Engaging in graduate attributes (ALTC funded project)
This project ran from 2007-2009 as an ALTC Funded Project. For further information see the ALTC Exchange Website.
Project overview
The ‘Facilitating staff and student engagement with graduate attribute development, assessment and standards in Business Faculties’ project focused on developing an approach to embed graduate attributes in the Business curriculum using an online system, ReView, to assist with the process. The term ‘graduate attributes’, as used in this project, encompassed: a broad range of personal and professional qualities and skills, together with the ability to understand and apply discipline-based knowledge.
Graduate attributes are often mentioned in curriculum documentation but the effective integration of these into developmental approaches in the classroom has proven to be somewhat elusive. In concert, the consistent alignment of graduate attributes with assessment processes is not widespread across the higher education sector (Chalmers & Thomson, 2008). The apparent lack of viable processes with which to engage staff in linking assessment to attributes initiated the development of an approach which utilised an existing online assessment system to assist the engagement process.
There is substantial evidence to suggest that not only does assessment drive learning (Ramsden, 2003), but also that assessment processes and student learning can be enhanced through a social constructivist approach (Rust, O’Donovan & Price, 2005). In a social constructivist approach knowledge about assessment processes, criteria and standards is developed through the active engagement and participation of both students and their educators (Kember & Leung, 2005). This constructivist approach was used as the theoretical foundation for developing a process to use across the four participating Business Schools.
The most prominent driver in this project was the accreditation or maintenance of accreditation from international bodies, such as EQUIS (European Quality Improvement System) and AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business). These accreditation organisations require institutions delivering Business education to be able to demonstrate a process for ensuring that a student achieves designated program learning outcomes as defined by clearly articulated goals for key business and management-specific knowledge and skills. The process developed, implemented and evaluated as part of this project was trialled as a mechanism for providing evidence to assure that certain standards of student learning are met. The fact that the institutions were AACSB accredited, and the focus of this accrediting agency on continuous improvement through program level assurance of learning processes, was a major consideration. The project’s success is closely associated with the strong influence of institutional adoption of policy, as well as a mechanism to engage and encourage academic staff to implement an approach to demonstrate assurance of learning.
The approach taken to move forward on embedding graduate attribute development and assessment evolved from an innovative approach, originating in the Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building at University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) that was being used to assess and give feedback to students on their work. This method of assessing and tracking graduate attributes via assessment was incorporated into a pilot project at The University of Sydney, where the online assessment system was successfully implemented. The initial pilot led to a further implementation at UTS business and subsequently to the ALTC project proposal - which aimed to further develop an approach to develop a constructivist approach to graduate attributes, with both staff and students using the existing online system, ReView, in the implementation (Thompson & Treleaven, 2008).
During the course of the project a community of practice was established which incorporated both the project team and associated academic staff using the process in their own practice. These experiences led each institution to review their policies, practices and/or procedures at the program.
Project outcomes summary
In summary, the Project has had valuable catalytic and/or strengthening effects on enhancement of learning and teaching work in business faculties in four large Australian universities. Through its dissemination activities these effects should be extended over the next year or so. The learning enabled by the Project includes ideas and lessons about the challenges for projects that aim to change academics’ thinking and practice relating to key curriculum elements such as graduate attributes (e.g. entrenched assessment philosophies and practices). It also illuminates ideas and practices that can be successful for helping to address such challenges.
The outcomes can be summarised as:
1. The use of a software application proved to be a very valuable resource for facilitating improvement in teaching and learning (particularly assessment), course (unit of study) design and management.
2. Substantial enhancement in the alignment of learning and teaching elements in several courses in business programs was achieved (i.e. elements such as learning goals, assessment criteria, feedback for students, and summative assessment methods and results).
3. Valuable learning was enabled; at the individual and local group levels about key concepts in learning and teaching and how to improve practice, and at the project level about success factors and challenges for achieving engagement with new practices (e.g. formation of local communities of practice to generate engagement with ideas and methods).
4. Increases in awareness have occurred, for specific groups of academics and students, of the meaning and relevance of graduate attributes (GAs) for learning and teaching, particularly at course level.
5. A valuable effect of the Project is that it has catalyzed, complemented and/or enabled synergies with other work in business faculties on important related matters in learning and teaching (e.g. critical review and clarification of learning goals; communication between academics and students and between course leaders and members of teaching teams; assessment practice; curriculum review, design and quality assurance; course-level leadership and management; and academic professional development).
The work done by this Project needs to be extended. If academics and students are to become seriously engaged with Graduate Attributes there will need to be well conceived, supported and implemented enabling strategies and projects at university and faculty levels for several years from now. There is a clear need for the real support of academic leaders and university and faculty level committees that apportion resources. Powerful professional and academic associations (e.g. ABDC; CPAA) also have particularly important roles to play in that they can influence academic leaders, and contribute actively to collaborative initiatives that are seen to be serving goals that are important to them.
Report recommendations
* The funding structure of budgets for ALTC projects relies heavily on in kind support from participating institutions. The universities who made the most progress were those with a dedicated Teaching and Learning Team to help implement the operational aspects of the project; the universities without this type of support were more limited in their outcomes.
* Further projects should look at operating collaborations on a multi level s– for example the policy makers, Associate Deans etc, together with the Learning and Teaching staff (academic developers) at the coalface. This project engaged the more senior staff in each Faculty in worthwhile discussions across institutions but the actual users would also have benefitted from more access to regular inter institution forums.
* Aligning projects with governing body standards, for example assurance of learning goals required for the AACSB maintenance is a strong driver in embedding procedures in institutions and is recommended as a consideration of future projects.
* The level of acceptance, and thus engagement with, ALTC projects varies in institutions, and is notably lesser in those with strong research cultures. This relates to the reward and incentives structures that often drive activity, particularly in terms of making choices about where to allocate time and resources. Providing scope for the ALTC projects to take on a research element would help to elevate their status and aid in recruitment of staff to be involved in the project.
* The amount of time allocated to ALTC projects limits the depth and breadth of the project, in this case the wider engagement of staff with graduate attributes. This kind of development has to be undertaken in stages which require a longer time span to achieve significant effects.
Conference dissemination
Freeman, M., Lyn Simpson, L. & Taylor, T. (2008). Assurance of Learning: An Australian Experience. AACSB International Conference, Hawaii.
Taylor, T., Simpson, L., & Freeman, M. (2008). Good Practice AoL Processes – Using Collaborative problem-solving for better solutions. AACSB Assessment Conference, Dallas.
Cathart, A. & Simpson, L. (2008). Engaging Students Through feedback. ABDC Conference, Sydney. ABDC Conference, Hobart.
Tracy Taylor, Darrall Thompson (UTS) Lyn Simpson, Andrew Paltridge (QUT), Mark Freemen, Lelsey Treleaven (USyd), Fiona Rohde (UQ) (2008). Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties: an ALTC funded project. .GAP Symposium, Sydney.
References
Barrie, S.C. (2004). A research-based approach to generic graduate attributes policy. Higher Education Research and Development, 23, 3, pp. 261-75.
Bath, D., Smith, C.D., Stein, S. and Swann, R. (2004). Beyond mapping and embedding graduate attributes: Bringing together quality assurance and action learning to create a validated and living curriculum, Higher Education Research and Development, 23, 3,313-328.
Cathcart, A.,Kerr, G. F., Fletcher, M. & Mack, J. (2008). Engaging staff and students with graduate attributes across diverse curricula landscapes. In: ATN Assessment Conference: Engaging Students with Assessment, 20-21 November 2008, University of South Australia, Adelaide.
Chalmers, D. & Thomson, K. (2008). Snapshot of Teaching and Learning Practice in Australian Universities. Teaching Quality Indicators Project Report, Carrick.
Harvey, A. & Kamvounias, P. (2008). Bridging the implementation gap: a teacher-as-learner approach to teaching and learning policy. Higher Education Research and Development. 27 (1) 31-41.
Hoban, G.; Lefoe, G.; James, B.; Curtis, S.; Kaidonis, M.; Hadi,M., Lipu, S.; McHarg, C. & Collins, R. (2004). A Web Environment Linking University Teaching Strategies with Graduate Attributes. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice. 1(1) 10-19.
Kember, D. & Leung, D.Y.P. (2005). The Influence of Active Learning Experiences on the Development of Graduate Capabilities. Studies in Higher Education. 30 (2) 155-170.
Ramsden, P.l (2003): Learning to teach in higher education. Routledge Publishers, London
Rust, C., O’Donovan, B and Price, M. (2005). A social constructivist assessment process model: how the research literature shows us this could be best practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 30(3), 231-240.
Thompson, D., Treleaven, L., Kamvounias, P., Beem, B., and Hill, L. (2008). Integrating graduate attributes with assessment criteria in Business Education using an online assessment system. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, (5)1, p. 34-48
Project team
Lead institution
University of Technology, Sydney
Partner institutions
The University of Sydney, The University of Queensland, Queensland University of Technology
Project leaders
Professor Tracy Taylor - Deputy Dean, Business, UTS
Tel: (02) 9514 3664 Email: Tracy.Taylor@uts.edu.au
Darrall Thompson, Design Architecture and Building, UTS
Tel: (02) 9514 8916 Email: Darrall.Thompson@uts.edu.au
Project manager
Dr Lucille Clements. Business, UTS
Tel: (02) 9514 3170 Email: lucille.clements@uts.edu.au
Institutional project leaders and teams
Professor Lynette Simpson, Andrew Paltridge & Dr Marty Fletcher, Queensland University of Technology
Associate Professor Mark Freeman & Dr Lesley Treleaven, The University of Sydney
Associate Professor Fiona Rohde, The University of Queensland
Romy Lawson, University of Technology, Sydney
