Search

Collegiality is at the heart of the academy's collective endeavour. It is central to how we think about academic governance structures, academic cultures, as well as the norms guiding academic work. This paper examines the less-explored affective dimensions of collegiality, probing the relationship between the collegial affect and the power and hierarchy in modern corporate universities. Three interview accounts describing academic practices in Australian universities are analysed to examine collegiality as academics' capacity to attune to certain collective affects. This analysis demonstrates how collegial relations can reproduce exclusion in universities. Alternative types of relations that are attentive to differences are then examined, charting possible new directions for a more inclusive academy.

This study draws on the tradition of transdisciplinarity to extend the boundaries of interdisciplinary educational work. In this paper, we apply the concepts of liminality and third space to examine a case of a professional immersive experience (PIEx), designed in response to the catastrophic disruption of work-integrated learning opportunities by the COVID-19 pandemic. The study uses a participatory reflexive methodology to interrogate the range of ways liminality was manifest in PIEx. First, we examine liminal learning in the virtual environment, which facilitated the unfolding of connections between different spaces, locations and people. Second, we seek to understand the PIEx experience through the concept of third space, highlighting the fluidity of roles, where educators, students and industry partners generate new knowledge and practices together. Lastly, we examine the experience through the boundary-crossing lens of transdisciplinarity. We conclude by gesturing towards a new understanding of work integrated learning, as it could take place in the future, well beyond the walls of the university.

Despite decades of managerial university reforms, collegiality emerges as an idea that unites academics, and that both symbolises and legitimises the collective aspirations of the academy. Typically, collegiality is positioned as an unquestionably "good thing"--an unproblematic academic ideal or an academic structure--obscuring the contingency of social arrangements in universities. This paper investigates the plurality of collegial practices that unfold "on the ground" in the context of university reforms and the diversification of the academic workforce over recent decades. The paper presents a qualitative and exploratory study of collegial practices in seven contemporary Australian and New Zealand/Aotearoa universities, employing a social cartographic analysis. Eleven types of logics underpinning collegial practices are identified and described in detail, by drawing on examples of collegial practices offered by fifteen research participants. A reconfigured picture of academic relations is presented, revealing the range of collegial practices that tend to be subsumed under a generic notion of collegiality. The effects of different types of collegial practices are examined, contesting exclusionary collegial relations and highlighting practices that have the potential to produce a more inclusive and socially just academy.

While higher education (HE) is entrenched as a context for scholarly inquiry in Australian universities, there remains contest about it as a research field. Unlike other forms of 'Education', in Australia there is no undergraduate programme inducting students into HE's key questions, scholars, and inquiry modes. For new doctoral students, learning to make an original contribution to a field described as a practice, a discipline, and context is a persistent challenge. In this paper, we 'think with' the concepts of borders, paths and orientations to interrogate our practices as doctoral students and supervisors in the field of HE research, under the formation #thesisthinkers. We offer multiple accounts of how #thesisthinkers invites us to confront HE as a field, and in particular, how #thesisthinkers has invigorated us to build a useable landscape of the HE research field that sustains multiple pathways for doctoral researchers, leaving behind traces for others to tread.

Work-integrated learning (WIL) is widely used to connect students with the world of work and authentic industry practices. WIL research and practice is primarily focused on the benefits to students and universities, whilst the value of WIL to partner organisations remains relatively underexplored. This study takes an industry, government and community partner-centric perspective to examine learning in partner organisations stimulated through engagement with transdisciplinary WIL. A case study of a transdisciplinary, innovation-focused project-based WIL subject at one Australian university is interrogated through the theoretical lenses of practice theory and mutual learning. Fifteen interviews with stakeholders in partner organisations are analysed against the three dimensions of practice articulated by Kemmis et al. (2014): sayings, doings and relatings. The analysis shows that through engagement with university-led transdisciplinary WIL partners were able to advance their learning projects, disrupt and reconfigure organisational practices, and legitimise experimentation within their organisations. The study builds the case for conceptualising WIL engagement as a professional learning opportunity for partner organisations, in addition to the well-documented benefits to students and universities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Partnership in higher education has gained prominence over recent decades, but recent studies have identified a lack of research exploring how partnership practices unfold in specific disciplinary contexts. This article explores how a transdisciplinary approach can be used to better understand and facilitate student-staff partnerships where staff and students have diverse disciplinary backgrounds and knowledge. We present a case study of the Bachelor of Creative Intelligence and Innovation at the University of Technology Sydney, focusing on the adaptation of our curriculum co-creation processes by drawing on multiple knowledge types through a reflexive process of mutual learning. We conclude that explicit consideration of these principles, which are common to both transdisciplinary and partnership frameworks, have the potential to enhance consideration of diverse perspectives and the roles played by worldviews, norms and values when building student-staff partnerships around curriculum co-creation.

This paper reports on the current experience of one higher education institution in Australia embarking on the path towards mainstreaming online learning opportunities by providing three complementary academic development initiatives that can inform strategies undertaken by other institutions internationally. First, an academic development program was redesigned and delivered in blended mode to provide teaching staff with the experience of learning in a blended environment to raise their awareness of effective strategies. Second, an accredited postgraduate course for teaching staff on the subject of educational design was redesigned to focus on strategies for online and blended course design and delivered fully online to raise awareness of online learning benefits. Third, a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC), entitled Learning to Teach Online (LTTO), was developed to offer professional development opportunities to teaching staff at the higher education institution, as well as to a wider international audience of educators. The threefold professional development strategies reported in this paper provide teaching staff with an opportunity to interact, mentor, and share knowledge with one another, alongside experiencing online and blended learning to effectively meet the challenge of improving the digital literacy of teaching staff and enhancing effective online and blended learning opportunities for students.

Relationships between students and external partners in work-integrated learning can vary and power dynamics, hierarchies and student agency have been under explored in research to date. Integrated research involving workintegrated learning, students as partners and transdisciplinarity presents an opportunity to enrich each of these fields. This paper presents the results of a case study of transdisciplinary project-based work-integrated learning in Australia. Our results highlight that reciprocity and the valuing of student knowledge are key elements in breaking down traditional power dynamics and enabling student agency, in line with the transdisciplinary principle of mutual learning. Participants who valued these elements in their relationship were less likely to frame the relationship in hierarchical terms and were more open to learning from one another. By empowering students to draw on their expertise and reframe challenges while also preparing partners for this kind of relationship, all parties can be positioned as learners within work-integrated learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The benefits of student–staff partnerships are widely reported in the Students-as-Partners literature. It is envisaged that partnership initiatives can have a transformative effect on institutional cultures, however, how this transformation might be achieved is less clear. Building on transdisciplinary and systems change perspectives, we propose a Partnership Outcome Spaces framework to develop an understanding of how student–staff partnerships might influence institutional cultures. We identify four outcome spaces: situation, knowledge, learning and relationships, with reflexivity and a structured partnership methodology as key enablers of these outcomes. This framework is applied to a case study examining a Student Services Hub project in one Australian university. Through this analysis, the importance of less tangible and relational outcomes arising from student–staff partnerships are highlighted. To influence institutional culture change, we encourage student–staff partnership practitioners to purposefully negotiate the various possible outcomes of their initiatives as an integral part of the partnership process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been argued that leadership in higher education differs from leadership in other organisational contexts, in part because of the culture of collegiality and autonomy underpinning academic work. Collegiality, however, is a complex and somewhat "slippery" idea that features in academic leadership literature in a variety of, sometimes contradictory, ways. We argue for the need to unpack and explore the notion of collegiality to understand what makes it such an enduring idea in academic leadership. We start by examining the multiple meanings of collegiality circulating in scholarly writing on leadership to reveal the complexity and tensions it raises for academic leaders. We then turn to Lacanian theory and explore collegiality as a subliminal fantasy that represents an important interface between "leaders" and those who are "led", and one which influences our understanding of academic work and leadership. From the perspective offered by our Lacanian exploration, we propose that in order to traverse the nostalgic fantasy of the collegial past, instead of looking for closure, it might be more useful to put indeterminacy, absence and lack at the centre of the academic leadership project.

This paper reports an investigation of "transformation narratives" emerging from early career academics' reflective writing. The pieces of writing analysed describe self-initiated teaching development activities embedded in the early career academics' practice. Using a transformative learning framework, the analysis reveals the following changes in early career academics' practice: a move from non-reflective habitual action to more conscious practice; a more sophisticated view of teaching than was previously held; increased agency where teaching practice is perceived as something that can be developed; increased confidence; and a more multifaceted conception of an academic role than their original conception. The limitations of the transformative learning approach and implications this might have for those designing and delivering these types of programs are then explored. (Contains 1 table.)