Talk:NTEU discussion on TEQSA framework for standards in teaching and learning

Please submit comment or thoughts in relation to the discussion document here.

As noted there are a number of issues raised by the paper, many of which are noted in questions we have posed below. NTEU welcomes comments in relation to any number of these as well as responses to the questions posed by the paper.

---

Q1 Principles

Is there anything additional required in the proposed principles for TEQSA's approach to national teaching and learning standards? Are the proposed principles appropriate? See page 6 for the 7 principles. --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Q2 Assessment

Benchmarking of assessment needs to be resourced and supported, as well as embedded in substantial assessment frameworks. --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Q3 Teaching and learning

Teaching standards and learning standards are proposed as conceptually different but there is scope in the document to look more at the teaching side, especially formal background and qualifications of staff who conduct peer-reviews. Should these be treated as seperate concepts? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Teacher qualifications in universities are a problematic area and the following clips from a newsletter feature by Geoff Crisp (outgoing HERDSA President) are of interest:

The UK has been particularly proactive in having policies requiring completion of a PgCert as a condition of continuing academic employment. In Australia, most higher education institutions (HEIs) would have a mandatory professional development requirement for new academics and would provide access to a formal qualification equivalent to the UK PgCert, although only a small number of institutions have made completion of the PgCert a requirement for continuing employment.

… a number of countries have embraced the idea of mandatory professional development for new academics, including the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Japan and Sri Lanka; whereas other countries, such as the USA, have been reluctant to move down this path.

…a question still posed by senior administrators is whether there is a direct, causal correlation between academics completing a PgCert and the quality of their teaching? I am sure all universities that offer PgCerts can provide evidence that there is a positive correlation for their programs; the bigger question is how do we explain the high quality teaching delivered by a large number of academics who have never completed a PgCert? Completing a PgCert is no guarantee that high quality teaching will result, yet the majority of academics who do complete a PgCert will likely apply their new or affirmed learnings to their educational practices. Source: Crisp, G. (2010). Should a post graduate certificate in higher education learning and teaching be mandatory for academics? HERDSA news, 32(3), December 2010. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.92.23.70 (talk • contribs) 10:19, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Q4 International and domestic developments

In the brief review of international and domestic developments, is the use of student satisfation/engagement and graduate surveys an appropriate tool to measure quality in teaching and learning? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The CEQ, Graduate Surveys have more national recognition but they tend to neglect the formative aspects of evaluation, especially in cohorts of undergraduate courses as they progress through their subjects/course. Formative evaluation is often neglected but can be the most valuable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.92.23.70 (talk • contribs) 10:23, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Q5 Australian Qualifications Framework

Are there likely to be problems in linking the Australian Qualifications Framework to Leaning outcomes and using these to provide a point of reference when accrediting qaulification within an education system? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Q6 External tests for generic skills

The Discussion paper notes the use of external tests for generic skills (such as the Graduate Skills Assessment (GSA)and the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) in the USA) to determine quality in teaching and learning. Is this a practical measure for TEQSA to adopot as part of the standards? Is it likely to lead to ranking and game playing by institutions? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Q7 Measuring teaching quality

Are the measures proposed for determing teaching quality (The Teaching Standards Framework (TSF) project, Macquarie University's internal teaching standards framework, DEEWR's proposed Higher Education Performance Framework) appropriate for this task? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC) Ranking and game playing is already deeply embedded in the system - even the names and categories of universities, Sandstone, Group of 8, ATN, gumtree universities etc. The idea of measuring each institution against its own stated objectives is a sound principle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.92.23.70 (talk • contribs) 10:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Q8 The peer reivew process

NTEU supports the peer review process. However, the paper asks if this is appropriate for teaching and learning, given that peer review is considered to usually focus on curriculum design and related teaching processes, and does not appear to be applied when assessing learning outcomes. It also contrasts external peer review to disciplinary peer review and raised the issue of transparency of process. --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Peer review of teaching - as indeed peer review of refereed papers - can offer enormous value. In teaching, however, what qualifies one to be a peer-reviewer? Is it one's experience, qualifications, recognition in awards, supervisory experience, one who does PDRs etc? What frameworks will be used for peer review? There are ALTC resources and some universities already have this system embedded in their promotion structure so there are points for implementation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.92.23.70 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Q9 Framework for national standards

Is the proposed framework for the construction of national teaching and learning standards appropriate? What difficulties are the likely to be in codifying higher education standards and is there are risk of setting the bar too low or that institutional diversity may be impacted upon? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Q10 Models for standards statements and descriptions

Are the proposed models for structuring standards statements and standard's descriptions appropriate? Is using student experience survey data to evaluate effective teaching and learning support an effective mechanism for this? Are common test instruments suitable to determine quality in teaching and learning? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Q11 External review of curricula

The Discussion paper notes (pg 20) that in relation to reviewing teaching standards that: There is a case to be made for the sector exploring how it might systematically expand existing practices of external review of curricula, beyond professional programs. People with appropriate expertise and experience might be recruited to review programs in their general discipline area. Such practice could make an important contribution to a national approach to teaching and learning standards.......The challenge for TEQSA lies in determining how to best utilise such practices for its role as the national regulator. If any such processes were mandated, rather than voluntary, they would need to be both cost-effective and efficient, for TEQSA and for institutions.

What should TEQSA's role be in reviewing the standards of Teaching and Learning? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Q12 Other issues

Is there any other issues that NTEU should consider in the context of this Review? --NTEUWiki 05:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Some of the critical issues are the resourcing, staffing, support structures and the underpinning frameworks that will be used. Peer review, benchmarking of assessment etc are two areas that require staff relief and recognition.

Underpinning a lot of this quality and standards thinking is the proposition that "if you can't measure it, you can't manage it" but teaching in its deepest sense is about an enduring impact on the thinking (behaviour?) of students far away down the track and ideally, in Wordsworth terms, something like long after the music in my heart I bore. Can that be measured? Some of the greatest teaching is about inspiring scholars, charismatic and well-loved professors etc Measurement and the idea of a liberal education, knowledge as an end in itself, is increasingly remote.

There is a real danger that the new TEQSA will arise, phoenix-like, only much more beaucratised, with an army of auditers and checkers, constituting an industry that one could happily send in to a car or air-craft factory to check on quality assurance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.92.23.70 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 6 July 2011 (UTC)