University of Adelaide Festival of L&T 2012
Strategic approaches to developing quality
in
21st century Australian higher education
Professor Geoff Scott
University of Western Sydney
Summary
“Good ideas with no ideas on how to
implement them are wasted ideas”
• The new operating context of higher education
• A case study of one productive response
• What has been the focus
• How this has been achieved
• Change doesn’t just happen – it must be led,
and deftly
The emerging context & standards’
agenda for Higher Education
• Balancing growth with quality; access with excellence
• Growing competition within and beyond Australia
• A new consumer and demand driven system – ‘user pays’
• Rapid developments in ICT-enabled learning – opportunities
for more (inter) active learning
• Determining standards & assuring academic integrity
• Working productively with TEQSA’s 5 standards areas.
• Need for a shared L&T framework that covers the total
university experience & shows all staff where they fit
• Need for more focus on validating the outcomes we seek
from c21st higher education and their measurement
The emerging context cont’d
• Need to appraise a set of prevailing assumptions about H.E.
• What is the key role of Higher Education (c.f. VET) in the
rapidly changing context of the 21st century? Is it to produce:
• ‘Work ready’ graduates;
• Graduates who are inventive, sustainability literate; change
implementation savvy and ethically robust;
• Graduates who can question & reshape current assumptions;
• Something else?
• How do we determine What should be given focus in this new
context - and then
• How to make sure it is implemented consistently and
effectively – Education for Sustainability (EfS) as a case-study
The four, linked dimensions of
sustainability
•
•
•
•
Social
Cultural
Economic
Environmental
A ‘quadruple helix’
Careers in sustainability
RCE-GWS Roundtable with
Employers Oct 2012
• Green logistics & lifecycle management
• Carbon lawyers,
accountants, energy &
water auditors
• Environmental forensics
• CSR & sustainability
services
• Alternative energy: Wind,
wave, solar hydrogen
• Organic farming
• Blue economy
• NGOs
• Community health,
wellbeing & development
• Government & councils
• Sustainability teachers
• Green builders, architects
& ICT consultants
• Cradle-to-cradle design
• Green car design
• Eco-tourism
• Environmental engineers –
eco-sensor services
• Behaviour change &
resilience professionals
Capabilities now sought in
graduates – RCE-GWS roundtable
with key employers October 2012
• Calmness, tolerance of
ambiguity, resilience,
authenticity, willingness to
listen & learn from errors,
strong ethics, commitment
• Understanding one’s core
values & tacit assumptions
about the ‘good life’
• Ability to work in a crossdisciplinary team; work with
diversity; empathy &
responsiveness
• Systems thinking, diagnosis,
ability to set priorities, trace
out consequences, ability to
work across disciplines and
see the key point in a
complex situation
• Strong written skills, ability
to present a case to a group,
facilitation, sharp data
location skills, effective
change implementation,
knowing how to engage the
disengaged
A University Sustainability
Framework
Some priority challenges
• An already crowded curriculum
• Having to work in a cross-disciplinary world but
having universities based on a mono-disciplinary
funding and incentive system
• Engaging the disengaged
• A pressure to produce ‘work-ready’ graduates
and fill places
A Framework for improving
performance in L&T - UWS as a
case study
• Overall satisfaction up 25%
• Retention up 4%
• L&T awards 2011
12 ALTC awards including Teacher of the Year
(Nil in 2005)
• AUQA commendation in 2011 for L&T Standards and
Quality Framework
How has this improvement been
achieved?
• A focus on the right combination of ‘what’
and ‘how’
• Building a change capable culture
• Culture = ‘how we do things around here’
The ‘what’: the UWS Academic
quality & standards framework
1. Design
4.
Impact
3. Delivery
2. Support
UWS Academic Quality & Standards Framework
for Learning and Teaching
4. Impact
4. Impact – Academic
Learning Standards
•
•
•
•
•
•
Validation
Retention
Assessment Quality
Progression
Employability
Further study
UWS Academic Quality & Standards Framework
for Learning and Teaching
1. Design
4.
Impact
1. Course design standards

 Relevance
 Active Learning including
eLearning

 Theory-practice links
 Expectations clear
 Direction & unit links clear 
 Capabilities that count are 
the focus
 Learning pathways are
flexible
Assessment is clear,
relevant, reliably marked
with helpful feedback
Staff are capable,
responsive & effective
teachers
Support is aligned
Access is convenient
4. Impact – Academic
Learning Standards
•
•
•
•
•
•
Validation
Retention
Assessment Quality
Progression
Employability
Further study
UWS Academic Quality & Standards Framework
for Learning and Teaching
2. Support standards
1. Design
4.
Impact
2. Support
1. Course design standards

 Relevance
 Active Learning including
eLearning

 Theory-practice links
 Expectations clear
 Direction & unit links clear 
 Capabilities that count are 
the focus
 Learning pathways are
flexible
Assessment is clear,
relevant, reliably marked
with helpful feedback
Staff are capable,
responsive & effective
teachers
Support is aligned
Access is convenient








Orientation
Library
Learning Guide Standards
vUWS & ICT standards
Staff selection & training
Peer support
First year adviser
Learning support standards
4. Impact – Academic
Learning Standards
•
•
•
•
•
•
Validation
Retention
Assessment Quality
Progression
Employability
Further study
UWS Academic Quality & Standards Framework
for Learning and Teaching
2. Support standards
3. Delivery standards
 Staff accessibility,
responsiveness and skills
 Consistency and quality
of delivery of support
systems
 Consistency of delivery
of design features
1. Course design standards

 Relevance
 Active Learning including
eLearning

 Theory-practice links
 Expectations clear
 Direction & unit links clear 
 Capabilities that count are 
the focus
 Learning pathways are
1. Design
4.
Impact
3. Delivery
2. Support
flexible
Assessment is clear,
relevant, reliably marked
with helpful feedback
Staff are capable,
responsive & effective
teachers
Support is aligned
Access is convenient








Orientation
Library
Learning Guide Standards
vUWS & ICT standards
Staff selection & training
Peer support
First year adviser
Learning support standards
4. Impact – Academic
Learning Standards
•
•
•
•
•
•
Validation
Retention
Assessment Quality
Progression
Employability
Further study
Some key reference points for
validating learning standards:
whose voice counts most/least?
• The Australian Qualifications Framework
• The University’s mission and agreed graduate attributes
• Learning outcome standards determined by ALTC discipline groups
the UK subject benchmark process, AHELO etc
• External professional accreditation standards (when applicable)
• Results from inter-institutional benchmarking
• Academic input, peer review and moderation
• Key capabilities identified by successful early career graduates
• The results of School/Department Reviews
• The learning outcomes for courses of the same name in other unis
• Employer feedback; input from External Course Advisory Committees;
• Government policy and funding incentives;
• What parents, prospective students & others say they want
• Plus?
Building sustainability into the
curriculum
• Case-based learning & assessment
• Building the campus as a living laboratory
• Establishment of a United Nations Regional
Centre of Expertise
• Work-based learning
• Critical reflection on tacit assumptions about
‘progress’ and ‘success’ in each program
• Working with key employers on current and
emerging careers in the area of sustainability
The ‘how’: key lessons on
effective implementation in higher
education
• Consensus around the data not around the table
• A small number of agreed priorities for action
• Ready, fire, aim not ready, aim, aim, aim…
• Steered engagement
• ‘Why don’t we’ not ‘why don’t you’
• Change is learning
The ‘how’: key lessons on the
effective implementation & CQI
cont’d
How staff like to learn is how students like to learn
• Motivators are both extrinsic) and intrinsic
• RATED CLASS A
• Just-in-time and just-for-me solutions to experienced
gaps
• From successful travellers down the same change path
• Peer group counts
• Knowing where I fit and getting acknowledgement for a
job well done
Quality improvement doesn’t just happen –
it must be led – the TLSHE & Learning
Leaders research (n=700)
•
•
•
•
Engaging the disengaged is key
Listen, link then lead – ‘steered engagement’
Model, teach and learn
A change capable culture is built by change
capable leaders
• Everyone is a leader in their own area of expertise
and responsibility
• Most challenged when things go wrong – this is
when you learn
• Key findings are available for every L&T role
Higher education leadership
capability framework
• Helen please insert the five circles
Personal
Capabilities
Interpersonal
Capabilities
Role-specific
Competencies
Cognitive
Capabilities
Generic
Competencies
Capability
Competency
Turnaround Leadership for
Sustainability in HE – top 15
capabilities in rank order (n = 188)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Having energy, passion and enthusiasm for EfS
(P – commitment)
Being willing to give credit to others
(IP – empathising)
Empathising & working productively with diversity
(IP –empathising)
Being transparent and honest in dealings with others
(IP empathising)
Thinking laterally and creatively
(C – strategy)
Being true to one’s values and ethics
(P - decisiveness)
Listening to different points of view before coming to a decision
(IP - empathising)
Understanding personal strengths & limitations
(P – self-awareness)
Time management skills
(GSK)
Persevering
(P – commitment)
Learning from errors
(P – self-awareness)
Learning from experience
(C - responsiveness)
Remaining calm when under pressure
(P – self-awareness)
Being able to make effective presentations to different groups
(GSK)
Identifying from a mass of information the core issue/opportunity (C – diagnosis)
Code: P– Personal Capability domain; IP – Interpersonal Capability domain; C– Cognitive Capability domain;
GSK– Generic Skills & Knowledge domain
What next?
• One key insight you have taken from this
presentation
• One key area you would like to see followed
up
Further reading
• Fullan, M & Scott, G (2009): Turnaround Leadership for
higher education, Jossey Bass, San Francisco
• Scott, G (2008): University student engagement &
satisfaction, commissioned report to the Bradley Review
• Scott, G, Coates, H & Anderson, M (2008): Learning leaders
in times of change, ALTC
• Scott, G, Tilbury, D, Sharp, L & Deane, L (2012):
Turnaround Leadership for Sustainability in higher
education, Australian Government, OLT, Sydney
• Scott, G & Hawke, I (2003): Using an external quality audit
as a lever for institutional change, Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Educations, 22 (3)