Search

Engaging students as pedagogical partners aspires to reposition students with more agency within universities as egalitarian learning communities. The growing literature reports numerous beneficial outcomes of such positioning, yet many partnership opportunities are limited to small numbers of selected students in extra-curricular, quality-assurance efforts. Understanding how partnership can reach into the classroom space affords opportunities to expand both practices to more students and theorisations of partnership beyond the extra-curricular realm. Our study investigates how final-year undergraduate students experienced the shift toward partnership in the classroom. Thematic analysis of focus group conversations surfaced four interrelated themes that shared many similarities with existing literature, yet diverged in regards to the central place of conflict students navigated as power dynamics shifted. Conflict manifested as both internal (within individual students) and interpersonal (among students and between students and the teacher). We argue for deeper attention to conflict, including its generative potential, in partnership practices.

In the global higher education sector, government accountability initiatives are increasingly focused on degree-level competencies that may be expected from university graduates. The purpose of this paper was to examine the extent to which SoTL reflects this increased interest in student learning across the degree program. Articles (N = 136) published in three international SoTL journals, over the past three years, were systematically reviewed using a framework that concentrated on the extent to which they reflected a focus of (a) teaching-emphasis versus learning-emphasis and (b) unit-level (subject, course) versus degree-/program-level. Our analysis indicated that the majority of SoTL publications (47%) were focused at the level of a single unit with an emphasis on teaching practice; in contrast, only a small minority of SoTL publications (9%) were focused at the level of the overall degree with an emphasis on learning processes. Drawing on our review, we highlight SoTL publications that exemplify the inquiry into student learning at the level of the degree program and offer questions to guide future SoTL inquiries.

Graduate learning outcomes in undergraduate science degrees increasingly are focussed on the development of transferrable skillsets. Research into, and comparisons of, the perceptions of students and academic staff on such learning outcomes has rarely been explored in science. This study used a quantitative survey to explore the perceptions of 640 undergraduate science students and 70 academics teaching into a Bachelor of Science degree program on the importance, the extent to which outcomes were included and assessed, the improvement and likely future use of science graduate learning outcomes. Analysis of findings shed light on potential pathways toward curriculum convergence by arguing the need for shared perspectives of academics and students on graduate learning outcomes and drawing on the "planned-enacted-experienced" curriculum model. Moving toward coherent curriculum planning that draws on both student and academic perspectives to achieve graduate learning outcomes is the key contribution of this study. Resulting recommendations include: the need to consider the development of each complex graduate learning outcome as distinct from other outcomes in both curricular and pedagogical approach, and the need for a programmatic framework for assessment practices to facilitate the constructive alignment of assessment with learning outcomes.

The development of transferrable skillsets, articulated in statements of graduate learning outcomes, is emphasised in undergraduate science degree programmes. Science students enrolled in dual (double) degrees comprise a significant minority of Australian science undergraduates. Research comparing perceptions of single and dual degree students on their science learning outcomes has rarely been explored. The Science Students Skills Inventory was used to compare the perceptions of single (n = 640) and dual (n = 266) degree undergraduate science students. The instrument explored science graduate learning outcomes across six indicators: importance; the extent to which outcomes were included; the extent to which they were assessed; improvement; confidence; and likely future use. Analysis of findings, employing the "planned-enacted-experienced" curricula framework, offers insight into potential avenues towards coherence of the "experienced" curriculum by arguing the need for shared perceptions of graduate learning outcomes for single and dual degree science students. The key contribution of this study is a shift towards progressive curriculum development that draws on both single and dual degree student perspectives to achieve graduate learning outcomes. Recommendations include: whole-of-programmes curricular pathways premised on progressive development of learning outcomes that are inclusive of dual degree students, explicit interdisciplinary learning opportunities, and adoption of dual/single status as a demographic variable reported in future research.

This study investigated students' perceptions of their graduate learning outcomes including content knowledge, communication, writing, teamwork, quantitative skills, and ethical thinking in two Australian universities. One university has a traditional discipline-orientated curriculum and the other, an interdisciplinary curriculum in the entry semester of first year. The Science Students Skills Inventory asked students (n = 613) in first and final years to rate their perceptions of the importance of developing graduate learning outcomes within the programme; how much they improved their graduate learning outcomes throughout their undergraduate science programme; how much they saw learning outcomes included in the programme; and how confident they were about their learning outcomes. A framework of progressive curriculum development was adopted to interpret results. Students in the discipline-oriented degree programme reported higher perceptions of scientific content knowledge and ethical thinking while students from the interdisciplinary curriculum indicated higher perceptions of oral communication and teamwork. Implications for curriculum development include ensuring progressive development from first to third years, a need for enhanced focus on scientific ethics, and career opportunities from first year onwards.

Higher education policies are increasingly focused on graduate learning outcomes, which infer an emphasis on, and deep understanding of, curriculum development across degree programs. As disciplinary influences are known to shape teaching and learning activities, research situated in disciplinary contexts is useful to further an understanding of curriculum development. In the life sciences, several graduate learning outcomes are underpinned by quantitative skills or an ability to apply mathematical and statistical thinking and reasoning. Drawing on data from a national teaching project in Australia that explored quantitative skills in the implemented curricula of 13 life sciences degree programs, this article presents four program-level curricular models that emerged from the analysis. The findings are interpreted through the lens of discipline-specific research and general curriculum design theories to further our understanding of curriculum development for graduate learning outcomes. Implications for future research and to guide curriculum development practices in higher education are discussed.

In this study, the Science Student Skills Inventory was used to gain understanding of student perceptions about their quantitative skills and compare perceptions of cohorts graduating before and after the implementation of a new science curriculum intent on developing quantitative skills. The study involved 600 responses from final-year undergraduate science students across four cohorts in an Australian research-intensive institution. Students rated their perceptions on a four-point Likert scale of: the importance of developing quantitative skills within the programme, how much they improved their quantitative skills throughout their undergraduate science programme, how much they saw quantitative skills included in the programme, how confident they were about their quantitative skills, and how much they believe they will use quantitative skills in the future. Descriptive statistics indicated overall low levels of perceptions with student perception of the importance of quantitative skills being greater than perceptions of improvement, inclusion in the programme, confidence, and future use. Statistical analysis of responses provided by the cohorts graduating before and after the new quantitative skills-intended curriculum revealed few differences. The cohorts graduating after implementation indicated that quantitative skills were included more in the curriculum, although this did not translate into them reporting higher levels of confidence or anticipated future use compared to the cohorts that graduated before the new curriculum was implemented. Implications for curriculum development are discussed and lines for further research are given.