TEACHING AND LEARNING ENHANCEMENT PLAN
A DISCUSSION PAPER
Introduction
This paper outlines some of the key issues for teaching and learning at The
University of Queensland as background to development of the new teaching and
learning enhancement plan.
Background
The University of Queensland is committed through its Strategic Plan to
excellence of learning outcomes and opportunities as part of its aspiration to
maintain the highest standards of teaching, research and scholarship and the
enhancement of society’s core values.
The current Teaching and Learning Enhancement Plan (TLEP) translates this
vision by concentrating on key elements in the University’s teaching and
learning landscape, which are
 Students
 Scholars
 Programs (including curriculum, teaching modes and assessment)
 Learning environment and
 Regular evaluation.
In reviewing the current Plan and identifying priorities for the future it is
important to reconsider the vision for teaching and learning at The University of
Queensland. The question to be asked and answered is how will we define and
understand excellence of learning outcomes and opportunities?
Context
Changes in university education in Australia became evident in the last decade of
the 20th century. Simply they can be summarised in the following way:






The creation or achievement of a mass higher education system
A decline in funding per student and an increase in the student: staff ratio
An increased contribution from students to the cost of their education
An increase in the numbers and proportion of international students both
on and off-campus
An increase in the number and proportion of fee-paying postgraduate
coursework students
An increase in research higher degree students and a new focus on ‘timely’
completion for these students
1


A new pattern of student disengagement reflecting greater time in paid
work while studying and greater focus on vocational outcomes from
programs among other things
The new challenges and opportunities flowing from information and
communications technology affecting teaching modes, as well as other
aspects of the student experience of university
Many of these features of Australian higher education are to be found in
university systems in other countries, such as the US and UK, which have quite
different government policy settings. Thus while government policy affects the
context in which teaching and learning occurs, it is not the only factor influencing
the teaching and learning environment.
Our policies and priorities must
respond to differences in the student body and their experience, as well as the
overarching changes that are affecting the delivery of higher education.
Fundamentally these changes challenge the way we envisage university teaching
and learning.
The basis of the university’s current practice and its aspirations can be gleaned
from the way teaching and learning is expressed through the strategic plan. The
reference in both the strategic plan and the current TLEP to the values of the
‘great universities’ provides some clues to the basis of our understanding of
excellent teaching and learning.
We might find agreement from staff and many students that excellence in
teaching and learning is
 A rich on-campus experience
 Exciting delivery in lectures supplemented by
 Small group interaction and/or experience in laboratory or clinical settings
with intellectually stimulating, ‘cutting edge’ research ideas
 Access to a major library with deep research collections in the major areas
of study
 A broad curriculum that gives students the opportunity to pursue in depth
their field of interest
 Student associations that provide a variety of other sporting and cultural
experiences to round out the life of a scholar
While The University of Queensland is a large campus-based university, our
ideals of teaching and learning excellence are powerfully shaped by a vision of an
intimate ‘college’ life. Is this the vision we should take into the 21st century?
Vision
It is important that we are able to articulate the goal towards which we strive. It
is equally important that the goal is credible and one towards which people can
make progress.
2
The higher education context in which we find ourselves challenges our deeply
held (and often unarticulated) vision of teaching and learning.







Increasing student: staff ratios challenge the ability to provide adequate
small group interaction.
Declines in funding affect the breadth and range of curriculum we can
provide comfortably – particularly in areas that attract small numbers of
students.
New technologies challenge the paradigm of transmission of content by
lecture followed by deeper engagement through seminars and practical
sessions.
Student disengagement due to greater commitment to part-time work
gives the lie to the extent of the on-campus experience and student
involvement in activities beyond the classroom
Funding stringencies threaten library collections, while paradoxically new
technologies make access to resources better.
Again student disengagement brings new challenges to on-campus library
provision.
Mass higher education brings a more diverse student body with a range of
expectations
And beyond these questions the changes in the student profile raise questions
about our unarticulated focus on undergraduate education (see Student Load
Profile table below).
 Increasing postgraduate coursework student numbers challenge us to
consider whether our practice is appropriate for this group – is
coursework really just coursework when we could expect the preparation
and attributes that postgraduate students bring to be different?
 Research higher degree students bring new challenges – have our
responsibilities increased and are our teaching models adequate?
Projected Student Load Profile (extracted from Strategic Plan 2002-06)
Student load 2000-2006
by program type
Higher Degree Research
Postgraduate Coursework
Undergraduate and non-award
Total
by funding source
HECS-based, RTS & Other
Domestic Fee Paying
International Fee Paying
recorded
2000
2001
2002
2003
projected
2004
2005
2006
2525
1591
21257
25373
2670
2159
22847
27676
2800
2300
22574
27674
2875
2700
22684
28259
2950
3200
22885
29035
3025
3800
22590
29415
3100
4300
22500
29900
16%
99%
-2%
8%
10.4%
14.4%
75.3%
21560
941
2871
22776
1257
3644
22000
1465
4208
21750
1692
4817
21750
1920
5365
21650
2165
5600
21600
2450
5850
-5%
95%
61%
72%
8%
20%
% increase
2001>2006
The university’s published vision has been excellence of learning outcomes and
opportunities. Our real vision has been more focused on what we understand to
be excellent teaching and an excellent learning environment, than on learning
3
% share
in 2006
outcomes. The challenge for the new teaching and learning enhancement plan is
to be clear about whether excellence of learning outcomes and opportunities is
our vision for teaching and learning and if we reaffirm this goal what we mean by
it.
Below are some themes that might be explored in creating a new teaching and
learning enhancement plan.
A. Goals
Excellence of learning outcomes
1. Should we reaffirm a commitment to excellence of learning outcomes and
opportunities?
2. What do we mean by excellence of learning outcomes? – the attributes we
attempt to develop in our graduates? Our revised graduate attributes say
that we will take the greatness of a research-based university culture and
infuse this into our undergraduate curriculum.
3. How does this vision relate to postgraduate coursework and to research
higher degree students? Do we need to say something about the way
excellence of learning outcomes will be achieved and recognised for all our
students?
Excellence of learning opportunities
4. What do we mean by excellence of learning opportunities? A commitment
to innovation in curriculum and delivery or the breadth of curriculum we
have historically prized or something broader?
5. Should we affirm a commitment to a broad scholarly environment?
Including in this the quality of learning resources, the breadth of the
curriculum and an opportunity to be part of the scholarly or learning
community?
B.
Curriculum
Overall, curriculum development has been strongly influenced by the way
disciplinary bodies of knowledge are constructed. The major counter-example is
problem-based curricula found particularly in the health sciences or clinically
based programs.
The use of industry or work-placement within various
programs or sequences of study has increased and spread beyond ‘professional’
programs with a requirement with direct work experience.
A program of curriculum review has been approved and with it a more explicit
focus on the curriculum of a program or sequence of study.
6. What do we seek to encourage in curriculum development? A stronger
program focus with clearer and more defined outcomes? Greater
4
integration or looser coupling? Do we seek maximise student choice
within a curriculum or across curricula?
7. Should programs for undergraduates and postgraduates follow the same
basic form? Our curriculum are implicitly time-based and structured
around two major teaching semesters. Should this be the underlying form
of undergraduate and postgraduate curriculum?
8. Where should such these debate be held? And who should be involved in
their resolution?
C.
Pedagogy
The university has encouraged more flexible approaches to learning. A whole
campus, Ipswich, has had programs developed explicitly to give expression to
more flexible learning. Gatton has had a long history of distance learning, which
is a particular form of flexible learning.
9. In embracing flexible learning the University has reaffirmed its
commitment to the on-campus experience for undergraduates. What does
this mean for the form of teaching and learning for undergraduates?
10. If the postgraduate experience is to be different, how should it be different
and why?
11. What are the key features of flexible learning that might lead to excellence
of learning opportunities? What might they require?
12. What is necessary to engage and support staff and students?
D.
Outcomes
The University has committed to criterion-referenced assessment and a revised
set of graduate attributes.
13. Are these adequate to assure excellence of learning outcomes? Do they
meet needs for postgraduate as well as undergraduate students?
14. What do these policies imply for future practice?
15. Are our evaluation and feedback systems sufficient to guide new policy
and practice?
(See Attachment 1: Results from the UQ Student Experience Survey 2001
reporting students’ perception of the extent to which their experience of studying
in their major areas of study or discipline had contributed to the development of
graduate attributes.)
5
E.
Learning Environment
A strong learning environment requires resources and facilities that support
students on and off-campus.
16. Should our priorities in terms of facilities and resources change to meet
new student demands and new teaching practice? If so, how?
17.
As students spend less time on campus how do we provide interaction
and engagement to bring the benefits of being part of a ‘scholarly
community’?
18. A university campus has been a little like a village with a range of support
services? What is required for the future in services that support teaching
and learning?
Priorities
If we had to list three major priorities for the next three years to enhance teaching
and learning, what would they be?
Margaret Gardner
June 2002
6
Attachment 1: Extract from the University of Queensland Student Experience Survey (UQSES) 2001
Acquisition of Graduate Attributes, by Cohort.
GA 1 Communication and Problem Solving
think critically
collect, analyse, and organize information
generate possible solutions to problems
approp style and mode of communication
computers to retrieve, process, and communicate info
convey ideas and info in clear oral form
evaluate competing perspectives and evidence
evaluate appreciate importance of scholarship and research
use research to inform decision making
work and learn independently
think in creative and innovative ways
confident about tackling unfamiliar problems (CEQ GSS 1)
help me develop as a team member (CEQ GSS 2)
sharpened analytic skills (CEQ GSS 3)
improved written communication skills (CEQ GSS 5)
GA 2 Discipline Knowledge and Skills
understand concepts and principles in discipline
knowledge of methods used in discipline
understand different approaches and perspectives
knowledge of full scope of discipline
appreciate real world applications of discipline
capacity to approach issues from perspective of discipline
First year
Mean
3.4886
3.6342
3.5422
3.3857
3.5416
2.9188
3.5634
3.5528
3.6658
3.9420
3.3401
3.2985
3.2547
3.5398
3.3301
N
1881
1878
1874
1877
1874
1872
1878
1876
1876
1878
1876
1876
1877
1871
1878
First year
Mean
3.8295
3.7484
3.6959
3.5101
3.6058
3.6983
N
1877
1872
1871
1874
1877
1873
Final year UG and
Hons
Mean
N
3.9013 1945
4.0576 1946
3.9039 1945
3.7241 1943
3.7840 1944
3.4250 1939
3.8691 1941
3.7580 1942
3.9918 1943
4.1711 1940
3.6042 1943
3.5954 1940
3.5926 1939
3.9778 1938
3.9206 1939
Final year UG and
Hons
Mean
N
4.0689 1945
3.9304 1939
3.8521 1941
3.6588 1943
3.5736 1942
3.8964 1940
PG coursework
Mean
3.8497
3.9478
3.8416
3.5387
3.5725
3.3731
3.7556
3.7213
3.8942
4.0015
3.6711
3.6146
3.5231
3.9121
3.9134
N
672
671
669
672
669
670
671
671
671
670
672
672
671
671
670
PG coursework
Mean
3.9911
3.8836
3.8490
3.6453
3.6841
3.7904
N
671
670
669
671
671
668
Combined
Mean
3.7210
3.8643
3.7435
3.5550
3.6512
3.2085
3.7243
3.6667
3.8410
4.0499
3.5039
3.4742
3.4408
3.7850
3.6724
N
4498
4495
4488
4492
4487
4481
4490
4489
4490
4488
4491
4488
4487
4480
4487
Combined
Mean
3.9573
3.8474
3.7864
3.5947
3.6036
3.7978
N
4493
4481
4481
4488
4490
4481
7
GA 3 Ethical and Social Sensitivity
knowledge of ethical issues and standards in discipline
appreciate philosophical and social contexts of discipline
aware and understand of others cultures and perspectives
openness to new ideas and perspectives
evaluate perspectives and opinions of others
understand social and civic responsibility
First year
Mean
3.4917
3.3953
3.2712
3.7018
3.6247
3.2359
N
1877
1877
1877
1878
1876
1878
Final year UG and
Hons
Mean
N
3.7183 1942
3.5270 1941
3.4250 1941
3.8380 1944
3.8404 1942
3.4153 1943
PG coursework
Mean
3.5940
3.5380
3.5000
3.8793
3.7928
3.3100
N
670
671
670
671
671
671
Combined
Mean
3.6050
3.4736
3.3719
3.7872
3.7431
3.3246
N
4489
4489
4488
4493
4489
4492
[Notes: Students responded using a 5-point Likert rating scale, where 1 = not at all, 2 = not much, 3 = somewhat, 4 = very much, 5 = a great deal.]
8