Hypothetical Scenarios to generate ideas around implementing graduate attributes
These scenarios were used by GAP Symposia participants to trigger ideas for institutional strategies. The ideas and scenarios are available for anybody to use as one way of triggering discussion and debate about how to achieve graduate attributes in their institution.
Scenario 1: A university is seeking to redevelop curriculum and learning experiences to improve their success in more sophisticated outcomes-based accreditation of their professional degrees.
Scenario 2: A large faculty offering primarily non-vocational degrees wants to improve curriculum and learning experiences to enhance the perceived relevance of their degrees to the world of work while also highlighting the relevance of their courses to graduates lives in contemporary knowledge societies.
Scenario 3: Assessment: National and internal Quality Assurance processes have indicated a problem with the quality of the student learning experience of undergraduate curriculum in a degree course, arising primarily from assessment practices which do not incorporate standards based assessment of complex transformative learning outcomes.
Scenario 4: It looks good on paper: We have had an institutional wide focus on generic skills for over a decade but somehow the reported experiences of our students and staff don’t seem to reflect this. Staff seem to teach in the same way as most other universities and students seem to learn no differently to their peers at more research intensive organisations.
Scenario 5: A focus on Health – taking the benefits of work integrated learning into traditional university based subjects.
Scenario 1: A university is seeking to redevelop curriculum and learning experiences to improve their success in more sophisticated outcomes-based accreditation of their professional degrees.
The University of Efficiency has recognised that, increasingly, accreditation by prestigious international bodies is one of the main indicators of quality in relation to their vocational degrees.
Their experience with previous accreditation processes over the past decade is that there is an underlying consistent criticism of graduate outcomes in relation to the development of “generic skills” (communication, client relations, team work, etc), despite all their efforts to include WIL activities in their vocational degrees and having invested in developing several generic skills courses. This may be due to the different understandings of graduate attributes between university staff and professional bodies.
They have noted with some alarm that the approaching cycle of accreditation reviews is far more rigorous and even more ‘outcomes-based’. The focus of this accreditation on assurances and outcomes will drive university action and shape internal quality assurance processes. Of even greater concern is the recognition that these ‘outcomes’ go beyond the notion of “skills” and reflect an emerging demand for higher-level attributes such as trans-disciplinary thinking and working, dealing with complexity, and transformative leadership. Existing initiatives have not achieved the generic skills outcomes and are even less likely to achieve higher order graduate outcomes.
Senior management have decided that it is worth investing in an inclusive strategy that could address this issue across the board, especially given the cost of these reviews and their significance. They have decided to have a university-wide focus on curriculum renewal to achieve Graduate Attributes and have approached your group for a plan of action.
Strategies for Scenario 1:
Stage 1. Raise the profile of graduate attributes. See The National GAP (Graduate Attribute Project - Scoping); Distributive leadership for learning and teaching: developing the faculty scholar model- Engage all relevant stakeholders, including senior management to establish a shared understanding of Graduate Attributes and outcomes which incorporate professional and university requirements (provision for a ten year culture change)
- Consult and review with stakeholders to achieve agreement regarding graduate attributes outcomes
Stage 2. Engage all university staff and other stakeholders in building reward systems. See Research Skill Development and Assessment in the Curriculum; Australian eportfolio project (scoping); Career Development Learning (CDL): Maximising the contribution of Work Integrated Learning (WIL) to the student experience; Learning and Teaching for Interprofessional Practice, Australia (L-TIPP, Aus); Enhancing Communication and Life Skills in Veterinary Students
- Establish integrated infrastructure and support systems- for example, mapping, designated leadership roles, reporting outcomes, assessment policy Identify and resource the implementation of appropriate strategies, for example, peer and leadership mentoring plans
Stage 3. Implement revised graduate attributes
- Ensure investment is visible and transparent to all stakeholders
- Keep the curriculum debate at an appropriate level, ie whole of degree
- Keep transparent and in focus through assessment. See Embedding the Development of Intercultural Competence in Business Higher Education; Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties
- Whilst maintaining holistic approach, start somewhere with a pilot project. This can be used to inform the evaluation and review of the initiative. See Nature and roles of Arts degrees in contemporary society: BA scoping project; Learning and teaching in the discipline of law: Achieving and sustaining excellence in a changed and changing environment
- Select a discipline that has had a graduate attributes project in your university See Developing interprofessional learning and practice capabilities within the Australian health workforce: Building capacity within the higher education sector
Stage 4. Evaluate and review initiative
- Evaluate and progressively develop quality indicators that represent authentic evidence of success at achieving graduate attributes
- Market the success and effectiveness of pilot internally, and use this to nurture Stage 1 activities in other projects
- Review, recognise, resource and reward initiatives linked to the development of graduate attributes.
Scenario 2. A large faculty offering primarily non-vocational degrees wants to improve curriculum and learning experiences to enhance the perceived relevance of their degrees to the world of work while also highlighting the relevance of their courses to graduates lives in contemporary knowledge societies.
The Faculty of Intellectual Studies has a large non-vocational degree program (e.g. Arts or Science) and is concerned with the impact external perceptions of irrelevance might have on student demand for their program. Within the faculty they recognise the intrinsic value of their disciplinary learning outcomes for students but both the faculty leaders – and the graduating students - find it hard to demonstrate this value under the current rubric of employability. Both staff and students believe that students graduate with very high-level transferable abilities and personal qualities and are frustrated that these higher-level graduate attributes are not represented in the discourses on generic skills and employability skills in their university and in the sector in general. They have heard as much directly from their alumni from time to time. Their University is encouraging the faculty to focus their attention on enhancing the student experience through curriculum reform and assessment reform that emphasises both student engagement and active learning. The Dean wants to address the faculty concerns about graduate attributes but has to ensure she does so while also meeting the University’s agenda in relation to curriculum and assessment reform. She has asked your group for a strategy to achieve this.
Strategies for Scenario 2:
- Recognise Career Development Learning and the overarching principle of student identity formation. See Career Development Learning (CDL): Maximising the contribution of work integrated learning (WIL) to the student experience; Nature and role of Arts degrees in contemporary society: BA scoping project.
- Ensure curriculum is built around Graduate Attributes and broadens learning experience and subject content. See Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties
- Identify learning activities that facilitate transferability, and ensuring that learning processes are supported by e-portfolios. See Australian ePortfolio Project (Scoping)
- Focus Assessment around Graduate Attributes using tasks that ensure individual student engagement and experiential learning. See Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties; (Career Development Learning (CDL): Maximising the contribution of work integrated learning (WIL) to the student experience
- Utilise career mentoring to ensure stakeholders are engaged in developing program relevance and are aware of the philosophy of teaching. See Career Development Learning (CDL): Maximising the contribution of work integrated learning (WIL) to the student experience; Developing interprofessional learning and practice capabilities within the Australian health workforce: Building capacity within the higher education sector; Nature and roles of Arts degrees in contemporary society: BA scoping project
Scenario 3. Assessment: National and internal Quality Assurance processes have indicated a problem with the quality of the student learning experience of undergraduate curriculum in a degree course, arising primarily from assessment practices which do not incorporate standards based assessment of complex transformative learning outcomes.
As a result of a review of internal quality assurance and academic review data, the University of Numbers and Rankings has discovered that there is a problem with their assessment practices which is impacting on the quality of the student experience – and also on the university’s CEQ scores. They have identified that the commonly used assessment practices at the university, mainly multiple choice-choice testing and traditional end of subject formal written exams based on course texts, are not assessing any of the complex transformative learning outcomes their students are expected to develop. More importantly, the assessment practices are making it difficult for them to give the sort of feedback that students are saying they want. A recent scholarship-of-teaching project conducted by some of the Faculty’s staff, has noted the value of standards based and authentic assessment approaches for developing graduate attributes. A decision has been taken to change the university’s approach to assessment to one which uses more ‘authentic’, ‘standards-based’ assessment to help students achieve relevant learning outcomes and to more effectively document evidence their achievements. Your group has been asked to identify what sorts of assessment strategies might be useful and to suggest how the university community might be supported in adopting and implementing these.
Strategies for Scenario 3:
- Achieve ‘buy in’ through providing resources that support engagement with, and enhancement of, assessment practice. See Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties; The National GAP (Graduate Attribute Project – Scoping)
- Create a policy environment focussed on assurance of graduate attribute learning outcomes. See The National GAP (Graduate Attribute Project – Scoping); Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties; Learning and teaching in the discipline of law: Achieving and sustaining excellence in a changed and changing world
- Identify assessment practices that focus on graduate attribute development. See Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties
Scenario 4: It looks good on paper: We have had an institutional wide focus on generic skills for over a decade but somehow the reported experiences of our students and staff don’t seem to reflect this. Staff seem to teach in the same way as most other universities and students seem to learn no differently to their peers at more research intensive organisations.
The ‘University of Teaching Management’ has had an explicit focus on generic attributes for over a decade. They emphasize strong skills development, work-readiness, and curricula that are kept constantly up-to-date through close liaison with industry and employers in their community. They have a clear policy stating the graduate attributes and numerous systems in place to ensure it is implemented. These systems include a course approval process which requires a statement of which attributes are addressed and a university wide subject outline template that requires each subject to specify which of the generic attributes are covered in the subject. In fact they have a database of the subject outlines which clearly shows the GAs that are taught and assessed in each subject across the university. They were feeling confident about their performance on this important aspect of their recent AUQA review and it was with some dismay that read in their report that AUQA considered this was an area of weakness in need of urgent attention. It turned out that despite all their curriculum mapping data, when the AUQA panel interviewed the staff and students they did not describe a teaching and learning experience which included addressing the university’s generic attributes. In fact the students had no idea this was the university’s ‘point of difference’. The university’s CEQ data, while it showed students felt they developed some of the generic skills mentioned on the CEQ scale items – it showed that they only felt they developed these skills to the same extent as students from the ‘University of Ivory Tower Research’ nearby. Even the key industry bodies in the state don’t seem to see much difference between their graduates and those from less enlightened universities which haven’t invested in generic skills work. Even informal conversations amongst academics elicit a certain degree of dismay when one by one they could recount stories of students who were extremely successful in their formal studies but who seemed to have very little idea of the significant learning they had achieved or an ability to articulate it. “Why,” they wondered, “are students so unaware of what they have achieved?”
The university senior executive group wants to know why – after a decade of focussing on generic skills, that this situation has come to be, and they have asked your group to come up with a strategy to address this problem.Strategies for Scenario 4
- Generate acceptance of the ineffectiveness of teacher focussed strategies, and promote student focussed strategies. See Career Development Learning (CDL): Maximising the contribution of Work Integrated Learning (WIL) to the student experience
- Recognise that telling people what actions to take without addressing their conceptions and motivations does not work. See Career Development Learning (CDL): Maximising the contribution of Work Integrated Learning (WIL) to the student experience
- Allow for ongoing support and resources required by staff to maintain initial levels of engagement throughout the process.
Scenario 5: A focus on Health – taking the benefits of work integrated learning into traditional university based subjects.
The ‘Faculty of Ailing Heath’ offers vocational health science degrees in Nursing and a range of Allied Health disciplines. All the degrees have a long standing clinical education component which exists alongside traditional lecture courses or research thesis work for undergraduates and postgraduates respectively. Each professional degree uses its own competency based occupational standards for the clinical / placement assessments. But the prevailing attitude amongst the academic members of the faculty is that clinical competence is very different to the sorts of things that students learn in their courses. The faculty has developed some professional skills training modules for students to take before they go in clinic to help them in the transition from their academic studies to the clinical placements. They have also developed some research training skills modules for their HRD students around research skills. However the academic staff continue to teach and supervise students in the same way they always did, focussing primarily on the transmission of content or – in the research degrees, on the completion of the experiment which is the basis of the research thesis. More than 70% of the actual faculty teaching and supervision is now carried out by staff on conjoint appointments (mostly shared with hospitals) rather than full time academics. Your group represents these staff and you want to approach the Dean about your concerns that the overall degree experience of students in not meeting the needs of the professions that are employing students. In particular you want to make the on- campus teaching and learning experiences more like the clinical education experiences of students by significantly changing the way the formal courses are taught and assessed. What is the proposal you are bringing to the Dean for a curriculum revolution?
Strategies for Scenario 5:
- To support the initiative, conduct a literature review and gather evidence about the quality of student learning outcomes. See Career Development Learning (CDL): Maximising the contribution of Work Integrated Learning (WIL) to the student experience; Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties
- Adopt a cross-disciplinary approach to research and implementation stages.
- Develop a shared understanding amongst stakeholders and source expertise as needed for each stage of the project. See Nature and roles of Arts degrees in contemporary society: BA scoping project; Mapping the Future of Occupational Therapy (OT) in the 21st Century
- Incorporate systems for support, professional development, recognition and reward into the university’s existing structures. See Facilitating Staff and Student Engagement with Graduate Attribute Development, Assessment and Standards in Business Faculties
- Use a pilot project to inform ongoing evaluation and review of the initiative.