Transcript Slide 1

How can we recognize and
reward quality teaching and
learning?
Denise Chalmers
Centre for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning
National TQI project leader
TQI Project Website: http://www.catl.uwa.edu.au/tqi
National approaches to teaching quality
• Audit (AUQA)
• Accreditation (National Protocols)
• Performance funding (Learning & Teaching Performance Fund)
• Performance budgeting (Formula-based & negotiated)
• Performance reporting (Institutional, national, international)
• Surveys and tests (AGS: CEQ, GDS)
Each of these performance models draws on performance
indicators of different types (input, output, process, outcome)
for different purposes.
We understand indicators more at the national level than at the
institutional level
Types of performance indicators - quantitative
INPUT
Human, financial and physical resources involved in
supporting institutional programs, activities and services
eg funding, student entry and background data and staff data
OUTPUT
Usually student related Information, has ‘political’ use
regarding information on efficiency but provides little
information regarding quality of teaching and learning
eg retention rate, progression rate, completion rate
Types of performance indicators - qualitative
PROCESS
Quality of the means used to deliver educational programs,
activities and services, looks at how the system operates
within its particular context, investigates the core of student
learning experience (quality of teaching, curriculum,
assessment)
Eg Policies and practices related to L and T, performance
management and professional development of staff, quality of
curriculum and the assessment of student learning and quality
of facilities, services and technology
OUTCOME
Quality of programs, activities and services or their benefits to
students, states and society. Measure complex processes and
results in terms of their quality and impact.
Eg student satisfaction, student learning, student grades,
employer satisfaction
National Teaching Quality Indicators project
• Funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council
(formerly Carrick Institute)
• Focus is on developing teaching quality indicators at the
institutional level and identifying some of these for use at the
national level
• Framework developed and indicators identified which
contribute to the enhancement of student learning
– Uses different types of indicators to inform institutional
planning and practices
– Flexible, allows for institutional priorities and context to
determine focus and implementation
– Potential for benchmarking across institutions, programs
of study
Dimensions of quality teaching practice framework
Learner
Individual
Teacher
Assessment
Engagement &
learning community
processes
Diversity
Institutional climate and systems
Learning
Teaching
Institution
inputs
ou t c o m e s
outputs
The framework
• Relationship between dimensions - learner and learning;
teacher and teaching
• Indicators – Input, Process, Output, and Outcomes are all
necessary and need to be part of the model. Important not to
privilege one type of indicator over the others
• Multilevel – individual teacher, programs and departments,
faculties, institutional and across organisational units
• Framework tables – offer a bank of items that are tested in
practice
Institutional climate and systems
1. Student centred learning perspective
2. Development of desirable teaching characteristics
3. Relevant teaching experience and qualifications
4. Use of current research findings to inform teaching, curriculum
development
5. Valuing teaching, teachers
- Recognising and rewarding quality teaching
- Requiring relevant teaching experience, qualifications,
development
6. Provision of support services
7. Funding model that supports learning and teaching
Diversity
1. Accounting for and valuing diversity of students
2. Provision of adequate support services
3. Active recruitment and admissions
4. Provision of transition and academic support
5. Providing multiple pathways for learning
6. Active staff recruitment
7. Accounting for and valuing diversity of staff
8. Providing multiple pathways for reward and recognition of
staff
Engagement and learning community
1. Student engagement
a. Engaging in supportive learning environments
b. Educational interactions between staff and students
c. Challenging academic engagements
d. Active learning experience
e. Constructive teaching
f. Complementary activities
g. Collaborative academic work and other settings
2. Fostering and facilitating learning communities
3. Social connections
4. Community, work, discipline connections
5. Staff engagement
Assessment
1. Assessment policies address issues of pedagogy
2. Evidence-based approach to assessment policies
3. Alignment between policies, levels, organisational units
4. Alignment between objectives, graduate attributes,
assessment tasks and types
5. Formative assessment
6. Provision of timely and developmental feedback
7. Explicit learning outcomes
8. Value of graduates and graduate outcomes
9. Establishing standards and moderation processes
Reward and recognise quality teaching (see table)
Uses each type of indicators
• Input, Output, Process and Outcome
Implemented at a number of levels
• Institution, Faculty, Department, Teacher
Flexible and sensitive to context
Project stages
Stage 1: Investigation and development of framework
• Studies and reports (see website)
• Draft Framework of dimensions of quality practice developed
• Tools with embedded teaching quality indicators identified at the
institutional, faculty, program and teacher levels
• Broad consultation with Reference Group, pilot universities,
Universities Australia group, AUQA, DEEWR
Stage 2: Pilot implementation of framework
• Mapping of Draft Framework and development of tools in pilot
universities
• Consultation and revision of Framework and tools
• Review and evaluation
Pilot implementation of framework
University of Western Australia
Reward and
recognition (ICS)
Macquarie University
Reward &
recognition (ICS)
University of Queensland
Assessment
>*Funding (ICS)
RMIT
Assessment
Griffith University
Assessment
University of Tasmania
Diversity
Deakin University
Engagement &
communities
University of South Australia
Engagement &
communities
Project deliverables and outcomes to date
• Contribution to scholarship on teaching and learning indicators
• Testing a framework and model of teaching quality indicators, trailed
in different types of universities
• Building a shared language regarding teaching performance
• An multilevel approach to teaching quality
• Improved links and increased transparency to reward and recognise
quality teaching and learning throughout the university
• Enhanced opportunities and tools for benchmarking
• Opportunity for institutional renewal
• A core set of indicators that can be shared between institutions
• A core set of materials that can be used to undertake to process of
developing and embedding institutional indicators around the
framework.
Acknowledgements
Deakin University
Prof John Rosenberg, Prof Marcia Devlin, Jennifer
Brockett
Griffith University
Prof John Dewar, Prof Sue Spence, Lynda Davies
Macquarie University
Prof Judyth Sachs*, Bronwyn Kosman, Barb
McLean
University of Queensland
Prof Michael Keniger, Prof Deborah Terry, Anne
Gilmore
RMIT
Prof Jim Barber, Josephine Lang
University of South Australia
Prof Peter Lee, Prof Margaret Hicks, Narelle Walker
University of Tasmania
Prof David Rich, Prof Gail Hart, Steve Heron
University of Western Australia
Prof Jane Long, Jacqueline Flowers
* Leader of the pilot group of universities
University of Western Australia
1. Online Database of Teaching and Learning –build a
comprehensive database of teaching and learning policy,
practice and projects across all Faculties and central
administrative units of the University.
2. Reward and Recognition Indicators Project (2 parts)
• Criteria Project criteria of quality teaching for use in
promotion & tenure processes and to align with Professional
Development Review processes.
• Professional Development Project – Comprehensive
professional development program (central and localised) to
support criteria
Macquarie University
Institutional Climate and Systems (Reward and recognition
of quality teaching)
• Appointment, probation, performance, appraisal, promotion
and management - a comprehensive review of the existing
academic promotions policy and its underlying principles and
philosophy.
• Development and Implementation of an Institution-wide Policy
Framework. A single source for all approved policies,
procedures and guidelines has been created available via the
Macquarie University home page (refer to Policy Central at
www.mq.edu.au/policy).
• Benchmarking with the University of Western Australia.