Debate on statutory control of the surveying profession in Queensland : 1907 to 1975

This article was written in 1997. After a 2009 review the content was left mostly unchanged - apart from this re-written abstract, restructured headings and a table of contents. The article deals directly with professional registration of surveyors; but it also relates to government procurement of professional services. The issues include public service and professional ethics; setting of professional fees; quality assurance; official corruption; and professional recruitment, education and training. Debate on the Land Surveyors Act 1908 (Qld) and its amendments to 1916 occurred at a time when industrial unrest of the 1890s and common market principles of the new Commonwealth were fresh in peoples’ minds. Industrial issues led to a constitutional crisis in the Queensland’s then bicameral legislature and frustrated a first attempt to pass a Surveyors Bill in 1907. The Bill was re-introduced in 1908 after fresh elections and Kidston’s return as state premier. Co-ordinated immigration and land settlement polices of the colonies were discontinued when the Commonwealth gained power over immigration in 1901. Concerns shifted to protecting jobs from foreign competition. Debate on 1974 amendments to the Act reflected concerns about skill shortages and professional accreditation. However, in times of economic downturn, a so-called ‘chronic shortage of surveyors’ could rapidly degenerate into oversupply and unemployment. Theorists championed a naïve ‘capture theory’ where the professions captured governments to create legislative barriers to entry to the professions. Supposedly, this allowed rent-seeking and monopoly profits through lack of competition. However, historical evidence suggests that governments have been capable of capturing and exploiting surveyors. More enlightened institutional arrangements are needed if the community is to receive benefits commensurate with sizable co-investments of public and private resources in developing human capital.

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.

Reaching across organisational, sectoral and geographical boundaries: exploring the learning potential of an EU cross-border project

Research This paper outlines some of the key findings from an evaluation of the project and demonstrates that EC funded projects such as this, which seek to promote cross border collaboration and understanding (i.e. across organisational, sectoral and geographical boundaries) offer considerable learning potential – not least about variances in health politics across different communities. However, for this learning to be realised a comprehensive system of knowledge management needs to be an integral part of project planning alongside a system for sustaining embryonic professional networks. The concept of managing relationships was also a key part of the projects success. Executing a project funded by the EU demands the development of complex organisational skills to negotiate all the administrative challenges en route to successful completion and this project in particular relied for its success on the development of social relationships of trust and mutual respect across national, professional and social boundaries. Context A three–year European Commission funded project designed to exchange a wide range of staff (professional semiprofessional and voluntary staff in health and social care) project led by the University of Greenwich (UK) and the Université Catholique de Lille, France was completed this year (February 2008). The project was complex because it involved working in different national contexts, was multi-disciplinary, and demanded the negotiation of multiple boundaries. Theories A mixed method evaluation including written reports gathered immediately after each exchange visit and a post hoc series of individual interviews and focus groups was conducted in order to gain qualitative information (from the participants perspective) on their experiences and to identify any learning gained. Results Analysis of the data provided evidence of learning on a number of levels; personally, inter and intra professionally and organisationally as well as across sectors and also from a project management perspective. The learning crystallised around the extent of the differences noted by the participants between the UK and the French health and social care systems despite geographical proximity, common membership of the EU and many shared challenges in health and social care. The extent of these differences, noted at every level from policy to practice proved a rich source for reflection on organisational philosophies, ways of working, distribution of resources, professional roles and autonomy and professional registration and mobility - in short on health politics at ‘macro’ and ‘micro’ levels.

Assessment matters-mentors need support in their role

BACKGROUND:
In the UK the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) standards to support learning and assessment in practice state that mentors are responsible and accountable for the assessment of pre-registration nursing students in practice. This study was undertaken to explore mentors' experience of assessing nursing students in practice post implementation of the NMC standards.
METHOD:
Five focus groups were conducted with mentors (N=35) who had assessed adult pre-registration nursing students in the previous 12 months. The focus groups were recorded, transcribed and analysed to generate categories.
RESULTS:
Five categories were identified from the data: Changing roles and responsibilities; Exploring the past to understand the present; Just knowing; The odds; Time to mentor. The findings highlighted that mentors were aware of their role and responsibility for the assessment of students in practice. However, many felt this was a new responsibility and role in which they lacked experience. Some existing mentors felt that they may not have had the necessary preparation to effectively assess students in practice and identified their need for support.
CONCLUSION:
Given that mentors are expected to be competent assessors of students in practice and protect the public through gate-keeping professional registration, this study suggests that serious consideration should be given to how mentors are prepared and the ongoing support and education they receive in assessment.

Annual report of the Wisconsin Registration Board of Architects and Professional Engineers.

Includes the Registration Statutes, rules and by-laws of the Board and rosters of qualified registrants.

Rules of the Supreme Court of Illinois : admission, registration, professional conduct and discipline of attorneys and the code of judicial conduct.

Subtitle varies.

What do beginning English teachers want from professional development?

This qualitative, interpretive case study allows insights into the reflective emerging teacher practitioner as it explores pre-service and beginning teachers’ preparedness to deal with curriculum change and the demands of the classroom and school community. Five beginning teachers were asked what they want from professional development in a period of rapid curriculum change. The study aligns with emerging local and national agendas for teacher professional development and accreditation in Australia. The data analysis, based on “community of practice” perspectives, shows that new teachers have clear ideas about the professional development they need and want. Professional development is seen as integral to their developing professional identities. The paper has implications for the way leadership teams offer and how new teachers take up professional development opportunities, upon which registration is contingent.

The Australian domain name registration system : a more efficient system for the promotion of liberalisation, consumer protection and growth

This thesis is about the Australian domain name system and, in particular, the principles governing the registration of domain names in the '.au' country code domain space. It examines the different types of registration systems adopted in country code domain spaces and categorises them according to the extent to which they impose restrictions on registration, ranging from restrictive to unrestrictive. A comparative analysis is made of the restrictive registration system in Australia and the United Kingdom‘s unrestrictive system.

An integrated approach to professional development in secondary schools

Following the implementation of the National Professional Standards for Teachers, all teachers in Australia will be required to undertake 30 hours per year of professional development (PD) to maintain their registration. However, defining what constitutes effective PD is complex and often contested. This paper looks at a case study in Queensland, Australia, where a high school worked collaboratively with a university lecturer to deliver effective whole-school professional development. The lecturer acted as an external change agent, working closely with the principal and staff to build a relationship of trust and to develop a strategy for the delivery of PD on-site. This case highlights how partnerships between teachers and teacher educators combined with a willing school leader can provide positive opportunities for collaborative, sustainable, professional growth and learning.

Professional development on-site and in context at Narangba Valley SHS

The implementation of the National Professional Standards for Teachers (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL), 2011) will require all teachers to undertake 30 hours per year of professional development (PD) to maintain thei registration. However, defining what constitutes effective PD s complex. This article discusses an approach used by Narangba Valley State High School (SHS) in Queensland which involves effective on-site PD, resulting in improved student outcomes. In addition to the school-administered growth and learning (GAL) plans for each teacher, the school worked collaboratively with an external person (university lecturer) and implemented an effective, sustainable, whole-school approach to PD which was ongoing, on time, on task, on the mark, and on-the-spot (Jetnikoff & Smeed, 2012). The article unpacks an interview with Ross Mackay, the Narangba Valley SHS executive-principal and one of the authors of this paper, and provides practical advice for other school leaders wishing to implement a similar approach to PD.

Australian pharmacists' understanding of their continuing professional development obligations

Background The adoption of continuing professional development (CPD) in Australia is still relatively new [expand]. There is limited information on how Australian pharmacists have engaged with the CPD requirements for registration. Aim To explore Australian registered pharmacists’ understanding and engagement with the requirement for CPD credits for registration. Method The Pharmacy Board of Australia’s CPD requirements for registration was used as a guide to design an online survey to ascertain Australian pharmacists understanding and engagement in the acquisition of CPD credits for registration. Results A total of 278 pharmacists responded to the survey – 66% were female and 30% were male (4% did not disclose their gender). 63% of respondents felt that it would not be difficult to acquire 40 CPD credits annually; with pharmacists identifying that Group 1 activities were a preferred way of acquiring CPD credits. The majority of pharmacists (91%) believed that they knew what the current CPD requirements for general registration are and 77% felt that there has been enough guidance provided to assist them. Despite this, 26% of participants had never used self directed learning plans and 38% did not know how to undertake self-directed learning. 76% of participants were under the common misconception that CPD is synonymous with continuing education. Conclusion The majority of registered pharmacists believe they understand and can engage in the acquisition of CPD credits for registration. However, some aspects of the process was not understood. The key link of how this process aims to develop individual practice needs to be further developed within the profession.

An international comparison of the continuing professional development process (CPD) in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom

Background: The Pharmacy Board of Australia stipulated that for renewal of registration, pharmacists must have accrued a minimum of 20 CPD credits over the 2010-11 registration years (1). Mandatory CPD is not new in Pharmacy. The UK and New Zealand have both established systems of CPD in recent years. The purpose of this study is to investigate established CPD processes in the UK and New Zealand with the view to making recommendations for the implementation of the CPD process in Australia. Objectives: To compare the acquisition and guidance on documentation of CPD credit points in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Methodology: A comparative online search of the websites of each of the registering authorities was undertaken. Any practice standards or guidelines which relate to registration or continuing professional development were analysed and compared. Results: In New Zealand the Pharmacy Council require Pharmacists to have a minimum of 12 outcome credits over a 3-year period for recertification (2, 3). The outcome credit related to each CPD action and is based on relevance to the pharmacist and their practice. It is graded between one, for CPD which has occasional relevance to practice and three which have considerable relevance to practice. There are examples of completed CPD recording sheets on their website (8). In the UK, The General Pharmaceutical Council require Pharmacists to make a minimum of nine CPD entries per year (4) and detailed guidance on how to record CPD activities is provided (5,7). The Pharmacy Board of Australia divides CPD activities into three groups (6). Of the 20 credits required annually only 10 can be gained from group one activities, which is information accessed without assessment. There is only brief guidance on the recording of CPD. Discussion: The GPhC in the UK provided the most comprehensive guidance on acquisition of CPD credit points and documentation (5,7) The Pharmacy Council of New Zealand made CPD points relevant to practice.(2,8) The Pharmacy Board of Australia provided limited information for pharmacists on CPD activities, which may impede pharmacist participation. Information may assist in increasing pharmacists’ engagement in CPD activities. In conclusion, there is variation between the three countries in the amount and type of information provided about CPD requirements.