Designing an education for life after university: Some strategies

1. Designing an education for life after university: Some strategies CHEC, South Africa March 2011 A/Prof Simon Barrie, The University of Sydney

2. Life after university….what does it hold for our graduates? • A process for developing the vision that engages relevant players: Institutionally coherent, discipline owned statements of outcomes • A strategy for moving from outcomes to learning – pedagogical renewal: Signature learning experiences as a framework for curriculum renewal • A strategic approach to quality enhancement and assurance: supporting staff and students, rewarding staff and students, and assuring outcomes

3. Institutional statements of 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). A process for developing the vision that engages relevant players: Institutionally coherent, discipline owned statements of outcomes Two tiered statement of outcomes: Overarching, implicit, enabling outcomes developed through the student experience of engaging in the culture of the university. Implicit so development and accountability are different Second tier of translation outcomes, expressed differently in different disciplines, explicitly taught learned and assessed in the disciplines Not foundation (generic) skills – inputs not outputs

4. What does this two tiered set of graduate attribute outcomes look like at Sydney? • Why did we choose these? • Institutional mission & review • of other university and • accrediting body statements

5. Scholarship: An attitude or stance towards knowledge • Graduates of the University will have a scholarly attitude to knowledge and understanding. As Scholars, the University’s graduates will be leaders in the production, application and communication of new knowledge and understanding through inquiry, critique and synthesis.

6. Five clusters of Translation level attributes illustrated by exemplars • Research and Inquiry:Graduates of the University will be able to create new knowledge & understanding through the process of research & inquiry • be able to identify, define and analyse problems and identify or create processes to solve them • be able to exercise critical judgement and critical thinking in creating new understanding • be creative and imaginative thinkers • have an informed respect for the principles, methods, standards, values and boundaries of their discipline and the capacity to question these • be able to critically evaluate existing understandings and recognise the limitations of their own knowledge

7. Research and Inquiry at the Conservatorium of Music: • be able to identify, define and analyse problems in written work, composition, teaching and performance and identify or create processes to solve them • be able to exercise critical judgement and critical thinking in creating new understandings in relation to music analysis, music composition, music education, music history, music technology, and music performance • be creative, imaginative and independent thinkers in their musical endeavours • have an informed respect for the principles, standards, values and boundaries of current music knowledge, pedagogy and performance practice. • be able to question critically and to evaluate current music knowledge and compositional, pedagogical and performance practices, acknowledging global and historical diversity and recognising the limitations of their own knowledge

8. Institutional statements of Graduate attributes Institutional coherence – the same five clusters in all disciplines – why is this important? Discipline ownership – consultation with staff, student, professional and employer communities to define the statements under each of the five clusters – these can be revised as required but the headings are set Only after this discipline consultation did we take a policy for approval articulating the institutional framework of enabling and translation level attributes -

9. 1: Graduate Attributes are actually several different sorts of types of ‘fortunes’ Precursor Complementary Translation Enabling Statements describing these graduate attributes, and universities’ efforts to foster the development of these attributes, need to accommodate these differences

10. From outcome statements to learning experiences • A strategy for moving from outcomes to learning – pedagogical renewal: Signature learning experiences as a framework for curriculum renewal • Getting ‘traction’ on curriculum is difficult • A vision for a curriculum framework – something to aim for but not imposed • Signature learning experiences: What does the university want to be known for in terms of the learning experiences it will provide for its students?

11. A vision for the curriculum

12. Focus on the discipline curriculumSydney signature learning experiences • A research intensive university…….. ‘Engaged enquiry’ and ‘mutual accountability’ are the two central planks of out new strategic plan • Engaged enquiry: through two pedagogical strategies • Research enriched learning and teaching (RELT) • Community engaged learning and teaching (CELT)

13. What does RELT look like in the curriculum? • Teaching students about research in the discipline (how and what) • Students learning in research-like ways • Outcomes are enriched, relevant, creative applied • Learning is more than courses……..research enriched learning community • Staff easily identify examples • Challenge is in sequencing increasingly complex learning opportunities

14. Sequencing the curriculumDimensions of increasing learner challenge • Independence/ autonomy • Modelling, Scaffolding, Withdrawing, Role (subject, agent, author) • Complexity • Task, Concepts, Knowledge • Consequence/significance • Risk, Impact, Usefulness

15. University wide process of curriculum review • Part of the agreed strategic plan for the next five years • The graduate attributes, Sydney signature learning experiences of RELT & CELT and the idea of increasing learning challenge will provide the framework against which curricula will be judged • Challenge now is to identify and provide sources of data to inform this review (quality assurance) • Review is partnered with support for renewal

16. Supporting curriculum renewal • $M1.2 competitive grant scheme to support curriculum development projects: • Renewal of curricula to provide RELT /CELT experiences that foster greater student engagement • Implementation of RELT /CELT teaching strategies that foster greater student engagement • Implementation of RELT /CELT assessment activities that foster greater student engagement • Development of faculty / school / department activities that offer students greater engagement with the research culture of the faculty / school / department or greater engagement with the professional / broader community.

17. 2: Moving from statements to learning

18. QUALITY ASSURANCE & ENHANCEMENT A strategic approach to quality enhancement and assurance: supporting staff and students, rewarding staff and students, and assuring outcomes Quality assurance: Curriculum Teaching Student learning

19. RECOGNISING PRODUCTIVE ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS & EVALUATION • Familiar (teacher focused) ‘measures’ used in audits (inquiries?) Curriculum mapping of statements of intended learning outcomes Others? • Learner-focused indirect measures • Learner-focsued direct measures

20. RECOGNISING ENGAGEMENT 2. 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 % of students reporting helpful teacher feedback on GA development % of students reporting participation in integrative learning experiences % of students reporting participation in 'research-like' learning experiences % of students involved in faculty research % of courses where students report multicultural learning experiences % of courses 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

21. RECOGNISING ENGAGEMENT 3. Direct (learner focused) GA ‘measures’ used Outcomes from course (discipline) and integrative capstone assignments, exams, projects - Complex but very useful – new National Project: Assessment and Assurance of Graduate Learning Outcomes AA-GLO Perhaps not standardised generic skills tests – Why not? Un-intended (unwanted and not insignificant) consequences of choices of measures…. Choice of measures will drive institutional and staff engagement

22. REWARD STAFF ENGAGEMENT BASED ON THESE MEASURES Evidence of effective curriculum development for graduate attributes that has encouraged productive student engagement leading to student achievement of these outcomes……as a KPI…..as a promotion criteria….as a selection criteria in staff recruitment? (Teacher measures cross tab with student process and outcome measures) Choice of measures will shape staff engagement but institution and department 'culture' will shape it even more.

23. 3: University Systems

24. Life after university….what does it hold for our graduates? Thank you! Simon.Barrie@sydney.edu.au http://www.itl.usyd.edu.au