It really is black and white when you look at it like this : reporting on a study into Australian professors' research and teaching priorities

Despite optimistic claims about the research-teaching nexus, Australian academics still face tension between research and teaching. The teaching and research priorities, beliefs and behaviours of 70 Professorial and Associate Professorial academics in Science, Information Technology and Engineering were examined in this study. The academics from 4 faculties in 3 Australian universities, were asked to rank 16 research activities and 16 matched learning and teaching (L&T) activities from each of three perspectives: job satisfaction, leadership behaviour, and perceptions of professional importance. The findings, which were remarkably consistent across the three universities, were unequivocally in favour of Research. The only L&T activity that was ranked consistently well was “Improving student satisfaction ratings for Teaching”. The data demonstrates that Australian government and university initiatives to raise the status of L&T activity are not impacting significantly on Australia’s future leaders of university learning.

Integrating a sustainable academic career around scholarly learning and teaching activities

To be scholarly in learning and teaching is rigorous academic work. It demands: currency and command of both discipline subject matter and educational theory; inquiring, methodical, and reflective approaches; the collection, evaluation and documentation of evidence of learning and teaching efficacy; and, optimally, entails participation in and communication among a community of teaching professionals. This chapter examines the author’s own practice in this regard to explicate the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of scholarly and scholarship approaches, as much as the ‘what’ and ‘where’ of that endeavour. In doing so, this meta‐analysis is made ‘community property’, in the same way that Shulman (1993: 6) exhorted we ‘change the status of teaching from private to community property’ so that teaching might be more greatly valued in the academy.

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.

Conceptualising and teaching discursive and performative reflection in higher education

The importance of reflection in higher education, and across disciplinary fields is widely recognised. It is generally embedded in university graduate attributes, professional standards and course objectives. Furthermore, reflection is commonly included in assessment requirements in higher education subjects, often without necessary scaffolding or clear expectations for students. It is essential that academic staff have substantive knowledge and clear expectations about the aims of reflective activities, the most effective mode of representation, and appropriate teaching strategies to support students in deep, critical reflection. The paper argues the case for reflection to be represented in different modes, using discursive (language) or performative (symbolic practice) forms of expression according to disciplinary context and individual communicative strengths. It introduces key discursive and expressive elements that constitute different modes of representation in reflective tasks. This functional analysis of textual elements provides explicit knowledge for teaching and assessing multiple modes of reflection in higher education.

Moral and social development : teachers’ knowledge of learning and teaching strategies in the early years

The intention of the analysis in this paper was to determine, from interviews with eleven early years’ teachers, what knowledge guided their teaching of moral behaviour. Six of the teachers defined moral behaviour in terms of social conventions only. Children’s learning was attributed by five of the teachers to incidental/contextual issues. Nine of the teachers used discussion of issues, in various contexts, as a way of teaching about social and moral issues. The majority of the teachers (n=7) gave the source of their knowledge of pedagogy as practical as opposed to theoretically informed. There was no clear relationship between their definitions, understanding of children’s learning, pedagogy or source of knowledge. Most of the teachers were using discussion, negotiation and reflection to develop the children’s moral and social behaviour. This is probably effective; however, it suggests a strong need for teaching of moral development to be given more prominence and addressed directly in in-service courses so that teachers are clear about their intentions and the most effective ways of achieving them.