Quality enhancement and assurance for teaching in a

Quality enhancement and assurance for teaching in a research university. Professor Michael Jackson, Ph. D, Acting Director

After

The University of Sydney Founded in 1851, now 45, 000 students, distributed campus in all degrees Polyglot student body, International and Non. English Speaking Background An international university Research intensive A regulated environment

The most important point Myth of selection, tenure, and promotion on research alone. Reality is that selection, tenure, and promotion on teaching occurs.

Means to promote teaching • Rhetoric to legislators and parents • Awards for teaching excellence http: //www. usyd. edu. au/learning/quality/awards. s html • The Institute devoted to teaching development Most universities go this far.

Other means to promote teaching? Teaching advocate in the chancellery Integration of Institute in planning and committees Academic Board cycles of reviews of quality enhancement and assurance.

The Institute manage about six strategic projects related to teaching. Through these Working Parties Faculties make commitments to enhancement and assurance measures. These are worked out over time and in collaboration with others. http: //www. itl. usyd. edu. au/ These commitments are audited in Academic Board reviews.

Still other means Required orientation to teaching for all new hires – Principles and Practice. It articulates in to a Graduate Certificate Active committee on Teaching and Learning in the Academic Board Associate Deans teaching and learning in faculties A public commitment to principles of good teaching on web site http: //www. usyd. edu. au/learning/about/

Teaching improvement fund Aimed at areas for improvement or innovation, linked to university and faulty strategic plans Competitive, less and more than $10, 000* Funds from top-slice of grant on basis of student load and fee-paying students $1. 5 million in total http: //www. usyd. edu. au/learning/quality/ties. shtml

Scholarship in Teaching Index Financial benefit to department whose staff contribute to teaching quality through the Scholarship of teaching. Faculties submit claims for points. Criteria include credentials in teaching like the Graduate Certificate offered by the Institute, teaching awards, publication, and the like. http: //www. usyd. edu. au/learning/quality/si. shtml#criter ia

Scholarship in Teaching Index Consists of 0. 5% grant and 0. 5% of College budgets, about $841, 000 Distributed at discretion of faculty An individual might get as much $10, 000 in a consultancy account

Teaching Performance Indicators A teaching dividend allocated to faculties Allocated on relative scores on teaching quality of a series of quantitative indicators Indicators are mix of in-house survey and national questionnaires

Teaching Performance Indicators include scales on good teaching, overall satisfaction from national graduation survey Also graduate placement Retention and progression Sydney Course Experience Questionnaire http: //www. usyd. edu. au/learning/quality/td. shtml

Does it make any difference? There is more activity related to quality teaching Scores on national surveys are improving Some gains in retention and progression Enthusiastic embrace by some faculties Changes in open-ended remarks http: //www. itl. usyd. edu. au/synergy/article. cfm? print=1& article. ID=281 Benchmarking suggests we are doing well Australian University Quality Agency said we are Newsweek listed us at #50 http: //www. usyd. edu. au/news/84. html? newsstoryid=1238

http: //www. geert-hofstede. com/

Purpose of Benchmarking is, first and foremost, a learning process to identify comparative strengths and weaknesses as a basis for self improvement.

Guidelines for Benchmarking University policy which bases our benchmarking MOUs in http: //www. usyd. edu. au/learning/quality/benchma rking. shtml “The process of identifying and learning from good practices in other organisations” (European Benchmarking Code of Conduct)

Sharing SCEQ data as a basis for benchmarking • What sorts of conversations would this allow us to start? • What sorts of limitations / forms will this impose on the conversation? • Who else can join in the same conversation? • How might we efficiently extend the data to allow more meaningful conversations?

An ongoing cycle… 1. Purpose of engaging in benchmarking 2. Priorities: Scope & Focus of 3. 4. 5. benchmarking Indicators & prompts for self assessment, comparison and learning Process for implementation Commitment to actions arising & communication

Before

The end.