Abstract:

The widening participation agenda of many Australian universities lifts the imperative to implement effective, evidence-based transition curricula. Transition pedagogy includes the purposeful integration of all curriculum design elements, including opportunities for students’ academic and social engagement, calibrated assessments and continuous evaluation and monitoring. Students’ initial experiences of university can be perplexing, not least because they have to navigate assessment requirements across all of their subjects that determine whether they become ‘successful’ students. Many students, due to competing demands of work and family (Universities Australia, 2013), are instrumental learners in that assessments drive their learning. Therefore the notion of assessment designed for learning (rather than of learning) and ensuring that students are afforded a range of ways to develop their capacity for academic thinking and writing are vital elements of transition design (Gill, 2015).

This paper reports on the outcomes of ongoing curriculum and assessment redesign informed by best practice guidelines for ‘transition pedagogy’ (Kift, 2009; Kift, Nelson & Clark, 2010) in a large enrolment, multi-campus, case study subject. The case study subject has moved in the timetable to first semester and has been reworked to better engage commencing students in their studies and maximize their chances for success. The transition to transition pedagogies in the subject has required a strong focus on embedded assessment scaffolds and supports that foster both students’ academic and social learning. Innovations to support students in their assessment for learning include a technology-enriched learning environment and a considered blended learning model including on-campus ‘team-based learning’ tutorials (Freeman, 2006), wrap-around learning resources, and an online tutor. These and other enhancements are discussed through a defined framework of best practices from the literature. In the context of continuous, iterative improvement, the evaluative voices of sessional tutors and students, and assessment outcomes and usage data will also be presented.

References:
[1] Gill, B. (2015). Talking about the elephant in the room: Improving fundamental assessment practices. Student Success 6(2).
[2] Freeman, M., McGrath-Champ, S., Clark, S. & Taylor, L. (2006, September). The case for assessable in-class team-based learning. Paper presented at the Assessment in Science Teaching and Learning Symposium, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from http://science.uniserve.edu.au/pubs/procs/2006/index.html
[3] Kift, S. (2009). Articulating a transition curriculum to scaffold and to enhance the first year student experience in Australian higher education. Final Report for ALTC Senior Fellowship Program. ALTC: Strawberry Hills, NSW.
[4] Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010). Transition pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE - A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), 1-20. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v1i1.13
[5] Universities Australia (2013) University students finances in 2012: A study of the financial circumstances of domestic and international students in Australia’s universities. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne. Retrieved from: http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/resources/272/1622

Keywords:

Transition pedagogy, curriculum design, assessment design, blended learning.