1. RESHAPING ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES AS AN INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVOUR International Consortium for Educational Development Barcelona 28 – 30 July 2010 DR CLAIR HUGHES, UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND A/PROF SIMON BARRIE, THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY

2. GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES Graduate attributes are an orientating statement of education outcomes used to inform curriculum design and engagement with teaching and learning experiences at a university (Barrie 2009). They are descriptions of the core abilities and values a university community agrees all its graduates should develop as a result of successfully completing their university studies (adapted from Bowden et al 2000). 2

3. HOWEVER… Meaningful curriculum renewal has proved elusive and in Australia there remains a 'national gap' between the rhetoric of generic attributes and the reality of the student learning experience. Same appears true of Bologna (Reichert 2010) Potentially same may be true for AHELO project 3

4. THE NATIONAL GAP STUDY IDENTIFIED SOME OF THE REASONS WHY... 1.As outcomes they are more complex than they seem 2.Universities systems arent supportive 3.Learners have been left out of the conversation Focus of todays discussion is on how academic development might contribute more effectively to change 4

5. ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES had not moved beyond policy had become compliance had become employability had become good teaching had become curriculum development was becoming culture development 5 Outcomes Process

6. EFFECTIVE ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT 1.Clear integrative outcomes (vision) 2.Make time and make it manageable (practical) 3.Make it intellectually rewarding, fun, and build on what is done (intrinsic) 4.Recognise and reward productive engagement (extrinsic) 5.Participatory leadership – lead by example Focus on 3 & 4 today 6

7. 3. INTELLECTUALLY REWARDING (ENGAGING) ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES What are some examples? turn audit into inquiry, turn formal into informal learning, turn compliance into critique, collaborative, scholarly and creative teaching development acts 7

8. 4. RECOGNISE ENGAGEMENT – EVALUATION Examples of familiar (teacher focused) measures used in audits (inquiries) Course (discipline and integrative) audits of developments, teaching and assessment activities Mapping is of limited benefit for engagement on its own What is done with the data after matters most Evidence of effective curriculum development for GA as a KPI? (teacher measures cross tab with student outcome measures) 8

9. 4. RECOGNISE ENGAGEMENT – EVALUATION Examples of indirect (learner focused) GA measures used in audits (inquiries) Average # times per semester academics meet with students outside class Frequency and quality of intellectual engagement with staff outside of class # and % of students reporting helpful teacher feedback on GA development # and % of students reporting participation in (integrative learning experiences) # and % of courses emphasizing multicultural learning experiences # and % of students involved in faculty research # and % of degrees requiring practicum, internship, service Frequency and quality of intellectual engagement with other students not studying your course Self ratings on development of GA Did the course / teaching / assessment help you develop these GA? Employer/Graduate/Peer perception surveys 9

10. 4. RECOGNISE ENGAGEMENT – EVALUATION Examples of direct (learner focused) GA measures Used Course (discipline and integrative capstone) assignments, exams, projects Perhaps not standardised generic skills tests – Why not? Un-intended (unwanted and not insignificant) consequences of choices of measures…. 10

11. 11 THANK YOU! simon.barrie@sydney.edu.au http://www.itl.usyd.edu.au simon.barrie@sydney.edu.au And don't forget……take a walk on the wilde side of academic development at the CAD Carnivale…….Wednesday at 3.05pm