The Australian Qualifications Framework for bachelor degree in property economics

The Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) requires every course in Australia to be reviewed and compliant by 2015. This paper compares the difference between AQF level 7 and level 8 and outlines the paradigm shift in course development, improvement and quality assurance. The AQF requires an outcome oriented process which influences the development, monitoring and implementation of AQF courses. Firstly the graduate profile is defined to underscore the direction of the property course development. Required graduate attributes are then defined, together with course learning outcomes. Each unit/subject assessment is then designed to reflect the desired learning outcomes, and then finally the unit/subject content is backfilled. This reverse engineered process will ensure that all students have been taught and assessed on the graduate attributes which will form the graduate profile. Therefore, monitoring the inclusion of learning outcomes on unit/subject level during course restructure and development is crucial to achieve the course learning outcomes. This paper recommends that further evaluation needs to be conducted in the course development phases by involving professional accreditation bodies, industry representatives, students and recent graduates in this course development process. It also discusses challenges for developing an undergraduate property course.

A national evaluation of the Australian Occupational Therapy Competency Standards (1994): a multistakeholder perspective

This paper summarises results from an evaluation of the adequacy and utility of the Australian Competency Standards for Entry-Level Occupational Therapists © (OT AUSTRALIA, 1994a). It comprised a two-part study, incorporating an online survey of key national stakeholders (n = 26), and 13 focus groups (n = 152) conducted throughout Australia with occupational therapy clinicians, academics, OT AUSTRALIA association and Occupational Therapy Registration Board representatives, as well as university program accreditors. The key recommendations were that: (i) urgent revision to reflect contemporary practice, paradigms, approaches and frameworks is required; (ii) the standards should exemplify basic competence at graduation (not within two years following); (iii) a revision cycle of five years is required; (iv) the Australian Qualifications Framework should be retained, preceded by an introduction describing the scope and nature of occupational therapy practice in the national context; (v) access to the standards should be free and unrestricted to occupational therapists, students and the public via the OT AUSTRALIA (national) website; (vi) the standards should incorporate a succinct executive summary and additional tools or templates formatted to enable occupational therapists to develop professional portfolios and create working documents specific to their workplace; and (vii) language must accommodate contextual variation while striking an appropriate balance between providing instruction and encouraging innovation in practice.

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.

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.

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

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

Dancing to too many tunes : contemporary course design in teacher education

Contemporary course designers in schools and faculties of Education are finding themselves dancing to many tunes, arguably too many tunes, in order to have their initial teacher education courses accredited by external agencies whilst satisfying internal approval processes and, critically, maintaining the philosophical integrity of their programs and their institutional watermarks. The “tunes” here are the agendas driven by and the demands made by distinct independent agencies. The external agencies influencing Education include: TEQSA (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency) which will assure alignment to the AQF (Australian Qualifications Framework); professional bodies such as AITSL (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership) which now accredits all pre-service teacher Education courses across Australia and assures alignment with the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers; and the state and territory regulatory authorities that have an impact within a specific jurisdiction, for example, the Queensland College of Teachers (QCT) and the Teacher Registration Board of Western Australia (TRBWA). This paper – whose findings have been arrived at through a year-long OLT National Teaching Fellowship - will outline the complex and competing agendas currently at play and focus on the disjuncture evident in the fundamental defining of who is a “graduate.” It will also attempt to identify where there are synergies between the complex demands being made. It will argue that there are too many “tunes” and the task of finding a balance between compliance and delivering effective initial teacher education may not be possible because of the cacophony of their conflicting demands.

Standards that we can 'own' : Threshold Learning Outcomes for Journalism, Public Relations, and Media & Communication Studies

This paper outlines the progress by the JoMeC (Journalism, Media & Communication) Network in developing TLO (Threshold Learning Outcome) statements for Bachelor-level university programs in the disciplines of Journalism, Public Relations and Media & Communications Studies. The paper presents the finalised TLO statement for Journalism, and outlines moves to engage discipline-based groups to further develop preliminary TLOs for Public Relations and Media & Communication Studies. The JoMeC Network was formed in 2011, in response to requirements that from 2014 all degrees and qualifications at Australian universities would be able to demonstrate that they comply with the threshold learning standards set by the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF). The AQF’s threshold standards define the minimum types and levels of knowledge, skills and capabilities that a student must demonstrate in order to graduate. The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) will use the AQF’s threshold standards as a key tool in recording and assessing the performance of higher educational institutions, and determining whether they should be registered as Australian Higher Education Providers under the Higher Education Standards Framework. The Office of Learning & Teaching (OLT) places the onus on discipline communities to collaborate in order to develop and ‘own’ the threshold learning standards that can be considered the minimum learning outcomes of university-level programs in that field. With the support of an OLT Grant, the JoMeC Network’s prime goal has been to develop three sets of discipline-specific TLOs – one each for the Journalism, Public Relations, and Media & Communications Studies disciplines. This paper describes the processes of research, consultation, drafting and ongoing revision of the TLO for Journalism. It outlines the processes that the JoMeC Network has taken in developing a preliminary TLO draft to initiate discussion of Public Relations and Media & Communication Studies. The JoMeC Network plans to hand management of further development of these TLOs to scholars within the discipline who will engage with academics and other stakeholders to develop statements that the respective disciplines can embrace and ‘own’.

Implementing the self-management threshold learning outcome for law : some intentional design strategies from the current curriculum toolbox

There is a growing awareness of the high levels of psychological distress being experienced by law students and the practising profession in Australia. In this context, a Threshold Learning Outcome (TLO) on self-management has been included in the six TLOs recently articulated as minimum learning outcomes for all Australian graduates of the Bachelor of Laws degree (LLB). The TLOs were developed during 2010 as part of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council’s (ALTC’s) project funded by the Australian Government to articulate ‘Learning and Teaching Academic Standards’. The TLOs are the result of a comprehensive national consultation process led by the ALTC’s Discipline Scholars: Law, Professors Sally Kift and Mark Israel.1 The TLOs have been endorsed by the Council of Australian Law Deans (CALD) and have received broad support from members of the judiciary and practising profession, representative bodies of the legal profession, law students and recent graduates, Legal Services Commissioners and the Law Admissions Consultative Committee. At the time of writing, TLOs for the Juris Doctor (JD) are also being developed, utilising the TLOs articulated for the LLB as their starting point but restating the JD requirements as the higher order outcomes expected of graduates of a ‘Masters Degree (Extended)’, this being the award level designation for the JD now set out in the new Australian Qualifications Framework.2 As Australian law schools begin embedding the learning, teaching and assessment of the TLOs in their curricula, and seek to assure graduates’ achievement of them, guidance on the implementation of the self-management TLO is salient and timely.

Holistically approaching curriculum renewal: A case study of the Queensland University of Technology

There are still many programs in Australia and overseas where curricula comprise largely 20th Century-relevant graduate outcomes, framed in 20th Century learning and teaching approaches. A ‘Dynamic and Deliberative Model for Curriculum Renewal’ (DDMCR) model exists for undertaking such curriculum renewal that draws on the experiences of educators around the world, however there are few experiences to date in applying this model. At the Queensland University of Technology, the 2012 accreditation by Engineers Australia observed that, despite being exposed to relevant discipline-specific engineering curriculum and practice, students did not seem to be aware of the relevance of sustainable development to their degree, beyond first year exposure. In addressing this feedback, level 8 Australian Qualifications Framework, and drawing ideas from the DDMCR model, faculty senior management undertook a full review of the engineering curriculum.

Conceptualising recognition of prior learning processes in the age of open learning

This chapter interrogates what recognition of prior learning (RPL) can and does mean in the higher education sector—a sector in the grip of the widening participation agenda and an open access age. The chapter discusses how open learning is making inroads into recognition processes and examines two studies in open learning recognition. A case study relating to e-portfolio-style RPL for entry into a Graduate Certificate in Policy and Governance at a metropolitan university in Queensland is described. In the first instance, candidates who do not possess a relevant Bachelor degree need to demonstrate skills in governmental policy work in order to be eligible to gain entry to a Graduate Certificate (at Australian Qualifications Framework Level 8) (Australian Qualifications Framework Council, 2013, p. 53). The chapter acknowledges the benefits and limitations of recognition in open learning and those of more traditional RPL, anticipating future developments in both (or their convergence).

Development and Accreditation of an Applied Climate Education Unit for Sustainable Land Use in Australia

In recent years, there have been significant developments in climate science relevant to agriculture and natural resource management. Assessing impacts of climate variability and use of seasonal climate forecasts have become increasingly important elements in the management "toolkit" for many Australian farmers. Consideration of climate change further increases the need for improved management strategies. While climate risk extension activities have kept pace with advances in climate science, a national review of the Vocational Education and Training system in Australia in relation to "weather and climate" showed that these topics were "poorly represented" at the management level in the Australian Qualifications Framework, and needed increased emphasis. Consequently, a new Unit of Competency concerning management of climatic risk was developed and accredited to address this deficiency. The objective of the unit was to build knowledge and skills for better management of climate variability via the elements of surveying climatic and enterprise data; analysing climatic risks and opportunities; and developing climatic risk management strategies. This paper describes establishment of a new unit for vocational education that is designed to harness recent developments in applied climate science for better management of Australia's highly variable climate. The main benefits of the new unit of competency, "Developing climatic risk management strategies,"were seen as improving decisions in climate and agriculture, and reducing climate risk exposure to enhance sustainable agriculture. The educational unit is now within the scope of agricultural colleges, universities, and registered training organisations as an accredited unit.

Legal Issues Relating to the Notification of Australian Data Breaches

Advances in information and communications technologies during the last two decades have allowed organisations to capture and utilise data on a vast scale, thus heightening the importance of adequate measures for protecting unauthorised disclosure of personal information. In this respect, data breach notification has emerged as an issue of increasing importance throughout the world. It has been the subject of law reform in the United States and in other international jurisdictions. Following the Australian Law Reform Commission’s review of privacy, data breach notification will soon be addressed in Australia. This article provides a review of US and Australian legal initiatives regarding the notification of data breaches. The authors highlight areas of concern based on the extant US literature that require specific consideration in Australia regarding the development of an Australian legal framework for the notification of data breaches.

Varieties of collaboration: The case of an Australian retail union

Much has been written about varieties of collaboration and the interplay between conflict and collaboration in industrial relations. This paper explores the preconditions, processes and outcomes associated with the collaborative strategies of an Australian retail trade union: the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees' Association. The data were collected from an extensive series of interviews with officials and organisers within the union across all Australian states. We find that despite taking a servicing approach, and indeed never aggressively organising members, the union has managed to achieve a range of outcomes that exceed retail employment conditions in other countries. We argue that this is partly a result of the Australian legislative framework, which is inherently pluralist and supportive of collective bargaining. This environment, whereby unions are not forced to fight to represent members, can be conducive to collaborative employment relations, particularly in industries where the parties do not adopt an adversarialist stance.

Have Anglo-Saxon concepts really influenced the development of European qualifications policy?

This paper considers how far Anglo-Saxon conceptions of have influenced European Union vocational education and training policy, especially given the disparate approaches to VET across Europe. Two dominant approaches can be identified: the dual system (exemplified by Germany); and output based models (exemplified by the NVQ ‘English style’). Within the EU itself, the design philosophy of the English output-based model proved in the first instance influential in attempts to develop tools to establish equivalence between vocational qualifications across Europe, resulting in the learning outcomes approach of the European Qualifications Framework, the credit-based model of European VET Credit System and the task-based construction of occupation profiles exemplified by European Skills, Competences and Occupations. The governance model for the English system is, however, predicated on employer demand for ‘skills’ and this does not fit well with the social partnership model encompassing knowledge, skills and competences that is dominant in northern Europe. These contrasting approaches have led to continual modifications to the tools, as these sought to harmonise and reconcile national VET requirements with the original design. A tension is evident in particular between national and regional approaches to vocational education and training, on the one hand, and the policy tools adopted to align European vocational education and training better with the demands of the labour market, including at sectoral level, on the other. This paper explores these tensions and considers the prospects for the successful operation of these tools, paying particular attention to the European Qualifications Framework, European VET Credit System and European Skills, Competences and Occupations tool and the relationships between them and drawing on studies of the construction and furniture industries.

Assurance of learning – are academics and senior management singing from the same hymn sheet?

Assurance of learning (AoL) is an important process in quality education, designed to measure the accomplishment of educational aims at the core of an institution’s programs, whilst encouraging faculty to continuously develop and improve the programs and courses. This paper reports on a study of Australian business schools to investigate current AoL practices through semi structured interviews with senior faculty leaders followed by focus group interviews with groups of senior program leaders and groups of academic teaching staff. Initial findings indicate there are significant challenges in encouraging academic staff to commit to the process and recognise the benefits of assuring learning. The differences in understanding between the various leaders and the academics were highlighted through the different focus groups. Leaders’ stressed strategic issues such as staff engagement and change, while academics focussed on process issues such as teaching graduate attributes and external accreditation. Understanding the differences in the perspectives of leaders and faculty is important, as without a shared understanding between the two groups, there is likely to be limited engagement, which creates difficulties in developing effective assurance of learning processes. Findings indicate that successful strategies developed to foster shared values on assurance of learning include: strong senior leaders’ commitment; developing champions among program and unit level staff; providing professional development opportunities; promoting and celebrating success and effectiveness; and ensuring an inclusive process with academics of all levels collaborating in the development and implementation of the process.