Friday, 26 September 2014

eResource: Innovative Indigenous Teaching and Learning


Good Practice Report: Innovative Indigenous Teaching and Learning from Uni. of Southern Queensland on Vimeo.

Innovative Indigenous Teaching and Learning Report

Report Link: http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-good-practice-report-innovative-indigenous-teaching-and-learning-2013

Report Development

The review consists of three major sections. First, it provides a summative evaluation of the good practices and key outcomes for teaching and learning from completed ALTC projects and fellowships (as at February 2013) relating to the topic of Innovative Indigenous learning and teaching in higher education. Second, it presents a review of relevant Australian and international scholarly research and publications on the topic. Drawing on the observations from the review of ALTC projects and relevant literature, the final section, Recommendations, identifies areas in which further work or development is needed.

This report has reviewed sixteen ALTC funded and completed projects and fellowships as at March 2013 that are relevant to the topic of Innovative Indigenous learning and teaching. These projects and fellowships have mapped an overall picture of innovative Indigenous teaching and learning practices in Australia. These practices were implemented in different educational settings and were examined from different angles. They took on different forms and addressed specific needs of different groups of stakeholders, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous. They are forging new and meaningful structures and understanding for promoting Indigenous learning and teaching.


Outcomes

Key outcomes for teaching and learning of the ALTC completed projects on the topic of Innovative Indigenous learning and teaching:
  1. Identifying and addressing different distinct and specific areas in Australian Indigenous education that need attention
  2. Strengthening capacity of Indigenous and non-Indigenous stakeholders involved both directly and indirectly in Indigenous education
  3. Forging and advocating new paradigms of Indigenous learning and teaching
  4. Creating multiple networks for promoting new understanding of Indigenous education and Indigenous knowledge and for supporting all involved in the process
  5. Developing practical learning and teaching resources either ready for use or adaptable for different contexts
  6. Developing theoretical and philosophical tools/frameworks relevant to indigenous education
  7. Providing exemplars of good Indigenous learning and teaching practices
  8. Drawing attention to the need for concerted effort by different sectors and agencies involved in Indigenous education
  9. Promoting and recognising the importance of Indigenous knowledge practice
  10. Acting as a blueprint for further work/research to be done in the field, in terms of epistemology and methodology

Report Authors

Professor Nereda White
Professor Nereda White is an Australian Aboriginal woman from the Gooreng Gooreng people of Bundaberg, Queensland. She is currently Professor and Director of the Centre for Indigenous Education and Research, at the Australian Catholic University. Professor White holds Early Childhood teaching qualifications, and Masters and Doctoral qualifications in the area of educational leadership and management.
Dr Jack Frawley
Dr Jack Frawley is Deputy Director of Australian Catholic University's Centre for Creative & Authentic Leadership, and Senior Research Fellow with the Centre for Indigenous Education and Research.He is an active researcher in several educational leadership projects, and intercultural studies related projects.

Dang Thi Kim Anh

Friday, 12 September 2014

eResource: Curriculum Renewal


Good practice report: Curriculum Renewal from Uni. of Southern Queensland on Vimeo.

Curriculum Renewal Report

Report Link: http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-curriculum-renewal-2011

Context and eResource Development 

This report serves as an overview of the work funded by the ALTC in the area of curriculum renewal in higher education, making recommendations for future work in the area. At the time of writing the report, the ALTC has funded 40 completed projects and seven fellowships in this area. These are from various discipline areas such as biology, physics, chemistry, maths, histology, pharmacology, studio arts, music, teacher education, construction, computer science, ICT, new media, engineering, health, occupational therapy, philosophy, sociology, social work, psychology, and veterinary science. The outcomes of each are summarised in this report, along with a comprehensive literature review of published national and international research and practice in the areas of curriculum renewal in higher education (up to 2011).

Outcomes 

The projects, fellowships and literature included in this report suggest some much-needed changes for higher education in Australia. They are as follows:
  1. Creating clear and accessible career pathways for students during their higher education journey.
  2. Clearly articulating threshold graduate attributes or outcomes.
  3. Aligning education pathways to meet national and international industry needs.
  4. Emphasising the interdisciplinary, intercultural, and global nature of modern knowledge.
  5. Empowering graduates for real-world work and life environments.
  6. Equipping and developing staff to use and incorporate technology tools within the curriculum in a creative manner.
  7. Recognising the emerging needs and different learning styles of our increasingly diverse and international student cohort.
 The major theme that emerges from all these projects is the need for a change of culture and curricular processes, not just at the organisational level, but also at the fundamental level of the educators themselves, who deal with students every day, and are closest to the needs, aspirations, learning, and growth of the students. There is also a need for standardisation of both graduate attributes and assessment practices in line with real-world and industry needs. The literature review of the discussion and debate in this area reveals similar needs and issues worldwide. It has also been demonstrated that while technology-assisted learning and teaching along with industry engagement can enrich learners‘ learning and engagement if done right, it has the opposite effect on learning and teaching if the delivery is poorly executed.

Report Authors

 

Dr. Bhuva Narayan 
Bhuva is the Discipline Coordinator for Information & Knowledge Management and Digital and Social Media studies at the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at the University of Technology Sydney. Bhuva is currently working on two research projects: one is funded by the Centre for Health Communications and focuses on the information practices around the self-management of information-intensive chronic health conditions such as diabetes; the other is funded by the AuDA Foundation and is exploring the development of an automated cyberbullying-detection system for social media.

Bhuva’s research is in the area of information ecologies and human learning, including information interactions and information behaviours in digital and social media.  Bhuva’s teaching interests are in the areas of Information Behaviour Theories, Information Research Methods, Information Cultures, User Experience Design, Information Architecture, and Digital Libraries. She is currently also working on a First Year Experience project to engage students in professional practice. 

Professor Sylvia Lauretta Edwards 
Sylvia’s career has focused on innovation in higher education and for 6 of the past 8 years Sylvia worked in executive roles leading faculty reorganisation to facilitate significant change in one university. She now works in the higher education sector as a consultant, mentor, advisor, and coach. A recipient of a prestigious Australian Award for University Teaching in 2006, Sylvia has received numerous QUT teaching performance and leadership awards.

Her research contributions include the development of The Net Lenses model: a relational model of students’ internet searching experiences, the co-development of the Six Frames for Information Literacy Education (Bruce, Edwards & Lupton, 2006), and the Reflective Model for Internet Searching (Edwards & Bruce, 2002). Her areas of expertise include: higher education leadership, T&L leadership, change management, curriculum renewal, coaching, and human information behaviour, information searching, phenomenography and variation theory.  She has published over 50 refereed publications and delivered over 40 academic and industry presentations. 

Friday, 5 September 2014

eResource: Work Integrated Learning



Good Practice Report: Work Integrated Learning from Uni. of Southern Queensland on Vimeo.

Work Integrated Learning Report

Report Link:  http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-work-integrated-learning-2011

Related Publications:

Cooper L, Orrell J, Bowden M (2010) Work Integrated Learning: A Guide to Effective Practice. Taylor & Francis, NY

Context and Development of the Report

The Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) commissioned this report to identify good practices in work-integrated learning (WIL) in Australia through a systematic review of 28 funded studies’ final reports, including WIL and discipline scoping studies, fellowships and projects.
WIL is delineated in this report as the intentional integration of theory and practice knowledge, and a WIL program provides the means to enable this integration and may, or may not, include a placement in a workplace, or a community or civic arena.


The diversity of interests within the reviewed projects points to the scope of WIL as a field of practice. A matrix was developed which identified four major WIL domains and eight dimensions to map the WIL landscape and contextualise the projects.




The following questions structure the report reviews:
  1. What was the scope of WIL practice in the study or project? (e.g. single program, discipline-wide, multi-disciplinary, sector-wide, multi-institutional) 
  2. How are WIL and its purposes conceptualised explicitly or tacitly? 
  3. Did the conceptualisation challenge current WIL conceptions and practices? 
  4. What strategies for success were identified and what are the leadership, management and educational implications? 
  5. Was there attention to issues of equity, access and risk mitigation?

Outcomes

Key outcomes of the reviewed studies recognise essential institutional, educational and partnership elements for successful WIL, as outlined below:
Institutional 
  • a clearly articulated, shared vision of WIL within the university, including a shared understanding of its purposes and expectations; 
  • a realistic recognition of WIL in institutional systems and infrastructure together with the provision of adequate resources; 
  • recognition and legitimation within disciplinary communities of the practice-generated knowledge, and the distinctive and complementary roles the university and workplace have in shaping and supporting the learning; 
  • and engaging and utilising existing institutionally-provided enabling services such as careers services in the WIL process.
Educational
  • adequate induction and preparation of students prior to their practice-based experiences; 
  • providing structured, critically reflective, self and peer learning processes during and after WIL experiences; 
  • presence of an element of risk to contribute to profound learning for students (the corollary is the futility of unchallenging placements); 
  • and investing in the development, trialling and up-scaling of technology-based tools to provide alternative or supplementary WIL experiences, and their integration in curriculum development and institutional strategic plans.
Partnerships
  • ensuring supervisory staff familiarity with students’ prior university learning; 
  • identifying and
  • including all stakeholders in development, innovation and communication regarding WIL;
  • induction/professional development for university and host-organisation supervisory staff and
  • development of their leadership capabilities; 
  • and robust and mature relationships with placement providers (host organisations) underpinned by a commitment to mutual benefit.

Report Author 

Professor Janice Orrell


Professor Janice Orrell has been an educator for over 47 years. She has taught in rural, remote and urban Schools in Western Australia and South Australia; an International School in Southern India. She has taught communication and developmental, health and educational psychology in Aboriginal Teacher Education and Nursing Education.  Her primary interests are in education for practice and assessment. Her research is in the fields of university learning and teaching; assessment in higher education; education for practice (WIL); quality assurance in HE; research education and leadership and management in higher education. She is currently a Professor of Assessment in Medical Education and a supervisor of 7 PhD and Ed Doc candidates in Flinders University's School of Education.

Thursday, 21 August 2014

eResource: Student Transition in Higher Education


Good practice report: Student transition in higher education from Uni. of Southern Queensland on Vimeo.

Student Transition in Higher Education Report


Other Publications:

Gale, T. & Parker, S. (2014). Navigating change: a typology of student transitions in Australian higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 39(5), pp. 734-753 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03075079.2012.721351

Content and Development of the eResource 


This Good Practice Report reviews 14 completed projects and five fellowships funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) between 2006 and 2010, and identified by the ALTC as contributing to an understanding of student transition into HE. Five then-current projects (three projects and two fellowships) are also identified and summarised although, given their in-progress status, they were not analysed in the Report.
The Report includes a one-page summary of each ALTC project and fellowship. These identify and analyse the findings of, and resources for, teaching and learning in HE produced by the ALTC projects and fellowships, particularly in relation to student transition. To enable a reading across these, each project/fellowship is summarised in six sections: (1) overview; (2) design, methodology; (3) findings, resources, outcomes; (4) dissemination; (5) implications for student transition into higher education; and (6) project report online availability. Sections three and five are particularly pertinent to the interests of this Report.

Outcomes


Emerging from this analysis of ALTC projects and of the international literature are three broad conceptions of student transition: as induction (T1), development (T2), and becoming (T3). These categories are not explicitly named in the literature. Rather they represent Gale and Parker’s analysis of existing research and program description.
The following recommendations for further development or work in the field of student transition into HE are informed by the review of the national and international research literature (including work completed as part of the ALTC projects and fellowships). The recommendations largely mirror the review’s conclusions regarding this literature.
Gale and Parker recommend that future research and practice in the field of student transition in higher education should:
  1. Declare how transition is defined. This should be an explicit statement that identifies how transition is defined within the project/program.
  2. Draw on related fields and bodies of knowledge. This should include drawing on the extensive research literature from related fields, particularly in relation to youth and life transitions and education and social theory.
  3. Foreground students’ lived reality.  Institutional and/or systemic interests should not dominate research and practice. 
  4. Broaden the scope of investigation. Adding to the corpus of investigations on the full range of ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ transitions should be an integral part of the research and/or practice.

Report Authors

Professor Trevor Gale 
Professor Trevor Gale is a critical sociologist of education, with research interests in policy and social justice, particularly in the fields of schooling and higher education.
He has an international reputation for his monographs Just Schooling (OUP 2000) and Engaging Teachers (OUP 2003), co-authored with Kathleen Densmore, and for his Foucauldian theorization of policy methodology. His more recent conception of student equity in terms of ‘mobility’, ‘aspiration’ and ‘voice’ (with Sam Sellar) and his typology of student transition (with Stephen Parker), have reframed the problem of social inclusion in higher education.
Prior to taking up his current position at Deakin University, Professor Gale was the founding director of Australia’s National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (2008-2011), a research centre established and funded by the Australian Government. While there he led the government-commissioned national review of university outreach programs, reported in Interventions Early in School (2010), which now informs inter/national policy and practice in the field.
Professor Gale is Chief Investigator on two current Australian Research Council (ARC) research projects: one focused on secondary school student aspirations in Melbourne’s western suburbs; the other on the social justice dispositions of teachers in advantaged and disadvantaged secondary schools.
He is a past president of the Australian Association for Research In Education (AARE) and the founding editor of Critical Studies in Education. He is also a co-founding editor of the book series, Education Policy and Social Inequality.


Dr Stephen Parker 
Dr Stephen Parker is Research Fellow at Deakin University with interests in social justice, public policy, social and political theory and sociology. He works closely with Professor Trevor Gale on several research projects related to these interests, in areas of schooling and higher education. His substantive position is as a Research Fellow on the Australian Research Council research project: Social justice dispositions informing teachers’ pedagogy in advantaged and disadvantaged secondary schools.
From 2008-2012, Stephen was a researcher in Australia’s National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE) where he contributed to a number of key projects including an ALTC-commissioned report on student transitions to higher education, as well as research on current higher education policy and student aspirations. He is also a co-author of the Australian Government-funded Interventions Early in School report (Gale et al. 2010).
Prior to working at the NCSEHE, he was engaged in research on the inequities of social security policy, housing and homelessness and published in those areas. In 2011 he completed his PhD entitled Theorising Human Rights: Foundations and Their Influence at the University of South Australia. In September 2012, he was a Visiting Scholar at the Centre for Educational Research in Equalities, Policy and Pedagogy, University of Roehampton in London, UK.

Friday, 25 July 2014

eResource: Good Practice in Technology-Enhanced Learning and Teaching


Good practice report: Technology-enhanced learning and teaching from Uni. of Southern Queensland on Vimeo.

Technology-Enhanced Learning and Teaching Report

Link to Report: http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-good-practice-report-technology-enhanced-learning-and-teaching-2011
 

Context and Development of the eResource

NATA is excited to announce the launch of the eReources on Good Practice in Technology-Enhanced Learning and Teaching (see above) by Mike Keppell, Gordon Suddaby and Natasha Hard. The eResource was  developed as part of a series that hopes to build awareness of the ALTC/OLT Good Practice Reports and the potential that they offer the sector. The eResources provide a short synthesis of the key elements of the Reports and present them in the more engaging format of video.

This eResource is based on the ALTC Good Practice Report on Technology-Enhanced Learning and Teaching which synthesised 33 ALTC projects and fellowships related to the topic (25 completed, 8 ongoing). The 9 minute long eReources was developed by the report authors in collaboration with Media Services and the University of Southern Queensland.

"Technology-enhanced learning and teaching is becoming a core element of all teaching in tertiary education. This report deconstructs TEL using a range of real-life project experiences to provide some core principles for practitioners to use and consider" (Report Authors).

10 Outcomes for Best Practice in TEL

The report authors developed a set of 10 Outcomes for Best Practice in TEL based on the meta-analysis of the 33 projects.
  1. A focus on learning design allows academics to model and share good practice in learning and teaching
  2. Authentic learning provides a means of engaging students through all aspects of curricula, subjects, activities and assessment
  3. Successful academic development focuses on engaging academics over sustained periods of time through action learning cycles and the provision of leadership development opportunities
  4. Engaging teaching practices are key to student learning
  5. Technology-enabled assessment provides flexible approaches for academics to provide feedback to students
  6. Integrating technology-enhanced learning and teaching strategies across curriculum, subjects, activities and assessment results in major benefits to the discipline
  7. Knowledge and resource sharing are central to a vibrant community of practice
  8. Academics require sophisticated online  teaching strategies to effectively teach in technology-enhanced higher education environments
  9. Academics need a knowledge of multi-literacies to teach effectively in contemporary technology-enhanced higher education
  10. Exemplar projects focused on multiple outcomes across curricula integration, sustainable initiatives, academic development and community engagement. 

 Standout Projects Reviewed

  1. Role-based learning environments (CG6-39)
  2. Educating the net generation (CG6-25)
  3. Learning to teach online (CG9-1091)
  4. Virtual microscopy for enhancing learning and teaching (CG7-398)
  5. Using mobile technologies to develop new ways of teaching and learning (CG6-33)
  6. Promoting the sharing and reuse of technology-supported learning designs (Ron Oliver 2006)
  7. Rethinking assessment in web 2.0 environments (Geoffrey Crisp 2011)
  8. Raising the profile of diagnostic, formative and summative eAssessments (Geoffrey Crisp 2009)
  9. Histology learning and teaching resource for students (Geoffrey Meyer 2009)
  10. Using eSimulations in professional education (CG8-771)

Report Authors


 Professor Mike Keppell
Executive Director of the Australian Digital Futures Institute (ADFI) at the University of Southern Queensland. Mike is also the Director of the Digital Futures Cooperative Partnership (DF-CRN) - a research partnership with the Australian National University (ANU) and University of South Australia (UniSA). Mike has a long professional history in higher education in Australia, Canada and Hong Kong. He is a life member of ascilite and has extensive experience in the areas of flexible learning, educational technology and design based research. His current foci include digital futures, learning spaces, blended learning and network leadership. For more information please visit his blog.


Mr Gordon Suddaby
Higher Education Consultant. Gordon previously held the position of Director of Massey University's Centre for Academic Development and eLearning for 10 years before becoming an Associate Professor: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning with the National Centre for Teaching and Learning. He held this position at Massey University in New Zealand until recently retiring. Gordon has extensive experience with relevant professional associations including HERDSA New Zealand, DEANZ and ACODE with whom he served as President. Gordon continues to work on many funded projects in Higher Education in Australasia.

Ms Natasha Hard
Project Manager and Research Assistant at the University of Southern Queensland's Australian Digital Futures Institute (ADFI). Natasha has worked with ADFI since November 2012 managing the Network of Australasian Tertiary Associations (NATA) project and as part of the conference organising group for the Digital Rural Futures Conference held at USQ in June 2014. Natasha worked at the Flexible Learning Institute at Charles Sturt University previously where she worked on two DEHub funded research projects in partnership with Massey University. Natasha also co-authored an ALTC Good Practice Report with Mike Keppell and Gordon Suddaby on TEL during this time.

Links