- Assuring graduate outcomes (2011) Professor Beverley Oliver
- Blended learning (2011) Professor Helen Partridge
- Clinical practice (2011) Professor Robyn Nash
- Curriculum renewal (2011) Dr Bhuva Narayan and Professor Sylvia Edwards
- English language proficiency (2014) Sophie Arkoudis and Lachlan Doughney
- Innovative Indigenous teaching and learning (2013) Professor Nereda White, Dr Jack Frawley, Ms Dang Thi Kim Anh
- Learning and teaching across cultures (2011) Associate Professor Betty Leask
- Revitalising the academic workforce (2012) Dr Deborah Southwell
- Student transition into higher education (2011) Professor Trevor Gale, Dr Stephen Parker
- Technology-enhanced learning and teaching (2011) Professor Mike Keppell, Associate Professor Gordon Suddaby, Ms Natasha Hard
- Work integrated learning (2011) Professor Janice Orrell
Part of NATA's focus was on building awareness of these reports and the potential value they offer the sector. Issues of dissemination within the sector are not new with considerable work already done in exploring this challenge (Gannaway, Hinton, Berry & Moore, 2011; McKenzie, Alexander, Harper & Anderson, 2005; Southwell, Gannaway, Orrell, Chalmers & Abraham, 2005). In attempting to overcome these challenges and share the value of the reports with the sector, several approaches were adopted by NATA. This included presenting at conferences, hosting webinars and developing a series of eResources in consultation with GPR authors. These eResources provide a synthesis of the key elements of the reports and present them in the short and more engaging format of video. Authors have adopted varying degrees of involvement in the development of the presentations and audio recording necessary for the production of the eResources to help ensure the author's voice remains true.
Completed GPR eResources below:
Technology-enhanced learning and teachingProfessor Mike Keppell, Mr Gordon Suddaby & Ms Natasha Hard
Technology-enhanced learning and teaching (click here to download report)
This GPR examines and provides a synthesis of best practice across 25 completed ALTC projects (including three fellowships) and 8 ongoing projects (including one fellowship) in the area of technology-enhanced learning and teaching. Our approach to developing the report involved a meta-analysis of the 33 projects in determining ten outcomes that represent best practice for technology-enhanced learning and teaching. Projects that traversed multiple outcomes were considered exemplary projects.
The report is designed to be accessible to the educator, using the ten key outcomes as a basis for the literature review and as key topic areas around which relevant projects were clustered. A list of evidence-based recommendations was also developed which provides guidelines that academic practitioners, institutions and sponsors might consider when implementing strategies on both a macro and a micro scale within the university and higher education sector.
Key outcomes for best practice in TEL detailed in the report:
Student transition in higher educationProfessor Trevor Gale & Dr Stephen Parker
Student transition in higher education (click here to download report)
The report assembles, analyses and assesses the findings of 19 completed and five in-progress ALTC projects and fellowships, selected by the ALTC as examples of good institutional practice in facilitating student transition in higher education. In addition, the ALTC brief called for a systematic review of the national and international literature on student transitions, drawing largely on but not limited to research conducted in Australia, the USA and the UK. Three broad literatures were identified in this review: (1) accounts of programs designed to assist students, particularly in the first year of HE; (2) quantitative and qualitative analyses of HE students; and (3) theoretically informed conceptualisations of transitions, including but importantly extending beyond formal education contexts. 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 our 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.
- Declare how transition is defined: Future projects/programs in the field of student transition into HE should explicitly identify how transition is defined within the project/program.
- Draw on related fields and bodies of knowledge: Future projects/programs in the field of student transitions into HE should draw on the extensive research literature from related fields, particularly in relation to youth and life transitions and education and social theory.
- Foreground students’ lived reality: Future projects/programs in the field of student transition into HE should be cognisant of students’ lived reality not just institutional and/or systemic interests.
- Broaden the scope of investigation: Future projects/programs in the field of student transition into HE should add to the corpus of investigations on the full range of ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ transitions.
Work integrated learningProfessor Janice Orrell
Work integrated learning (click here to download 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.
A vital part of the review process involved identifying gaps and silences in the project profiles:
- The WIL needs of students with particular backgrounds, including students who are indigenous, students with disabilities, students from low SES backgrounds, international students and students who are the first in their family to attend university. While a few reports mentioned this issue in passing, it was not given strategic consideration; it was absent from projects or plans designed to make changes, although the WIL report (GI7-632) raised the need for this;
- The perspectives of professional accrediting organisations who frequently regulate the amount of WIL included in curricula;
- Group placements (multi-disciplinary and otherwise);
- Implementing mutual benefit systems and ways to integrate the diverse needs and interests of host organisations in WIL program designs; and
- High-level, institutional governance issues to support and manage large-scale WIL implementation plans.
Innovative Indigenous teaching and learningProfessor Nereda White, Dr Jack Frawley & Ms Dang Thi Kim Anh
Innovative Indigenous teaching and learning (click here to download report)
- Identifying and addressing different distinct and specific areas in Australian Indigenous education that need attention
- Strengthening capacity of Indigenous and non-Indigenous stakeholders involved both directly and indirectly in Indigenous education
- Forging and advocating new paradigms of Indigenous learning and teaching
- Creating multiple networks for promoting new understanding of Indigenous education and Indigenous knowledge and for supporting all involved in the process
- Developing practical learning and teaching resources either ready for use or adaptable for different contexts
- Developing theoretical and philosophical tools/frameworks relevant to indigenous education
- Providing exemplars of good Indigenous learning and teaching practices
- Drawing attention to the need for concerted effort by different sectors and agencies involved in Indigenous education
- Promoting and recognising the importance of Indigenous knowledge practice
- Acting as a blueprint for further work/research to be done in the field, in terms of epistemology and methodology.
Curriculum renewalDr Bhuva Narayan & Professor Sylvia Edwards
Curriculum renewal (click here to download report)
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). 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.
- Creating clear and accessible career pathways for students during their higher education journey.
- Clearly articulating threshold graduate attributes or outcomes.
- Aligning education pathways to meet national and international industry needs.
- Emphasising the interdisciplinary, intercultural, and global nature of modern knowledge.
- Empowering graduates for real-world work and life environments.
- Equipping and developing staff to use and incorporate technology tools within the curriculum in a creative manner.
- Recognising the emerging needs and different learning styles of our increasingly diverse and international student cohort.
- Gannaway, D., Hinton, T., Berry, B. & Moore, K. (2011). A review of the dissemination strategies used by projects funded by the ALTC Grants Scheme. Sydney: Australian Teaching and Learning Council. <http://www.olt.gov.au/system/files/resources/PP9-1591%20UQ%20Gannaway%20D-Cubed%20Final%20report%202011.pdf>
- Mckenzie, J., Alexander, S., Harper, C. & Anderson, S. (2005). Dissemination, Adoption & Adaptation of Project Innovations in Higher Education: A report for the Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Australian learning and Teaching Council, Sydney. <http://www.olt.gov.au/system/files/resources/dissemination_disseminationadoptionandadaptation_report_2005.pdf>.
- Southwell, D., Gannaway, D., Orrell, J., Chalmers, D. & Abraham, C. (2005). Strategies for effective dissemination of project outcomes. Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Strawberry Hills, NSW. <http://www.olt.gov.au/system/files/resources/dissemination_uqandflinders_strategieseffectivedissemination_2005.pdf>