Resource Library

The Resource Library contains a collection of higher education learning and teaching materials flowing from projects funded by the Commonwealth of Australia including those from the Australian Learning and Teaching Council.

Results may be sorted filtered by keywords.

2 resources found.

History Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement

I.M. Hay
Australian Learning and Teaching Council Limited
2010
Australian Learning and Teaching Council Limited

Academic standards covering programs of study for a bachelor degree with a major in history. These standards were developed as part of a demonstration project funded by the Australian Government in 2010 and facilitated by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Academic institutions and teachers, professional bodies, accreditation bodies, employers and graduates participated in the development of minimum threshold learning outcomes for the discipline.

ISBN: 978-1-921856-31-0

History LTAS Statement Download Document (788.99 KB)

Quality assessment: linking assessment tasks and teaching outcomes in the social sciences: Final Report

Jennifer Gore, James Ladwig, Wendy Elsworth, Hywel Ellis, Robert Parkes, Tom Griffiths
The University of Newcastle
2009
The University of Newcastle
Final Report Download Document (636.62 KB)

 

The report uses the concept of ‘authentic pedagogy’, which has been developed from earlier work. This purports to measure demonstration of disciplinary depth, depth of analysis, richness of communication and the extent to which problematic nature of knowledge is recognised. The report is dense but well referenced and examines correlation between assessment tasks and standards, as well as providing an ‘audit’ of the quality of assessment tasks. It suggests that it provides explicit criteria which lecturers can use to measure specific achievement in their subject area. The sample size is small and self selected; all are in social sciences, except for the odd inclusion of languages. The results are statistically analysed to ensure validity, although the variance may be questionable. 
The assessment task quality descriptors provide a useful framework for those designing assessment tasks although the meta-language criterion is, in the reviewers view, tied to the philosophical underpinnings and may confuse those unfamiliar with it or provide an issue for those who do not accept this stance. The strength of the report lies in the clarity with which the descriptors and the authentic achievement scales are described and in the examples which are included in the report. The results of the study usefully show that tasks which are intellectually challenging and engaging produce work which is consistent with broad academic standards (although these are not  defined).  The approach using a variety of inputs, including workshops, development of a tertiary assessment practice guide and scoring manual make this a much needed additional resource which could assist in improving assessment in universities in the Social Sciences. Its complexity and less obvious applicability for assessment in the humanities may make it less accessible for some academics.