The peer leader capacity building model: A student learning journey

The benefits of peer leader experiences in building graduate skills and capabilities, is well documented and recognised in the higher education sector (Ender & Kay, 2001; Lindsey, Weiler, Zarich, Haddock, Krafchick, & Zimmerman, 2014; Shook & Keup, J., 2012). While benefits are acknowledged, responsibility for identifying, structuring and recording the learning experiences and learning outcomes is charged to the student. This poster describes a framework ‘The Peer Leader Capacity Building Model’ that purposefully structures the peer-leader’s learning journey providing: timely training, moments of critical reflection and goal setting. The model articulates the fundamental interplay of learning and peer leader service which forms the peer ‘learnership’. The journey begins with the ‘aspiration’ phase where students come to understand their leadership opportunities, progressing through ‘enabling’ and ‘mastering’ phases where students shape their learner-leader experience, and finally, to the ‘contributing graduate’ phase where students emerge as competent graduates able to confidently participate in their communities and workplaces. In shifting from a program centric approach that priorities the needs of the mentees, the Peer Leader Capacity Building Model focuses on the individual as a peer leader encouraging the student to shape their individual ‘learnscape’ through consciously navigating both their curricula and co-curricular learning experiences.

Evaluating the quality of learning in Computer Supported Co-operative Learning

Can learning quality be maintained in the face of increasing class size by the use of Computer Supported Co-operative Learning (CSCL) technologies? In particular, can Computer-Mediated Communication promote critical thinking in addition to surface information transfer? We compared face-to-face seminars with asynchronous computer conferencing in the same Information Management class. From Garrison's theory of critical thinking and Henri's critical reasoning skills, we developed two ways of evaluating critical thinking: a student questionnaire and a content analysis technique. We found evidence for critical thinking in both situations, with some subtle differences in learning style. This paper provides an overview of this work.

Co-evolutionary and Reinforcement Learning Techniques Applied to Computer Go players

The objective of this thesis is model some processes from the nature as evolution and co-evolution, and proposing some techniques that can ensure that these learning process really happens and useful to solve some complex problems as Go game. The Go game is ancient and very complex game with simple rules which still is a challenge for the Artificial Intelligence. This dissertation cover some approaches that were applied to solve this problem, proposing solve this problem using competitive and cooperative co-evolutionary learning methods and other techniques proposed by the author. To study, implement and prove these methods were used some neural networks structures, a framework free available and coded many programs. The techniques proposed were coded by the author, performed many experiments to find the best configuration to ensure that co-evolution is progressing and discussed the results. Using co-evolutionary learning processes can be observed some pathologies which could impact co-evolution progress. In this dissertation is introduced some techniques to solve pathologies as loss of gradients, cycling dynamics and forgetting. According to some authors, one solution to solve these co-evolution pathologies is introduce more diversity in populations that are evolving. In this thesis is proposed some techniques to introduce more diversity and some diversity measurements for neural networks structures to monitor diversity during co-evolution. The genotype diversity evolved were analyzed in terms of its impact to global fitness of the strategies evolved and their generalization. Additionally, it was introduced a memory mechanism in the network neural structures to reinforce some strategies in the genes of the neurons evolved with the intention that some good strategies learned are not forgotten. In this dissertation is presented some works from other authors in which cooperative and competitive co-evolution has been applied. The Go board size used in this thesis was 9x9, but can be easily escalated to more bigger boards.The author believe that programs coded and techniques introduced in this dissertation can be used for other domains.

Self-regulated learning in higher education : strategies adopted by computer programming students

Trabalho apresentado em PAEE/ALE’2016, 8th International Symposium on Project Approaches in Engineering Education (PAEE) and 14th Active Learning in Engineering Education Workshop (ALE)

The SurfAid International Schools Program : opportunities for HPE and senior health education

SurfAid International is a humanitarian organisation that has been delivering a range of evidence based health promotion initiatives, primarily for people living on Nias and the Mentawai Islands off the west coast of Sumatra, Indonesia since 2000. The SurfAid Schools Program launched in 2007, providing opportunities for the development of global awareness, cultural knowledge, empathy and active citizenship among students living in Australia, New Zealand, North America and the United Kingdom. This session will commence with an overview of the work of SurfAid International and resources provided by the SurfAid International Schools Program. The social justice orientation of the Queensland Health Education Senior Syllabus and the HPE Essential Learnings will be reviewed along with a consideration for affective learning through attitudes and values. Participants will be given time to consider how units with a health of specific populations focus could be conceptualised, developed and managed. Opportunities for co-curricular applications will also be discussed.

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

Entrepreneurship Programs and the Modern University

Entrepreneurship Programs and the Modern University is an excellent resource for those who intend to set up an entrepreneurship program or centre, and arguably even more so for those who wish to coordinate or expand such activities into an effective "entrepreneurship eco-system" across the university and its external stakeholders. Morris, Kuratko, and Cornwall's intention in writing this book is to "advocate a more strategic and integrative framework for building the curricular, co-curricular, research, community engagement, and infrastructure components of a program" (p. xii).

An experiment in group learning technology: evaluating critical thinking in face-to-face and computer-supported seminars

Can learning quality be maintained in the face of increasing class size by the use of Computer Supported Co-operative Learning (CSCL) technologies? In particular, can Computer-Mediated Communication promote critical thinking in addition to surface information transfer? We compared face-to-face seminars with asynchronous computer conferencing in the same Information Management class. From Garrison's theory of critical thinking and Henri's critical reasoning skills, we developed two ways of evaluating critical thinking: a student questionnaire and a content analysis technique. We found evidence for critical thinking in both situations, with some subtle differences in learning style. This paper provides an overview of this work.

Unexpected allies: advancing literacy in a ‘Science-English’ cross-curricular context

Critical reading of science-based media reports is an authentic context in which to explore the mutual interests of teachers of science and English, who want to use science in the media to promote their subject discipline while encouraging cross-curricular learning. This empirical study focused on 90 teachers of science and English to explore their aptitude and capability for critical reading of science-based news reports. The influences of specialist subject culture and the extent of classroom experience contributed to the distinctive nature of the responses. The study revealed features in critical reading that were characteristic of the subject background of the participants. It suggested approaches to initial teacher education and ongoing professional development that would be mutually beneficial to teachers from different disciplines in promoting among pupils a critical approach to science-related news media.

Quality of student involvement and college contribution toward development of traditional and nontraditional undergraduate students

Nontraditional students differ from traditional students on characteristics such as age, employment status, marital status, and parental status. The quality of a student's experience is important as it relates to his or her transformation and is a reflection of the quality of the college. ^ Using theory of involvement as a framework, the purpose of this study was to test if there were differences between traditional and nontraditional undergraduate students in their ratings of quality of college involvement (academic, co-curricular, student interactions, and faculty interactions) and perceptions of college contribution toward development (intellectual, personal, social, and career). A two part survey was distributed to a random cluster sample of sophomore and higher level undergraduate classes equaling 400 undergraduate students. ^ Results of a 2 x 4 repeated measures ANOVA indicated that traditional students rated quality for co-curricular involvement and student involvement significantly higher than nontraditional students. Both traditional and nontraditional students had similar ratings of college contribution toward development. There were different patterns of correlations between involvement and development. Traditional students' ratings of academic and student involvement were more highly correlated with development than were the ratings of nontraditional students. However, nontraditional students' ratings of academic and faculty involvement were more highly correlated with development. When testing for differences in correlations between quality of involvement and college contribution toward development, the largest observed differences were quality of student involvement and college contribution toward personal and social development. Although not significantly different, traditional students had stronger correlations between those factors than did the nontraditional students. ^ This research demonstrates the importance of using social role when defining student type. It contributes to involvement theory by explaining how traditional and nontraditional students differ in their ratings of quality of involvement. Further, it identifies different patterns of correlations between ratings of quality of involvement and college contribution toward development for the two types of students. While traditional students may need a more rounded college experience that includes more social and co-curricular experiences, nontraditional students use the classroom as their stage for learning. ^

Perceptions of underprepared community college students regarding their educational achievement

The purpose of this study was to understand the perceptions of underprepared college students who had participated in learning communities and who persisted to complete developmental classes and earned at least 30 college-level credit hours to graduate and the perceptions of their peers who had dropped out of college. The theories posed by Tinto, Astin, and Freire formed the framework for this case study. The 22 participants were graduates or transfer students now attending a public university, currently-enrolled sophomores, and students no longer enrolled at the time of the study. Semi-structured individual interviews and a group interview provided narrative data which were transcribed, coded, and analyzed to gain insights into the experiences and perspectives of the participants. The group interview provided a form of member checking to increase accuracy in interpreting themes. A peer reviewer provided feedback on the researcher’s data analysis procedures. The analysis yielded four themes and 14 sub-themes which captured the essence of the participants’ experiences. The pre-college characteristics/traits theme described the students’ internal values and attributes acquired prior to college. The external college support/community influence theme described the encouragement to attend college the students received from family, friends, and high school teachers. The social involvement theme described the students’ participation in campus activities and their interactions with other members of the campus. The academic integration theme described students’ use of campus resources and their contacts with the faculty. The persisters reported strong family and peer support, a sense of responsibility, appreciation for dedicated and caring faculty, and a belief that an education can be a liberatory means to achieve their goals. The non-persisters did not report having the same sense of purpose, goal orientation, determination, obligation to meet family expectations, peer support, campus involvement, positive faculty experiences, and time management skills. The researcher offers an emerging model for understanding factors associated with persistence and three recommendations for enhancing the academic experience of underprepared college students: (a) include a critical pedagogy perspective in coursework where possible, (b) integrate co-curricular activities with the academic disciplines, and (c) increase student-faculty interaction.

Quality of student involvement and college contribution toward development of traditional and nontraditional undergraduate students

Nontraditional students differ from traditional students on characteristics such as age, employment status, marital status, and parental status. The quality of a student's experience is important as it relates to his or her transformation and is a reflection of the quality of the college. Using theory of involvement as a framework, the purpose of this study was to test if there were differences between traditional and nontraditional undergraduate students in their ratings of quality of college involvement (academic, co-curricular, student interactions, and faculty interactions) and perceptions of college contribution toward development (intellectual, personal, social, and career). A two part survey was distributed to a random cluster sample of sophomore and higher level undergraduate classes equaling 400 undergraduate students. Results of a 2 X 4 repeated measures ANOVA indicated that traditional students rated quality for co-curricular involvement and student involvement significantly higher than nontraditional students. Both traditional and nontraditional students had similar ratings of college contribution toward development. There were different patterns of correlations between involvement and development. Traditional students' ratings of academic and student involvement were more highly correlated with development than were the ratings of nontraditional students. However, nontraditional students' ratings of academic and faculty involvement were more highly correlated with development. When testing for differences in correlations between quality of involvement and college contribution toward development, the largest observed differences were quality of student involvement and college contribution toward personal and social development. Although not significantly different, traditional students had stronger correlations between those factors than did the nontraditional students. This research demonstrates the importance of using social role when defining student type. It contributes to involvement theory by explaining how traditional and nontraditional students differ in their ratings of quality of involvement. Further, it identifies different patterns of correlations between ratings of quality of involvement and college contribution toward development for the two types of students. While traditional students may need a more rounded college experience that includes more social and co-curricular experiences, nontraditional students use the classroom as their stage for learning.