How can we recognize and reward quality teaching and learning?

Denise ChalmersCentre 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 - quantitativeINPUT

Human, financial and physical resources involved in Human, financial and physical resources involved in supporting institutional programs, activities and services supporting institutional programs, activities and services

eg funding, student entry and background data and staff dataeg 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 - qualitativePROCESS

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

i n p u t sDimensions of quality teaching practice framework

Institution

Institutional climate and systems

Diversity

Engagement & learning community

Assessment

o u t c o m

e s

Learning

Learner

Teaching

Teacher

outputs processes

Individual

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 tablesFramework tables – offer a bank of items that are tested in – offer a bank of items that are tested in practicepractice

Institutional climate and systems1. 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

Diversity1. 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 community1. Student engagement

a. Engaging in supportive learning environmentsb. Educational interactions between staff and studentsc. Challenging academic engagementsd. Active learning experiencee. Constructive teachingf. Complementary activitiesg. Collaborative academic work and other settings

2. Fostering and facilitating learning communities

3. Social connections

4. Community, work, discipline connections

5. Staff engagement

Assessment1. 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 stagesStage 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.

AcknowledgementsDeakin 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 Australia1. 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 Institutional Climate and Systems (Reward and recognition of quality teaching)quality teaching)

• Appointment, probation, performance, appraisal, promotion and Appointment, probation, performance, appraisal, promotion and management - a comprehensive review of the existing academic management - a comprehensive review of the existing academic promotions policy and its underlying principles and philosophy.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.