The job of upholding standards

Associate deans and other faculty leaders are important in the disciplined approach to implementing and assessing academic programs. By Jonathan Holmes and Mark Freeman. No one would seriously argue that disciplines shouldn’t be the main driver of learning standards used to benchmark program quality. Academics have a strong allegiance to their disciplinary tribe. Getting disciplinary engagement is clearly crucial in evidencing planned and delivered learning outcomes to meet TEQSA threshold standards such as sections 1.2 and 5.5 of the provider course accreditation standards. In the current context of research and teaching demands, however, the majority of academics are relatively distanced from setting, assessing and assuring learning standards at program or major level. At the same time, associate deans provide the critical interface between those on the frontline engaging students to learn and develop graduate capabilities and those driving tertiary sector policy within their universities and with external stakeholders such as the professional bodies as well as with TEQSA. In this article we examine the actual and potential role played by faculty leaders and their networks to provide the disciplinary voice in setting, implementing and assessing academic standards. As disciplines are grouped alongside related disciplines in schools, faculties or colleges, there is considerable value in building the capacity of learning and teaching leaders, in particular, in their ability to support their related informal or formal communities and networks. While the position comes by a range of titles including associate pro-vice chancellor (learning and teaching) or dean teaching, associate deans have an important, if sometimes under-recognised, role in academic administration in the tertiary sector. Associate deans stand between program leaders or convenors at the disciplinary level, responsible for designing, delivering and managing the ongoing quality of their particular degree programs, and those at the institutional level responsible for overall educational outcomes. Typically they are charged with implementing learning and teaching policy, like that related to academic standards, across the multiple related disciplines in their school, faculty or college. They are charged with ensuring that learning standards are properly reflected in learning outcomes and assessed in the degree programs their respective institutions offer. Given the tacit nature of the knowledge around academic standards and the rate of change occurring, networks will be a significant source of peer support in this regard. Institutional executives rely on associate deans to manage the quality assurance, curriculum renewal and change at the faculty level. This reliance is particularly the case for the standards agenda. Many universities have networks for their own associate deans to share information about what works and what doesn’t. To hear the disciplinary voice, associate deans need to collaborate with those outside their institution facing a similar disciplinary context. The Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) recognised this in the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards (LTAS) project and funded several inaugural associate dean meetings to assist in setting learning standards for 11 disciplines or disciplinary groups over 2010-11. Some groups evolved further into ongoing support networks. In a recent Campus Review article Sally Kift described six good practice guides developed under the auspices of the law associate dean network that followed their engagement in developing threshold standards for the Bachelor of Laws. The Johns review recognised the value of networks in supporting engagement and systemic change leading to improvement in learning and teaching in higher education. It is comforting to see Office of Learning and Teaching’s (OLT) recent acknowledgement. “Academics by and large relate to their discipline rather than the hierarchical structure in which they operate or their institution and if the OLT is to create long-lasting change in learning and teaching, the focus needs to be on the discipline.” (HERDSA News, April, 2012) Some disciplines have long-running networks, such as that formed under the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) in 2004. Regular engagement between associate dean network members over the past five years has resulted in multiple collaborations. These range from national initiatives such as setting thresholds for accounting coursework bachelors and masters degrees under LTAS to embedding generic skills. The network’s chair, for instance, was chair of the working group that established the accounting learning standards. The ALTC discipline scholar is a member of the business network executive and continues to take a leading role in standards with his appointment as ABDC’s scholar from 2011. The ALTC discipline support strategy was invaluable to the business network’s activities. In contrast, the Creative Arts Learning and Teaching Network (CALTN) is the most recent network, established in April through a merger with CreatEd. Funded by the ALTC, they plan to monitor and build capacity in learning and teaching focusing initially on standards. Networks can build disciplinary capacity around academic standards in four ways. First, they can support new disciplines setting threshold learning standards. For instance, the ABDC sponsored the development of learning standards for marketing bachelors and coursework masters degrees in 2011. While the deans have taken responsibility for identifying key academics from the marketing discipline to lead the development of learning standards, the associate dean network has facilitated ongoing engagement including hosting local workshops. The law network has been involved in the development of the learning standards for the Juris Doctor qualification (AQF level 9). Subsequent to learning standards established for geography and history in 2010 as part of the LTAS project involving the humanities and social sciences network, peak bodies for sociology, political science and theology have been working on their own discipline standards. Other examples are noted on the standards website co-ordinated by the discipline scholars. A second possible standards activity relates to implementing threshold learning standards previously developed. The education associate dean network (NADLATE) established in 2011 met nationally to share plans to revise the Master of Teaching and Master of Education in line with the learning standards developed as part of LTAS. They are also seeking to harmonise any development with the new teacher registration requirements and have established a website discussion forum for sharing information on applying agreed learning standards. Several conservatoires of music, led by Griffith University, are collaborating through the creative arts network in mapping learning standards against the curriculum offered in bachelors of music and will share their experience across the network. Implementing the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) is a third focus. The revised AQF is mandated for full compliance under the TEQSA threshold legislation (December 2011) by January 1, 2015. While it recognises different fields and purposes exist such that some of the learning outcomes (knowledge, skills and the application of knowledge and skills) of each qualifications type (e.g. bachelor degree) may have more emphasis than others, the AQF requires that all of the learning outcomes must be evident for the particular level qualification. The business disciplines responded in several ways: twhe ABDC developed a position paper in relation to implementing the AQF and the associate deans network used a recent conference tow share experiences on how their respective universitiewws have been, or intend to, respond to the revisewd requirements. The fourth potential standards activity around associate dean collaboration relates to assessing achievement against published learning standards. A notable example is the collaborative project funded by the business deans, several professional bodies and subsequently the ALTC. This 10-university initiative involves (double-blind) external peer review of the accounting learning standards estabwlished under the LTAS project in 2010. Reviewers assess small random samples of student work and the related assessment requirements. Experiences of external academic and practising professionals involved in the calibration process prior to external peer review are shared with network members and mock interventions are simulated. Similarly network members are exposed to the results of benchmarking data and, importantly, improvements to assessment practice that have arisen. Academic standards are well and truly on the Australian higher education agenda. Higher education providers would do well to support associate deans to build capacity, including through networking activities, since they play a key brokering role in institutions being TEQSA ready. Jonathan Holmes is Emeritus Professor in the Faculty of Arts, University of Tasmania and an ALTC discipline scholar in creative and performing arts. Mark Freeman is with the University of Sydney Business School and is an ALTC discipline scholar in business, management and economics.