curriculum that promotes students’ connection with their intrinsic interests, values, motivations and purposes will facilitate student success in terms of their personal well-being, ethical dispositions and academic engagement.

Dancing doctorates down-under? Defining and assessing ‘doctorateness’ when embodiment enters the thesis

Assessment frames the focus of this paper, which emerges from our collaborative research, Dancing Between Diversity and Consistency: Refining Assessment in Postgraduate Degrees in Dance, funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC). We examine the attributes of danced ‘doctorateness’, giving special attention to those factors in the Australian environment, which may endow resilience to concepts of excellence, independent thinking and originality when kinaesthetic knowledge becomes pivotal to research. Have the small pool of examiners and relationships between academia and the professional artistic environment shaped these doctorates in a particular way? Can these perspectives illuminate and forge parameters by which to legitimate danced insight? These and related issues are interrogated giving voice to supervisors, research deans, candidates and industry professionals across Australia who participated in this research project.

ePortfolio use by university students in Australia: A review of the Australian ePortfolio Project

In October 2008, the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) released the final report for the commissioned project ePortfolio use by university students in Australia: Informing excellence in policy and practice. The Australian ePortfolio Project represented the first attempt to examine the breadth and depth of ePortfolio practice in the Australian higher education sector. The research activities included surveys of stakeholder groups in learning and teaching, academic management and human resource management, with respondents representing all Australian universities; a series of focus groups and semi-structured interviews which sought to explore key issues in greater depth; and surveys designed to capture students’ pre-course expectations and their post-course experiences of ePortfolio learning. Further qualitative data was collected through interviews with ‘mature users’ of ePortfolios. Project findings revealed that, while there was a high level of interest in the use of ePortfolios in terms of the potential to help students become reflective learners who were conscious of their personal and professional strengths and weaknesses, the state of play in Australian universities was very fragmented. The project investigation identified four individual, yet interrelated, contexts where strategies may be employed to support and foster effective ePortfolio practice in higher education: government policy, technical standards, academic policy, and learning and teaching. Four scenarios for the future were also presented with the goal of stimulating discussion about opportunities for stakeholder engagement. It is argued that the effective use of ePortfolios requires open dialogue and collaboration between the different stakeholders across this range of contexts.

ePortfolio use by university students in Australia: Informing excellence in policy and practice

In mid 2007, the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC), formerly the Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, commissioned an intensive research project to examine the use of ePortfolios by university students in Australia. The project was awarded to a consortium of four universities: Queensland University of Technology as lead institution, The University of Melbourne, University of New England and University of Wollongong.---------- The overarching aim of the research project, which was given the working title of the Australian ePortfolio Project, was to examine the current levels of ePortfolio practice in Australian higher education. The principal project goals sought to provide an overview and analysis of the national and international ePortfolio contexts, document the types of ePortfolios used in Australian higher education, examine the relationship with the National Diploma Supplement project funded by the Federal government, identify any significant issues relating to ePortfolio implementation, and offer guidance about future opportunities for ePortfolio development. The research findings revealed that there was a high level of interest in the use of ePortfolios in the context of higher education, particularly in terms of the potential to help students become reflective learners who are conscious of their personal and professional strengths and weaknesses, as well as to make their existing and developing skills more explicit. There were some good examples of early adoption in different institutions, although this tended to be distributed across the sector. The greatest use of ePortfolios was recorded in coursework programs, rather than in research programs, with implementation generally reflecting subject-specific or program-based activity, as opposed to faculty- or university-wide activity. Accordingly, responsibility for implementation frequently rested with the individual teaching unit, although an alternative centralised model of coordination by ICT services, careers and employment or teaching and learning support was beginning to emerge. The project report concludes with a series of recommendations to guide the process, drawing on the need for open dialogue and effective collaboration between the stakeholders across the range of contexts: government policy, international technical standards, academic policy, and learning and teaching research and practice.

ePortfolio use by university students in Australia : Informing excellence in policy and practice. Supplementary report : October 2010

In April 2007, the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC)commissioned a study to examine the diverse approaches to ePortfolio use by students in Australian universities. The goals were to consider the scope, penetration and reasons for use of ePortfolios, and to examine the issues associated with their implementation in higher education. One of the central research activities in the project was a national audit which sought to establish a picture of current and emerging ePortfolio activities in Australian academic institutions. The data collection activities took place in late 2007 and the findings were presented and discussed in the final project report, published in October 2008. In 2010, the idea of a ‘follow up survey’ was developed. The resulting supplementary research activity was undertaken to update the data collected by the AeP project team in late 2007. The plan behind this ‘postscript to AeP’ project was to refresh the picture of ePortfolio practice in Australia by collecting new data to identify and map the use of ePortfolios in adult learning across the higher education, vocational education and training (VET) and the adult community education (ACE) sectors. The supplementary project has been referred to as the ‘AeP PS survey’.