2019 Good Practice Finalists' nominations

Deakin University

In the context of an increasingly digital world, Deakin University launched a free two-week MOOC “Transforming Digital Learning: Learning Design meets Service Design” in November 2018, with the aim of developing capability in digital learning and teaching practice on a large scale. This open course is distinctive in simultaneously targeting both teaching teams in HE and global professionals already working in the field of digital learning. The MOOC also constitutes the first part of a foundation unit into the innovative professional practice postgraduate degrees in Digital Learning Leadership, which incorporate stackable qualifications through micro-credentials (Oliver, 2019), and may also be taken as part of Deakin’s Graduate Certificate in Higher Education.

The pedagogical principles that underpinned the design and delivery of the MOOC were the notions of social learning and andragogy  (Laurillard, 2012; Ross-Gordon, 2011). In building a productive learning community bringing digital learning practitioners from a variety of roles together, we have applied a lens of reflective practice, revealing our own practices as an invitation to learners to share their own, while also teaching the key theories of learning design and service design frameworks (Carvalho & Goodyear, 2018). 

The development of the MOOC required a whole of institution effort – driven by the L&T centre, through deep collaboration with faculty teams. Since its conception, the MOOC has run 4 times, overwhelmingly positive feedback and high impact – a total of 190 Deakin staff and 4810 global learners took the MOOC. Some feedback include:

• “Gaining insight into transforming digital learning with this MOOC from FutureLearn. Strongly recommend for learning professional looking to the future.” @LindaRuthMcGee

• “Just finished a great short course on @FutureLearn – great PD!” @ireneoduffy

• “So far this course has given me lots of useful insights that I can apply to my work straight away.” (Deakin student)

References

Carvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (2018). Design, learning networks and service innovation. Design Studies, 55, 27-53.

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology: Routledge.

Oliver, B. (2019). Making micro-credentials work for learners, employers and providers (pp. iii, 48 p.). [Melbourne]: Deakin University.

Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2011). Research on Adult Learners: Supporting the Needs of a Student Population that Is No Longer Nontraditional. Peer Review, 13(1), 26-29.

University of Tasmania

The principle of good learning and teaching inherent in our approach to engaging and developing every teacher in everyday scholarship includes routine collection of data with analysis focused on informing curriculum decisions and improvements in teaching practice. Data underpins our explicit integration of three orientations to quality: quality improvement (QI), quality assurance (QA) and scholarship. QI activities feed forward to inform QA and scholarship; scholarship and QA feedback to inform and evidence QI initiatives.

Key success factors are: building scholarly environments, a team-based culture with a distributed leadership ethos; establishing team practices for scholarship that build on existing capacities and develop practices for QI and QA.

Since our 2012 pilot, in which we designed an evaluation research framework for three curricula, the impact of the Curriculum Evaluation Research (CER) framework has increased from local award-winning courses, to initiating national and international engagement. Since 2015, we have connected a network of scholars across Australia who have sought to adapt and implement the CER framework and grow their capacity for scholarship. Within our institution, college and divisional organisations have adopted the CER framework; it has informed research strategies to support teachers participate in research that is linked to and aligned with learning and teaching activities. At its heart, it is intended to build staff capability and embed practices to assure quality and measure the impact of curriculum for student learning. In 2019, the Australian Council of Deans of Science awarded a joint fellowship to adapt the CER framework for STEM disciplines in Australian higher education institutions.

The innovative CER framework addresses barriers to engagement in scholarship. It guides teaching teams to create collegial and whole-of-team approaches that allow for a range of contributions. It also provides non-threatening contexts for peer review, decentred from individuals to focus on a whole-of-course perspective.

The University of Queensland

UQ2U is a dynamic, engaging and contemporary approach to course development and redesign which is transforming courses at UQ.

This multi-faceted program builds innovative educational experiences responding to changing student expectations, digital disruption, and  preparing students for a lifetime of continuous learning.

UQ2U courses use evidence-based approaches to maximise campus-based ‘face time’ for active learning, complemented by high-value, flexible online content.

The program is resourced by a centralised team from the Institute for Teaching and Learning Innovation which collaborates intensively with course teams on a 6-month, whole-of-course (re)design project.

Academics undergo a customised program including:

• all-round professional learning informed by the Higher Education Learning Framework (Nugent, et al., 2018) including authentic assessment writing, learning tools to support interactive and contextual learning.

• intensive course design work using the backwards design approach (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).

• course content development for optimisation in blended and active learning.

The UQ2U program focuses on developing genuine partnerships between academics, tutors, students, learning designers, project managers, eLearning officers, learning advisors and librarians and has reached over 400 staff from all faculties. By the end of 2020, its outputs will benefit around 50,000 unique enrolments through the re-imagining of 78 courses over a 3 year period.

We are building academic staff capacity to enable enhanced active learning experiences and course sustainability. UQ2U academics also learn how to use learning analytics geared toward just-in-time interventions as well as continuous course improvement.

The program is highly valued by academics and rewarding new experiences have been created through a shared purpose, academic autonomy and support for highly effective teaching.

Ultimately, this new delivery model aims to showcase UQ academics’ expertise and redesign the nature of teacher-student interactions through a flexible format.

These fundamental changes have the capacity to be extended to further collaborative projects with industry or within their research

Edith Cowan University

Assessment frames learning (Carless, 2015; Gibbs, 2006). It also frames teaching. By changing assessment and moderation practices we have changed teaching and learning at ECU. Starting with the Assessment Policy, we sought to assure learning that was deep (Fullan & Scott, 2014) and connected (Fung, 2017), and to build students’ capacity for future learning (Boud & Soler, 2016).

Following extensive benchmarking, wide-ranging consultation (including students and the Union), and thorough exploration of how assessment changes affected each discipline, adoption was supported by interventions such as: adding check boxes to the Marks Recording System for different moderation phases; providing fact sheets and ‘how-to’ guides; and, delivering customised workshops to all Schools, in consultation with Associate Deans and incorporating discipline-specific examples. All eight Schools participated in the 2018 roll-out, with four Schools requesting multiple sessions. Over 200 academics attended these sessions in 2018. Third Party Partners also became engaged, with two sessions for Edith Cowan College, and another combined ECU/ECC session scheduled. Academics noted positive outcomes from assessment changes, sharing these at ECUlture (institutional forum) and the WA Forum.

Another facet of our multi-pronged approach to academic development has been the adoption of Cadmus (assessment software with an educative approach to academic integrity). Tasks run in Cadmus are redesigned to improve scaffolding and authenticity. These design features have been adopted by Unit Coordinators in other assessments and units. Of 20 units that used Cadmus in Semester 1 2019, 73.7% showed improved success rates. In 2018, three Unit Coordinators presented at ECUlture and three more have submitted abstracts for 2019.

Schools are now revising Academic Workload Models to accommodate new assessment practices like early consensus moderation activities. Scaffolded, authentic assessment tasks are becoming normalised at ECU, driving new teaching approaches that assure deep and connected learning and build students’ capacity for future learning.​

The University of Adelaide

To support the University of Adelaide’s strategic vision to enhance student learning opportunities in blended and online programs, the Program Enhancement Partnership (PEP) model was developed to provide an innovative approach to embedded academic development in learning design whilst working to deliver enhanced learning design in priority programs.

Inspired by Salmon & Wright’s (2014) team-based Carpe Diem approach and Perovic & Young’s (2015) ABC method, PEP combines the benefits of group and individual based approaches to staff development (Southwell, Morgan, & ALTC, 2009) within learning design, in a way that is contextualised, relevant, immediately applied and intensively resourced. Learning Enhancement and Innovation (central unit) and Faculty Associate Deans (Learning & Teaching) work together to identify and prioritise Programs of Study to join a Partnership. Within the Partnership, teaching staff partner with learning designers, students, librarians, analysts and developers to undertake a team-based, intensive, effective and forward-looking design process which embeds principles of constructive alignment, scaffolded learning, authentic assessment and evidence-based good practice.   

“Thank you for providing an opportunity for collaborative and creative course development. I learned a great deal, and left feeling supported, encouraged and inspired.” - Course Coordinator

Beginning with a pilot in Q4 of 2017, and rolled out in 2018, over the past 18 months PEP has become embedded within Division and Faculty strategic approaches to support enhancement of the student learning experience and increased academic learning design capability through collaborative exploration. Whist PEP hasn’t been without its challenges, in 2019 Partnerships are active across 18 Programs, encompassing 44 courses and impacting 14,000 enrolments.

Perovic,  N.  &  Young,  C.  ABC  Curriculum  Design  2015  Summary  (2015,  December  2).  Message  posted  to  http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/digital-education/2015/12/02/abc-curriculum-design-2015-summary/

Salmon, G., & Wright, P. (2014). Transforming Future Teaching through "Carpe Diem" Learning Design. Education Sciences, 4(1), 52-63.

Southwell, D., Morgan, Wendy, & Australian Learning Teaching Council. (2009). Leadership and the impact of academic staff development and leadership development on student learning outcomes in higher education : A review of the literature : A report for the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) / Deborah Southwell, Wendy Morgan. Brisbane, Qld.]: QUT Dept. of Teaching and Learning Support Services.

​

UNSW Sydney

Academic Mentoring at UNSW is a university wide, evidence-based approach which aims to build successful mentoring relationships across the institution. Established mentoring programs promote range of personal and professional benefits to individuals involved, as well as institutions more broadly (e.g., Boles & Diehm, 2013). The initiative is aligned with the UNSW 2025 Strategy, specifically supporting and valuing teaching excellence.

 

Informed by a ‘spectrum’ approach to mentoring (Harvey, Ambler, & Cahir 2017), Academic Mentoring at UNSW empowers mentees to choose their mentors and the type of mentoring relationship they want (e.g., one-on-one, group, peer, online, compound). Mentees and mentors set goals, timeframes and parameters for how their relationship will work. The initiative is innovative and distinctive because it’s:

1. Evidence based: informed by research in academic and corporate sectors (Ambler, Harvey, & Cahir, 2016; Harvey et al., 2017).

2. Flexible: the approach is adaptable and specific to the needs of higher education learning and teaching.

3. Supported: by face to face/online training and resources developed by the Academic Development Services (ADS) team.

4. Transferrable: could be adapted to academic mentoring outside of learning and teaching (e.g. research).

 

Aside from the initial set up, involving development of a website (which houses mentor profiles),  resources (including a guide for mentors/mentees) and recruitment/training of mentors, the program requires little resourcing as mentees self-select their mentors (there is no matching process that needs to be administered).

 

The initiative is being piloted in 2019 with 32 mentors from a diverse range of disciplines, supported by professional development workshops. Survey results from the workshops are very positive with 100% of participants surveyed so far (n=10) in strong agreement/agreement that learnings from the workshop are useful to their practice. A comprehensive evaluation of the initiative will be undertaken towards the end of the year. 

 

References

Ambler, T., Harvey, M., & Cahir, J. (2016). University academics’ experiences of learning through mentoring. Australian Educational Researcher, 43, 609–627. doi: 10.1007/s13384-016-0214-7

Boles, W., & Diehm, R-A. (2013). Creating more rewarding careers: A mentoring guide for the professoriate [Navigating a pathway to outcomes-focused thinking in engineering education]. Sydney: Office for Learning & Teaching. Retrieved from: www.nationalteachingfellowshipboles.com/library/Prof%20Guide%20Mentoring-ebook.pdf 

Harvey, M., Ambler, T., & Cahir, J. (2017). Spectrum Approach to Mentoring: An evidence-based approach to mentoring for academics working in higher education. Teacher Development, 21(1), 160-174. doi: 10.1080/13664530.2016.1210537

UNSW. (2015). 2025 Strategy: Our Strategic Priorities and Themes. Retrieved from: https://www.2025.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/uploads/unsw_2025strategy_201015.pdf​

University of Southern Queensland

The USQ Open Educational Practice (OEP) Grant learning communities are structured, participant-driven experiences providing direct, on-going support to grant projects that facilitate quality outcomes for participants and their students.  The community fosters cross-disciplinary collaboration, peer-review of outputs, authentically connects domain knowledge in OEP to specific disciplinary contexts that transform teaching practices, and creates institutional networks to benefit practice beyond the grant lifecycle.

Most institutional L&T grant programs provide little or no support during the funded grant period.  The applicants are usually reliant on pre-existing professional networks to learn additional skills and domain knowledge.  Mentors are present during grant writing, and successful teams automatically join the eighteen-month community that assists in constructing an understanding of OEP and connects it to their L&T practice.

Whilst the community facilitation remains the critical component for success, formal and informal qualitative feedback informs continuous, iterative development of the structure.  Interviews with participants coincide with the Interim, and Final Reports capturing the challenges and enablers of practice.  In 2019, this extends to a monthly formal learning environment designed to elicit reflection, whilst building an externalised record of design and development decisions in context as a journal of educational experiences. Fullan and Steigelbauer’s Theory of Educational Change (1991) informs this initiative, especially noting that any practice change requires contextualised support, and a sense of ownership over self-determined change.

Since 2015, the grants have engaged 44 academic staff across 9 disciplines.  In the post-funded period, 75% of outputs continue to be used as core content.  Participants attribute 17 journal and conference publications during this period to the grants and the grant support processes.  The implementation of OEP has saved students c.$164,000, directly reducing the financial burden of university study.  Furthermore, all three other internally-funded T&L grant schemes have adopted this support structure, demonstrating wider diffusion of this practice.

​

Victoria University of Wellington

Student-staff partnerships can change learning and teaching for everyone involved, when based on respect, responsibility, and reciprocity1. Our university has embedded a bicultural approach to learning and teaching that recognises the value of ‘akoranga’ (collective responsibility for learning) and is embodied by “including students in the design, development and evaluation of learning and teaching, and by learning how to learn and teach from each other”2. The Centre for Academic Development is deeply committed to akoranga and, in partnership with students, we have created the Ako in Action programme.

 

Students, lecturers, and academic developers worked together to co-design, trial, and launch Ako in Action. Growing from a planning team of four in 2017 to a pilot with 16 participants in 2018, we are now a thriving and growing community of 58 students, lecturers, and academic developers. The overarching aim is to reflect upon and improve learning and teaching at our university, and for all participants to see themselves as both learners and teachers.

 

Students are paired with academics to observe lectures and consult on course design, assessment, teaching practices, and the use of technology. The academic developers run weekly sessions with the students based on the principles of our university’s learning and teaching strategy, which marry well with the three principles from the research literature (in italics): akoranga (collective responsibility for learning/reciprocity), whanaungatanga (an extended family of collaborative learners), rangatiratanga (autonomous learners and leaders), whai mātauranga (intellectual curiosity), kaitiakitanga (the guardianship of knowledge and wellbeing/responsibility), and manaakitanga (a generous fostering of knowledge/respect). Evaluation shows that Ako in Action provides staff with iterative, regular, just-in-time, reflective student perspectives on their teaching, and students with increased awareness of their own capacities as learners and leaders. Participants also develop empathy for others and a stronger commitment to reflective, deep learning.

Victoria University

Victoria University’s (VU) Connected Learning team recognises that the student voice (Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A. & Felten P., 2011) is imperative in any university change process. To support large scale transition to Block Model, it established a Student as Staff (SaS) program: employing students to support academic development in the design of curriculum, learning resources and learning activities from the student perspective. SaS also work with academics to build capacity in blended learning and learning technologies, fostering a collaborative, help-seeking culture, a move away from “pedagogical solitude” (Bovill et al. 2011, p.139) through face-to-face support at our Hive drop in space and online.

Our model recognises the benefits of team-based design (Bass, R. 2012) and positions the design process as a structured and contextualised form of academic development. It is distinct from others in that students are involved in integrated design teams with academics, learning designers and librarians, and work elbow to elbow capacity build. It is also distinctive due to its scale. Since mid 2017, students have worked with academics redesigning over 450 units for VU’s innovative Block Model. There is a positive trend in help-seeking behaviour from academics who have worked with students. The number of drop-ins at the Hive spaces has doubled in 2019 from 2018, with 590 staff seeking student support this year to date. Self-directed learning is also increasing, with almost triple the use of online guides and modules.

We are now seeing a whole of institution change, where staff are not only comfortable working with students to improve their unit and their practice, they expect to do so. The unique role of SaS in academic development has contributed to the well documented improvements in pass rates, grades and retention since the implementation of the VU Block Model (McCluskey T, Weldon J, & Smallridge A., 2019).

​

References

Bass, R. (2012) Disrupting ourselves: The problem of Learning in Higher Education. Educause review, vol 47, no.2.

Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten P. (2011) Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: implications for academic developers. Int J Acad Dev. 16:133–145. [Taylor & Francis Online]

Flint, A., Harrington, K. & Healey, M. (2014) Engagement through partnership: students as partners in learning and teaching in Higher Education. The Higher Education Academy.

McCluskey T, Weldon J, & Smallridge A. (2019). Re-building the first year experience, one block at a time. Student Success, (1), 1. https://studentsuccessjournal.org/article/view/1148

Video: Students as Staff at Victoria University

https://youtu.be/ioR1I2u9868

Video: Academic Views of Students as Staff at Victoria University

https://youtu.be/gKuUrB9MDrU

University of Otago, New Zealand

In October each year, about 50 recently-appointed academics at the University of Otago gather in Dunedin for a two-day conference to socialise, to learn about, to challenge and to contribute to the values and ways of working in the University. This New Academic Staff Conference (NASC)  has been running since the early 2000s and since 2010 has been coordinated and facilitated by Professor Kerry Shephard. Since 2015, the NASC has been designed around constructivist and transformational learning theory (owing much to Dewey, Piaget, Bruner, Vygotsky and Mezirow). Its design emphasises conversation, whereby all aspects of the NASC  are conversational, with an introductory discussion to ensure that participants set the agenda for subsequent conversations; engagement, where presentations from senior colleagues are strongly discouraged, and instead participants visit colleagues in their own offices, or network in small groups in a speed-dating arrangement; participation, where participants share experiences and hopes; and collegiality, meaning whatever level or role participants have, everyone, professional or academic, is involved as a participating member of the community of the University. Conversations may be intense, but exemplify the nature of transformational learning as combining rational, cognitive with emotional, affective elements; essential when the future values of an educational institution are at stake.

 

Colleagues greatly value this conference (participant feedback on overall quality, over 90% 1& 2 on a 5 point scale for the last 3 years) and particularly value some parts (“…especially the part when we visited the various centres and the ‘speed dating’ format in the afternoon”). Often participants are surprised by the NASC (“I suppose I thought about it beforehand as an information session, whereas it's definitely a conference…”). It even seems to provide a transformational experience for some (“…my take home message was that university wants me to succeed and will help me do so”).