Change leadership, management and strategies to promote quality university teaching and learning

377 Chapter 15 Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Lynne Hunt University of Southern Queensland, Australia Denise Chalmers University of Western Australia, Australia ABSTRACT This chapter provides an overview of change leadership and management strategies to promote the quality of university teaching and learning It draws attention to the organisational contexts of universities that encompass change leadership processes, emphasizing the need for whole-of-university approaches and ‘joined-up’ policies, plans and procedures that support teaching The discussion is organized in terms of five principles of action (McInnes et al., 2012) These are (1) Shape the strategic vision that puts student learning and student experience at its core; (2) Inspire and enable excellence; (3) Devolve leadership of learning and teaching; (4) Reward, recognize and develop teaching; and (5) Involve students INTRODUCTION Evidence shows that students want, and need, the full support of teachers and university services to maximize their opportunities for learning (Scott 2005) This means that faculties, libraries, administration, and student support and learning technology services must coordinate their work through ‘joined-up’ policies, plans and procedures The leadership and management goal is whole-of-university change to ‘get the context right’ for teaching and learning To explore how this is done, the chapter is organised around McInnes, Ramsden and Maconachie’s (2012) five principles for action by senior university leaders because these sustain a sharp focus on student learning outcomes Change leadership strategies are conceptualized as push and pull drivers of change Push factors refer to quality assurance and compliDOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-0672-0.ch015 Copyright © 2017, IGI Global Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning ance with teaching and learning standards These are normally monitored by external authorities Push factors are based on the management principle that what gets measured gets done Pull factors include incentives to enhance teaching such as awards, fellowships, grants, and career enhancement strategies such as professional development and promotion based on evidence of teaching excellence BACKGROUND Traditionally, universities have focused attention on the core business of research, leaving faculties and individual teachers to determine teaching practices and programs However, the massification and globalization of higher education mean that universities must now promote teaching excellence in systematic ways to ensure effective learning experiences for all students The focus on teaching and learning has been prompted by external and internal pressures External drivers of change include reduced funding, increasing numbers of students, increased competition from private and public institutions, external quality audits, and developments in communications and information technology that have changed the educational landscape to make online, blended and flexible learning not only viable but necessary (Hunt & Peach, 2009;Scott et al., 2008) Internal pressures for change arise from the strategic vision of each university and locally determined priorities University education is now understood by governments to be a significant business opportunity In Australia, for example, higher education earned a record $17.6 billion in 2014, making it Australia’s fourth largest export (The Department of Education and Training, June 2015) Understandably, the income-earning capacity of higher education has focused the attention of governments around the world They now want to ensure that they are getting a good outcome from their investment in universities As a consequence, governmental agencies have emerged to assure and promote quality in university education Over 200 national and regional quality agencies, many established by government charter, attest to the level of interest in ensuring the quality of national higher education systems and, in particular, university teaching quality (The International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education nd) The leadership and management task is to ensure that each university meets the standards for quality teaching Internationally, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports on a range of higher education indicators through their Education at a Glance reports, providing opportunities for national benchmarking International rankings, such as the QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education World University, use metrics to rank individual institutions Whilst these rankings are contested in regard to the indicators and weightings used, they are important for the prestige they bestow and their role in attracting students and funding For example, governments in China and Chile will only fund scholarships for their students in universities with high rankings So far, rankings are based largely on research metrics but attention is now turning to the identification of metrics to inform international ranking tables associated with the quality of teaching and learning Benchmarking and ranking against standards assures comparability of university qualifications and student learning outcomes and it facilitates the mobility of students and university teachers between institutions and nations For example, the capacity to promote such mobility was a key driver in the establishment of the European Bologna Process in 1999 Governments ‘push’ universities to enhance teaching through requirements to comply with quality standards Examples of quality agencies established to this include the Malaysian Qualification 378  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Agency and The Indian National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) These assess and accredit higher education institutions in accordance with national standards for teaching, learning, curriculum, and student services Governments have also implemented incentives to enhance the quality of teaching, learning, curriculum and the student experience National examples of capacity-building organisations that encourage teaching excellence include the Higher Education Academy (HEA) in the United Kingdom It has a mission to support and improve ‘learning outcomes by raising the status and quality of teaching in higher education’ In Australia, the Office for Learning and Teaching (OLT) and its antecedent organisations, have offered teaching awards, fellowships and grants to promote teaching and learning In the USA, the Carnegie Foundation has a long history of promoting the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) through strategic projects and awards In and of themselves, organisations such as these are important in the enhancement of university teaching and learning, but they also have an extended and trickle-down effect on institutional practices For example, almost all Australian universities have established awards for teaching excellence aligned with the OLT and many have allocated significant funding for strategic initiatives in teaching and learning (Chalmers & Thompson, 2008) These international and national agencies set the targets and build capacity for institutional change leadership and management to promote university teaching and learning MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER Institutional Change Leadership A key message in this chapter about change leadership to promote excellent teaching and learning is that a whole-of-university approach is required to produce sustainable outcomes This is not always easy to achieve because universities are complex organisations with multiple and competing goals to promote teaching, research and enterprise For Cuthbert, universities are characterised by: problematic goals, in that there is no universally shared view of the purpose of a higher education; unclear technology, meaning that we not know how to make sure that either teaching or research takes place successfully; and fluid participation, referring to the tendency for academic staff not to relate very closely to their ‘home’ institution, but often to be better networked with colleagues in other institutions (Blackmore, 2012, p 273) To bring order to this complex context, this discussion about institutional change leadership is organised in terms of McInnes, Ramsden and Maconachie’s (2012) five principles for action by senior university leaders to achieve quality in teaching and learning These are: Shape the strategic vision that puts student learning and student experience at its core Inspire and enable excellence Devolve leadership of learning and teaching Reward, recognize and develop teaching Involve students 379  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Principle 1: Shape The Strategic Vision McInnes et al (2012, pp 13-15) suggest that a strategic vision encompasses: applying up-to-date knowledge of how teaching influences student learning; identifying the institutional factors that affect student success; conceptualizing the future student experience; assessing the current performance of the institution; and balancing collegial and managerial imperatives This section will explore these issues under three headings: Strategic visions; joined-up policies and plans; and teaching and learning projects Strategic Visions for Quality Teaching and Learning The specific strategic vision of a university informs current and prospective students, and staff, about its distinctive approach to teaching and learning For example, the vision for teaching and learning at the University of Southern Queensland (USQ, 2013-2015) is about personalized learning: ‘We promise to partner with learners in the pursuit of their study objectives regardless of their background, location or stage in life’ In order to pursue this vision, the university promises, inter alia, to provide students: access to learning through online and blended learning opportunities; a range of pathways to higher education; and support services that respond to individual student needs Strategic visions normally reflect international, national and local issues – the latter referring to matters such as the size and nature of a university’s student population They also draw on evidence about how students learn, contemporary understandings of which cohere around the importance of students’ active engagement in learning (see Stewart, 2012) Of late, these pedagogies have been summarized into a ‘flipped classroom’ approach defined by Sankey and Hunt (2014, p 28) as: The term ‘flipped’ refers to the provision of tailored online resources and associated learning activities that facilitate student preparation for classroom or online discussion time focused on the application and consolidation of planned learning outcomes ‘Essentially, what was traditionally completed at home as homework has been flipped to become the focus of classroom learning’ (The Queensland Government, 2012) In simple terms, flipped university classrooms represent a move away from standard lectures and tutorials and a move towards learning experiences based on a series of deep learning activities including workshops and mediated online discussion A university’s strategic vision also shapes its curricula For example, some universities distinguish themselves by offering problem-based learning (Brodie, 2012), research-led curricula (Jenkins & Healey, 2012), or a particular focus on open and online learning (Reeves & Reeves, 2012) Others, such as Middlesex University, offer work-integrated curricula described by Garnett (2012, p.166) as an acknowledgement ‘that work has learning needs (i.e., workers require specific knowledge and skills) but also that high-level learning can take place at work, through undertaking work and for the specific purposes of work’ A university’s strategic vision charts a course of action for leaders and managers that is codified in the subsequent development of mission statements and goals, which direct and inform university management For example, one of the goals arising from the Strategic Vision of Charles Darwin University is ‘To become a recognised national leader in the tertiary education of Australian Indigenous students, and in the teaching, research and understanding of Indigenous knowledge systems’ (Charles Darwin Univer- 380  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning sity, 2012) Statements at this level become quite specific and inform the development of a university’s policies and plans In the teaching and learning domain, policies can include, but are not limited to: • • • • • • • • • Curriculum design Review and accreditation of degree programs Assessment and moderation Student feedback and evaluation Teaching standards Graduate attributes Retention and progression Student academic skills support Academic integrity New strategic visions for teaching and learning require new policies as Hunt, Huijer and Sankey (2011, pp 187-188) noted in their case study about the redesign of learning spaces: ‘key policy changes included the introduction of a Fleximode Policy to diminish differences in the design of learning experiences between on-campus and distance education students and to guarantee to students appropriate and equal access to learning resources’ Joined-up Policies and Plans A university’s vision for teaching and learning is brought to fruition in its strategic plan, normally of three to five years’ duration This informs the shorter-term, operational plans of departments Hunt and Peach (2009) argue that the purpose of teaching and learning policies and plans is to ‘get the context right’ to support student learning This is important because, to learn effectively, students prefer a coordinated response to their needs: ‘efficient and responsive administrative, information technology, library and student support systems actively working together to support … operation[s]’ (Scott 2005, p 13) The implication of Scott’s findings is that collaboration between university departments is necessary to provide what students need to support their learning This means that policies and plans should be aligned to the common cause of teaching and learning excellence – what might be called ‘joined-up’ policies and plans Hunt & Peach’s (2009, p 7) case study of one university’s change initiative to support teaching, shows how the concept of students’ ‘learning journeys’ was used as the organising principle to ensure that policies and processes were joined-up: The concept of the student learning journey informs all planning It is a relationships-based and holistic approach that focuses attention on the student as a whole person, as opposed to the student as the subject and object of a series of unrelated interactions with an organisational bureaucracy The aim is to ensure connectedness between the responses provided by the university at different points in a student’s journey Teaching and Learning Projects The implementation of policies and plans may be organised as projects which can be monitored through normal project management processes, albeit in modified form (Hunt & Sankey 2013, p 266): 381  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning There is a difference between the necessarily punctilious approaches to, for example, engineering projects and those pertaining to human service (education) organisations Engineering projects require an exactness that is difficult to incorporate into community development However, the elements of setting targets, estimating timelines, measuring outcomes and establishing communication plans can all be used … to ensure maximum outcome Hunt and Sankey’s (2013) case study of whole-of-university change identified ten teaching and learning projects to provide services for students and staff (See Figure 1) Whilst this set of ten projects is not definitive (other universities will have different priorities and projects), the case study does offer a useful starting point for scoping a reasonably exhaustive range of teaching and learning change leadership projects at institutional level Figure illustrates the importance of incentives to promote teaching These include the development of teaching awards and grants in the Teaching Excellence and Academic Professional Development projects It also shows quality assurance projects, for example, the Evaluation Project, and it indicates the need to plan support services for both staff and students Principle 2: Inspire and Enable Excellence The second of McInnes, Ramsden, and Maconachie’s (2012, pp 19-23) five principles for action is about inspiring and enabling teaching excellence According to them, this involves: maintaining personal credibility through leadership in interpreting and shaping the national policy landscape; leading from a strong evidence base; presenting the vision as achievable with early wins and long term change in sight; developing a focused learning and teaching plan, securing sufficient funds to support the vision; creating conditions that enable academics to strive for excellence in teaching; and stimulating staff engagement Figure 1: Learning and teaching projects (Source Hunt & Sankey, 2013) 382  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning This section will explore these issues under three headings: Securing financial support; building an evidence base; and enabling staff engagement Securing Financial Support Gibbs’ (2010) argued that the best educational outcomes for students arise from the manner in which resources are used Institutions must plan their use of resources to make the most of the students they have Gibbs (2010, p 5) claims that what really matters are the ‘well understood pedagogical practices that engender student engagement’ these he identifies as ‘class size, the level of student effort and engagement, who undertakes the teaching, and the quantity and quality of feedback to students on their work’ Ewell (2008, pp 10-11) agrees noting that ‘one of the most pervasive and unassailable myths about higher education has to with the relationship between outcomes and money’ He concluded that ‘it is not how much is invested in a given collegiate experience that is important; it is how intentionally these resources are directed’ Building an Evidence-base to Enable Teaching Excellence In their discussion of turnaround leadership, Fullan and Scott (2009, p 80) note that: ‘A university culture, characterised by a commitment to continuous evaluation, inquiry, and quality improvement concentrates on using evidence to identify what aspects of its current provision are working well and what most needs enhancement’ The growth of evidence-based approaches to change leadership may be seen in the emergence of organisations such as the Higher Education Institutional Research networks in the UK and Ireland (HEIRNETWORK) These are networks of practitioners working to support teaching and learning through informed management decision-making The emergence of learning analytics also demonstrates an increasing thirst for information about learning and teaching outcomes In her succinct summary of the ways in which evidence about teaching and learning outcomes might be secured, Krause (2012) notes a range of strategies including: student evaluations of teaching; professional accreditation; reviews of degree programs; evaluation of student support services such as the library; curriculum design and delivery standards; and peer review of teaching In fact, measures of teaching and learning outcomes are now widely available at international, national, institutional and discipline-based levels (Chalmers, 2008) Comparative analysis of the relative success of strategies designed to support teaching and learning may be secured through criterion based or quantitative benchmarking processes According to McKinnon et al (2000), benchmarking: has three potential uses It provides senior staff with tools to ascertain performance trends in the university and to initiate continuous self-improvement activities Second, it is sufficiently well developed for use by groups of universities wishing to compare performance on all or some of the areas covered Third, some of the benchmarks can be used by universities now to ascertain their competitive position relative to others There are now international discipline standards that facilitate benchmarking For example, the TUNING Project (Tuning Educational Structures in Europe) has developed generic and subject specific competences for undergraduate degree programs in Europe This has followed from the national higher 383  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning education discipline-based standards developed by the British Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) It has been expanded into the USA and other countries While much of the data collection has been at international and national levels, Chalmers (2007) advocates a shift in focus to intra-institutional measures of teaching and learning performance To inform this process, Chalmers et al (2014) trialed a framework of good practice principles and evidence-based measures of teaching performance It is based on seven criteria of good teaching which can be used as a basis for management planning The criteria are: Design and planning of learning activities Teaching and supporting student learning Assessment and giving feedback to students on their learning Developing effective learning environments, student support and guidance Integration of scholarship, research and professional activities with teaching and in support of student learning Evaluation of practice and continuing professional development Professional and personal effectiveness Enabling Staff Engagement in Teaching Excellence Strategies to engage staff in the promotion of teaching excellence include participation in university teaching and learning and course approval committees as well as professional development programs In the UK, universities have established introductory teaching programs accredited by the national Higher Education Authority These are assessed against the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) Some 65,000 university academics have completed an accredited program (HEA, 2014) In Australia, there is more variation in professional development programs across the university sector, though most universities offer introductory teaching programs (Hicks et al., 2010) Some universities now require all new academic staff to complete a Graduate Certificate in Tertiary Teaching to be eligible for a tenured position Such requirements for formal qualifications to teach in universities reflect international trends to professionalise university teaching (Chalmers et al., 2014) The establishment of professional development programs is an important task for university managers because they are demonstrably effective in encouraging teachers to adopt a reflective, learning-focused approach to university teaching (Postareff et al., 2007; Gibbs, 2010; Chalmers & Gardiner, 2015) The implementation of such programs may also be a required management task because the provision of professional development is used in quality audits as a measure of an institution’s commitment to teaching (HEA, 2009) Even so, the effectiveness of professional development programs has been contested because access to these programs can be limited for part-time and casual teachers (Anderson, 2007) While universities rarely exclude their part-time and limited-term staff from professional development programs, few pay additional salary costs to ensure attendance With increasing numbers of academic staff in limited-term positions, this presents a serious challenge to universities seeking teaching excellence (Probert, 2013) 384  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Principle 3: Devolve Leadership of Learning and Teaching The third principle for action concerns leadership itself McInnes et al (2012) maintain that this principle encompasses: ordered flexibility in the approach to implementation; aligning faculty and departmental leadership of teaching with institutional goals; building a critical mass of leaders of learning and teaching; and promoting collaborative approaches to the improvement of learning and teaching This section of the chapter discusses leadership under four headings: Leaders and managers; teaching and learning leaders; formal and informal leadership; and whole-of-university change leadership Leaders and Managers There is a distinction between leadership and management (Marshall et al., 2011) In the domain of teaching and learning, management is concerned with essential functions such as the allocation of teachers and students to classes, employment of casual teachers and tutors, and the collection and reporting of assignments and grades In contrast, leadership is normally described in terms of vision: ‘leaders are said to be transformative – that is, they enable people not just to the same things better, but to better things, at a different level’ (Blackmore 2012, p 270) Leadership is important because, as Scott et al (2008, p xiii) emphasized, ‘Change does not just happen – it must be led, and led deftly’ Teaching and learning managers and leaders find their tasks challenging because there is a perceived antithesis between the academic collegiality normal to a university context and some of the teaching quality assurance processes described in this chapter For example, Coady (2000, p 10) refers to corporate university leaders as ‘myopics’, who think that the purpose of ‘tertiary training is to grind out graduates at a certain rate for consumption by society’ This antithesis makes leadership challenging as Scott, Coates and Anderson (2008, p 10), found The learning leaders they interviewed, described their task of leading as ‘Getting butterflies into formation’ and ‘Trying to drive a nail into a wall of blancmange – little resistance but no result’ Who Are the Teaching and Learning Leaders? Most universities now have senior leaders and managers whose role is focused on students and their learning In addition, new leadership roles have emerged with specific responsibilities for the quality of teaching and learning There are now Deputy Vice-Chancellors (Vice Presidents) ‘Education’ and/or ‘Quality’ and, reporting to them, Pro Vice-Chancellors (Education/Teaching and Learning), who have university-wide responsibility related to teaching, students and/or the curriculum Similarly, in the organisational structure of faculties, schools, or departments there are roles such as Associate Deans (Teaching and Learning) as well as Curriculum Coordinators The expertise and knowledge about teaching and learning of people in these positions is variable and sometimes limited (West et al., 2011) This may be because, as Gibbs, Knapper and Pininnin (2009) found, the skills required for teaching leadership are distinct from formal departmental leadership Specific programs for curriculum coordinators have been developed in Australia (see Jones et al., 2009; D’Agostino & O’Brien, 2009; Trivett, et al., 2011; LeFoe et al., 2011) Inter alia, these focus on matters such as reflective practice, leadership theory, communication skills, pedagogy, curriculum design, assessment and evaluation The principles on which they are based are adapted here from Jones et al 385  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning (2009) as a model for the development of courses elsewhere In general, such courses are not generic Rather, they are tailored to local contexts and specific disciplines Accordingly, they are: • • • • • • Role specific, practice based, authentic and custom-made Based on peer learning, providing opportunities for dialogue, networking and shared experiences Self-guided Supported through coaching and mentoring Linked to annual performance review systems Organized in terms of skill development such as team building, conflict resolution, and communication Many universities provide teaching and learning leadership through academic development units, otherwise known as teaching and learning centres These advise upwards to senior managers and work outwards across faculties and departments to support and implement university teaching policies and plans Teaching and learning centres variously include functions such as student learning support, information and learning technology specialists, instructional design, student feedback and evaluation functions, and the coordination of teaching excellence initiatives such as teaching grants and awards Teaching and learning centres are typically responsible for professional development, in particular induction to teaching programs and foundation courses such as Graduate Certificates in Tertiary Teaching Their websites contain self-help information and best practice exemplars It is customary to deploy instructional or educational designers to assist academics with curriculum development and assessment alignment (Angelo, 2012) Empowering community of practice strategies have emerged to create opportunities for university teachers to engage with their own immediate issues (Cox 2006; McDonald et al 2012) A model of what academic development units normally may be gleaned from the benchmarking standards developed by the Council of Australian Directors of Academic Development (CADAD) Their Benchmarks identify eight strategic domains of leadership and management normally seen in teaching and learning centres Strategy, policy and governance Quality of learning and teaching Scholarship of teaching and learning Professional development Credit-bearing programs in higher education Curriculum development Engagement Academic development unit effectiveness Similar benchmarks prevail in the domain of learning technology services: the ACODE Benchmarks for Technology Enhanced Learning (2014) capture the following eight dimensions of leadership and management that are normally required to promote online and blended learning: 386 Institution-wide policy and governance for technology enhanced learning Planning for institution-wide quality improvement of technology enhanced learning Information technology systems, services and support for technology enhanced learning The application of technology enhanced learning services  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning about the nature and outcomes of effective teaching; ensuring that faculty deans and heads of departments acknowledge and reward the teaching function of individuals and academic units; linking formal rewards such as promotion, awards, and financial incentives to teaching excellence and the performance of academic units; aligning professional development opportunities with strategic learning and teaching goals; and promoting the university as a successful teaching institution In the early 1990s, in some western countries, there was a growing realisation that the reward and recognition systems in universities favoured research over teaching, particularly in regard to promotion and tenure There was an evident need to redress the balance Chalmers (2011) described the three common mechanisms that were then established to reward and recognize teaching as: (1) annual awards for good teaching; (2) offering programs (grants and professional development) to improve teaching; and (3) giving teaching more importance among the criteria for evaluating staff for performance review and promotion Awards for Teaching Awards for teaching in universities were introduced to signal that teaching is valued (Jackson, 2006; Skelton, 2004) The UK national teaching fellowships were established in 2000 (Gosling, 2004) Many North American universities already had established teaching awards (El-Khawas, 1996), with national teaching awards and fellowships conferred by organisations such as the Carnegie Foundation, 3M and professional associations In the UK and Australia, the introduction of national awards schemes has been credited with prompting universities, that previously had no teaching awards schemes, to establish their own at institutional level (Chalmers & Thomson, 2008) Awards normally take the form of one-off rewards of a single payment that can be spent on approved activities such as professional development, conference attendance, and computer equipment (Jackson, 2006) While the intent of awards was not only to recognize but to further encourage teaching excellence, their one-off nature has been challenged (Frame et al., 2006; Young, 2006; Menges, 1996) because other career incentives, such as promotion and tenure, are of a continuing nature, with salary and increments that continue throughout an academic career Further, while awards were established with the best of intentions, and they can enhance individual careers, there is little evidence that these have contributed to addressing the prestige imbalance between teaching and research (Huber, 2004; HEA, 2009; Chalmers, 2011) The best that can be said, at this stage, is that such awards have demonstrated an investment in the domain of teaching and learning that have provided incentives to individuals and to teaching teams Tenure and Promotion Over the last three decades, there has been a major shift in the commitment of universities to improve tenure and promotion systems, and to redefine and expand the definition of university work to recognize teaching (Braxton et al., 2006; Diamond, 2002; Paulsen & Feldman, 2006) This has resulted in the development of teaching criteria and standards on which to make decisions about tenure and promotion The Australia University Teaching Criteria and Standards (AUTCAS) project (Chalmers et al., 2014), made significant progress in clarifying teaching criteria and evidence to assist senior leaders to make judgments about teaching performance It also clarified expectations for teachers, thereby helping them to engage in the development of their own teaching capacity and career progression 389  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning While initiatives such as AUTCAS signal substantial progress towards recognizing and rewarding teaching, there is still much that needs to be done because the evidence suggests that rewards continue to be directed to those engaged in discipline-based research and publications rather than to excellent teachers (Chalmers, 2011) Cashmore et al (2013) documented the progress made in UK universities in regard to the reward and recognition of teaching While they found general progress, there remained substantial variation between different types of universities and within disciplines Of greatest concern was the limited progress made in embedding teaching criteria and establishing standards in institutional systems and policies, and the persistent skepticism among academic teachers who thought that their teaching contributions would not be recognized and rewarded with career progression (European Union, 2013; Locke, 2014) These trends are also evident in Australia, where the extent to which teaching performance standards are detailed, embedded and enacted in policy, processes and systems remains highly variable (Chalmers et al., 2014) With increased focus on gaining research funding and the status it confers, especially in international university rankings, the separation of those who research and those who teach remains distinct with increasing numbers of teaching-only and research-only positions (Probert, 2013; Trowler et al., 2005) The language used in workload policy and associated guidelines highlights this role separation, with universities ‘freeing up’ the time of researchers by allocating more teaching to the ‘non-research’ staff Hardre and Cox (2008, p 19) found that academic staff identified as being insufficiently research productive were assigned increased teaching loads, while those who were sufficiently productive were ‘spared’ increased teaching loads The clear and consistent message is that successful academics disciplinary research while less successful academics teach Peer Review Peer review is increasingly specified by institutions and national organisations to support claims for teaching quality It has been encouraged by universities and promoted through national projects This has given rise to a substantial literature that includes good practice examples The majority of the projects have focused on peer review for teacher development within an institution (Harris et al., 2008; Nash & Barnard et al., 2014; Sachs et al., 2013) Two Australian projects focused on peer review in online teaching contexts (McKenzie et al., 2011; Wood et al., 2011) Crisp and colleagues (2009) established a project on ‘Peer Review of Teaching for Promotion Purposes’ It incorporated teacher observation and external peer review of documented evidence They concluded that ‘summative peer review of teaching has the ability to improve both the status and the quality of teaching at tertiary level, by encouraging the promotion of exceptional teachers and academics engaged in the scholarship of teaching at all levels’ (2009, p 5) Peer review of teaching has now been expanded beyond an emphasis on classroom observations to different aspects of teaching For example, the University of Western Australia recommends that ten dimensions of teaching are suitable for peer review, only one of which is observation of classroom practice These include course and unit content; learning materials and resources; assessment practices; management; leadership roles; evaluation of teaching; and scholarship related to teaching and postgraduate supervision Top-down peer review initiatives are typically unsuccessful because they are seen as surveillance The preferred approach is to engage staff in their own career enhancing peer review processes (Sachs & Parcell, 2014) 390  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Rewarding Academic Units and Departments Probert (2015) argues that a focus on disciplines and departments is critical if quality in teaching and learning is to be sustained For example, the University of Sydney was one of the first Australian universities to allocate a fund to reward departments that demonstrated excellent teaching evidenced by a number of indicators including: scores from student satisfaction surveys; number of academics who had completed the Graduate Certificate of Tertiary Teaching; attendance at and contribution to teacher development courses; competitive teaching grants and publication in teaching journals Those departments that did well on these indicators received additional funding (Asmar, 2002) Principle 5: Involve Students The fifth and final principle for action to promote teaching and learning relates to students McInnes et al (2012, p 35-37) maintain that this principle encompasses: reviewing the relationship between all aspects of university life contributing to, or hindering, student engagement and designing systems that promote student involvement in academic quality processes; seeking student advice to improve teaching, curriculum and the student experience; and providing incentives for faculty deans and heads of departments to encourage students to engage in learning communities This section of the chapter will explore student involvement and engagement noting the student learning journey planning framework, curriculum issues, academic skills support and student involvement in governance Student Learning Journey A student learning journey (SLJ) planning framework begins with a review of the relationship between all aspects of university life that contribute to, or hinder, student engagement and learning It offers a ‘joined-up’ approach focused on integrated policies, plans and services for students from pre-entry to alumni This approach was described in Hunt and Peach’s case study (2009, p 10), which showed ‘that support for students’ learning moves beyond pedagogy and curriculum to include matters such as marketing, recruitment, enrolment, timetabling and graduation’ Their case study reveals how a university’s strategic vision, goals focused on student learning, holistic SLJ planning, targeted projects (see Figure 1), and a renewed policy framework can dissolve the boundaries between the academic and administrative functions of a university A holistic planning framework incorporating the academic and administrative functions of a university not only involves students, it is for and about them It also has import for the strategic objectives of universities seeking to improve their retention rates because it addresses key transition points for students when they are at increased risk of dropping-out of university For example, many universities now respond to students’ needs at point of entry to university through orientation programs that facilitate students’ engagement with faculties, departments and support services, such as the library and technical assistance (Kift, 2009) 391  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Student Involvement Through the Curriculum The greatest potential for student involvement is through their studies, simply because this is the main reason they attend university Curriculum quality is, therefore, a core function of policy and planning processes as Angelo (2012 p 95) noted in his account of backwards curriculum design: In most universities, academic policies, procedures and guidelines – and the available resources – set the context and practical limits within which subject design choices can be made For that reason, it is critical to become familiar with relevant policies, procedures, guidelines and teaching and learning resources The purpose of planning is to ensure that quality learning opportunities are locked into curricula, as Angelo (2012, p 110) observed: ‘Simply put, a well-designed learning-centred curriculum is one that helps all willing and able students achieve and demonstrate the expected standard of learning more effectively, efficiently and successfully than they could on their own’ A specific example of engaging students through the curriculum may be found in Kift’s (2009) articulation of six First Year Curriculum Principles that are supportive of first year learning engagement, success, and retention These are: Transition Diversity Design Engagement Assessment Evaluation and monitoring Kift’s own university initiated change to enhance the first year learning experience based on these principles In particular, new assessment policy and protocols were introduced to ensure, among other things, that the necessary skills and content knowledge needed to complete an assignment are taught or practiced to maximise students’ opportunities for success Further, first year university teachers were required to facilitate early assessment so that weak students might be monitored and assisted to ensure that they achieve success at university According to Brown and Race (2012, p 91): Assessment is the engine that drives student learning … assessment is the basis of the qualifications students want to take away from higher education as their passport to the rest of their careers Nothing you for your students is more important than assessing their learning fairly, openly and in a wellplanned way Assessment in university degree programs can be formative – that is, part of the process of learning Or it can be summative, meaning that it is an evaluation of the extent to which students have learned Either way, as Brown and Race (2012) argue, assessment is integral to student learning and engagement It is now common practice to use Biggs’ (1999) principles of constructive alignment to ensure strong alignment between learning objectives, teaching and learning activities, student assessment, marking 392  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning schema, graduate skills, and learning outcomes The leadership and management task is to ensure that policies, procedures and course approval processes support curriculum alignment Student Support Services Success in assignments is dependent on the extent to which students have acquired necessary academic skills Some (Chalmers & Fuller, 1996; Northedge 2005) argue that these should be taught in and through the curriculum rather than through services outside the curriculum Northedge (2005, p 13) reasons that separate support services for academic skills risk alienating rather than involving students because they may be seen as remedial support for ‘weak’ students: so that non-traditional students are effectively treated as ‘charity’ cases, rescued from ignorance The existing edifice of elite education is simply extended by adding a large paupers’ wing ‘Proper’ students continue to define the norms, while the rest tag along behind Yet such a response fails to meet the underlying aims of broadening education Instead, it creates an underclass of students, who become alienated from the knowledge dangled beyond their reach and eventually emerge from their encounter with education with a sense of personal inadequacy rather than empowerment Assumptions about student support can no longer be based on traditional notions of on-campus students in full-time study The advent of learning technologies, in particular learning management systems, has given rise to ‘any place any time’ learning and the need for student support to be aligned accordingly For example, Hunt and Sankey (2013, p 274) described the development of a virtual learning centre for off-campus and distance education students which deployed: virtual classroom technologies for individual or small group consultations Other tools include, phone, email, online chat, online workshops and peer assisted learning sessions - also facilitated online More recently, online student mentors have been established along with an academic technology advocate position to help students unfamiliar with online learning technologies Whether online or on-campus, student support services are normally tailored to students’ diverse needs For example, international students and students who are not native speakers of the local language may require special language assistance Students living with disability may need large text reading material, audio loops, or mobility assistance Particular religious groups have need of prayer rooms, and students who are parents will need child care services whilst students from low socio-economic backgrounds may be in need of scholarships Given these diverse needs, some universities have developed separate equity and diversity services to ensure that all students are fully supported in their learning journeys Student Involvement in Evaluation Student involvement in the development and evaluation of curricula normally occurs through completion of student feedback surveys Most universities now have formal student feedback processes, in many cases, online However, as Hunt and Sankey (2013) argue, genuine quality improvement arises not from the data collection but from ‘closing the loop’ Their case study shows how all relevant data, such as grade distributions, student retention rates, and student feedback, were collated and fed back 393  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning to staff teaching a specific degree program Teaching teams should normally meet at least once a year to examine and to respond to the data and to report on what they have done to address any emergent problems The two key points are that: Quality is locked-in to the accountability processes Academics are resourced with one-stop-shop data about the degree programs they teach Hunt and Sankey (2013, p 274) describe ‘closing the loop’ as an ‘empowering process because staff have considerable control This is an improvement on surveillance models of course review [because it] serves to support reflective practice’ Student involvement in review processes can include discussion of previous student feedback at the start of subsequent courses and explanations of what has been done to ameliorate students’ learning opportunities In some cases, universities provide examples of student feedback in their online description of courses Student Involvement in Governance and Quality Some universities have developed student charters that articulate what students might expect from their university, for example, participation in decision-making In addition, it is customary for universities to have policies and formal committee structures that ensure student involvement in governance Often, but not necessarily, their participation is brokered through student guilds, sometimes known as unions In contrast, students in some Swedish universities have created their own processes of engagement through largely autonomous, self-funded programs to support fellow students in their study and personal development For example, students at Uppsala University have initiated several ongoing volunteering, peer and study support programs and offer an accredited subject that develops students’ leadership capacity These initiatives are supported by the university senior leadership and documented and published in the university’s quality enhancement program (personal communication, 2013) CONCLUSION: ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS This book characterizes universities in terms of ‘domains of support services’, and this chapter has explored the specific domain of teaching and learning The change leadership and management issues raised in the chapter are organized in terms of McInnes, Ramsden and Maconachie’s (2012) five principles for action to enhance university teaching and learning The specific issues raised in the context of each principle were selected to present best practice from around the world The structure of the chapter, therefore, offers a range of approaches and change leadership and management strategies that can be tailored to the needs of a particular university The purpose of using this framework is to show that services to support teaching and learning should be joined-up to provide a supportive context for teaching and learning excellence The principles, and strategies discussed in this chapter are as follows Principle 1: Shape the strategic vision that puts student learning and student experience at its core ◦◦ Strategic visions ◦◦ Joined-up policies and plans ◦◦ Teaching and learning projects 394  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Principle 2: Inspire and enable excellence ◦◦ Secure financial support ◦◦ Build an evidence base ◦◦ Enable staff engagement Principle 3: Devolve leadership of learning and teaching ◦◦ Leaders and managers ◦◦ Teaching and learning leaders ◦◦ Formal and informal leadership ◦◦ Whole-of-university change leadership Principle 4: Reward, recognize and develop teaching ◦◦ Awards for teaching ◦◦ Tenure and promotion ◦◦ Peer review ◦◦ Rewards for academic units and departments Principle 5: Involve students ◦◦ Student learning journey ◦◦ Student involvement through the curriculum ◦◦ Student support services ◦◦ Student involvement in evaluation ◦◦ Student involvement in governance and quality The promotion of excellent teaching and learning is a continuous cycle of leadership, decision-making and quality improvement This is based on strategic visions for teaching and learning that incorporate what the curriculum might look like in a particular university Examples include work-integrated learning; problem-based learning; research-led and inclusive curricula; as well as curricula that facilitate transition, such as the first-year curriculum Professional development opportunities, notably foundation of teaching courses and graduate certificates in university teaching, are essential to the promotion and development of excellent teaching, as is the establishment of reward systems that incorporate awards, fellowships, grants and career enhancing opportunities for promotion based on teaching excellence An emerging direction is the establishment of reward systems for academic units or departments Ultimately, sustainable outcomes will be achieved through reflective practice at all levels of a university, examples of which include closing the loop on evaluation processes and peer review This chapter also noted the different forms of leadership that may be required in complex university contexts, with particular reference to the importance of formal, informal and distributed leadership Ultimately, the push and pull drivers of change selected and managed by each university will determine the outcomes of local efforts to enhance university teaching and learning REFERENCES Anderson, V (2007) Contingent and marginalized: Academic development and part-time teachers The International Journal for Academic Development, 12(2), 111–121 doi:10.1080/13601440701604914 395  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Angelo, T (2012) Designing subjects for learning: Practical, research-based principles and guidelines In L Hunt & D Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 93–111) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Asmar, C (2002) Strategies to enhance learning and teaching in a research-extensive university The International Journal for Academic Development, 7(1), 18–30 doi:10.1080/13601440210156448 Australasian Council on Open, Distance and e-Learning (ACODE) (2014) Benchmarks for technology enhanced learning Retrieved from http://www.acode.edu.au/ Bamber, V., Saunders, M., Trowler, P., & Knight, P (2009) Enhancing learning, teaching, assessment and curriculum in higher education Maidenhead: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press Barr, R B., & Tagg, J (1995) From teaching to learning — a new paradigm for undergraduate education Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning., 27(6), 12–26 doi:10.1080/00091383.1995.10544672 Biggs, J (1999) Teaching for quality learning at university Berkshire: Society for Research into Higher Education: Open University Press Blackmore, P (2012) Leadership in teaching In L Hunt, & D Chalmers, D (Eds), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 268-281) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Bologna Process (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/ Braxton, J M., Luckey, T M Jr, & Helland, P A (2006) Ideal and actual value patterns towards domains of scholarship in three types of colleges and universities New Directions for Institutional Research, 1(29), 67–76 doi:10.1002/ir.172 Brodie, L (2012) Problem-based learning In L Hunt, & D Chalmers, D (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 147-165) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Brown, S., & Race, P (2012) Using effective assessment to promote learning In L Hunt & D Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 74–91) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/ Cashmore, A., Cane, C., & Cane, R (2013) Rebalancing promotion in the HE sector: Is teaching excellence being rewarded? York: HEA Chalmers, D (2007) A review of Australian and international quality systems and indicators of learning and teaching V1.2 Chalmers, D (2008) Indicators of university teaching and learning quality Chalmers, D (2011) Progress and challenges to the recognition and reward of the scholarship of teaching in higher education Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 25–38 doi:10.1080/0729 4360.2011.536970 396  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Chalmers, D., Cummings, R., Stoney, S., Tucker, B., Elliott, S., Wicking, R., & Jorre de St Jorre, T (2014) Australian university teaching criteria and standards project Retrieved from http://uniteachingcriteria.edu.au/project/reports/ Chalmers, D., & Fuller, R (1996) Teaching for learning at university London: Kogan Page Publishers Chalmers, D., & Gardiner, D (2015) An evaluation framework for identifying the effectiveness and impact of academic teacher development programmes Studies in Educational Evaluation, 46(Sept), 81–91 doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2015.02.002 Chalmers, D., & Thomson, K (2008) Snapshot of teaching and learning practice in Australian universities Retrieved from http://www.catl.uwa.edu.au/projects/tqi Charles Darwin University Strategic Plan 2012-2014 (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.cdu.edu.au/ sites/default/files/CDU_Strategic_Plan_2012-14_web.pdf Coady, T (Ed.), (2000) Why universities matter St Leonards: Allen and Unwin Council of Australian Directors of Academic Development (CADAD) Benchmarking performance of academic development units in Australian universities Retrieved from http://www.cadad.edu.au/pluginfile.php/401/course/ section/78/Benchmarking_Report.pdf Cox, M D (2006) Phases in the development of a change model: Communities of practice as change agents in higher education In L Hunt, A Bromage, & B Tomkinson (Eds.), The realities of change in higher education: Interventions to promote learning and teaching (pp 64–77) London, UK: Routledge Crisp, G., Sadler, R., Krause, K., Buckridge, M., Wills, S., Brown, C., Brougham, B (2009) Peer review of teaching for promotion purposes: A project to develop and implement a pilot program of peer review of teaching at four Australian universities Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-peerreview-teaching-adelaide-2009 D’Agostino, F., & O’Brien, M (2009) Closing the gap in curriculum development leadership Diamond, R M (2002) Defining scholarship for the twenty-first century New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 90(Summer), 73–79 El- Khawas E (1996) Campus trends: Adjusting to new realities Higher Education Panel Report, 86 Washington, DC: American Council on Education European Union (2013, June) High level group on the modernisation of higher education Report to the European Commission on improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union Ewell, P T (2008) No correlation: Musings on some myths about quality Change, 40(6), 8–13 doi:10.3200/CHNG.40.6.8-13 Frame, P., Johnson, M., & Rosie, A (2006) Reward or award? Reflections on the initial experiences of winners of a National Teaching Fellowship Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(4), 409–419 doi:10.1080/14703290600974016 397  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Fullan, M., & Scott, G (2009) Turnaround leadership for higher education San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass Garnett, J (2012) Authentic work integrated learning In L Hunt & D Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 165–180) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Gibbs, G (2010) Dimensions of quality Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/ files/dimensions_of_quality.pd Gibbs, G., Knapper, C., & Piccinin, S (2009) Departmental leadership of teaching in research intensive environments Research and Development Series London: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education Gosling, D (2004) The impact of a national policy to enhance teaching quality and the status, England, the United Kingdom Quality Assurance in Education, 12(3), 136–149 doi:10.1108/09684880410548762 Hardre, P., & Cox, M (2008) Evaluating faculty work: Expectations and standards of faculty performance in research universities Research Papers in Education, 24(4), 383–419 doi:10.1080/02671520802348590 Harris, K.-L., Farrell, K., Bell, M., Devlin, M., & James, R (2008) Peer review of teaching in Australian higher education: A handbook to support institutions in developing an embedding effective policies and practices Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-peer-review-of-teaching-melbourne-2009 Hicks, M., Smigiel, H., Wilson, G., & Luzeckyj, A (2010) PATHE Preparing academics to teach in higher education Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-preparing-academics-teach-highereducation-unisa-2010 Higher Education Academy (HEA) (2009) Reward and recognition of teaching in higher education Interim report Leicester, UK: Higher Education Academy and GENIE Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, University of Leicester Higher Education Academy (HEA) (nd) Mission, vision and values Retrieved from https://www heacademy.ac.uk/about-hea/mission-vision-and-values Higher Education (HEA) (2014) Fellowships Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/recognitionaccreditation/hea-fellowships Higher Education Institutional Research in the UK and Ireland (HEIRNETWORK) Retrieved from http://www.heirnetwork.org.uk/ Holt, D., Bennett, L., Challis, D., and colleagues (2014) Strategic leadership for institutional teaching and learning centres: Developing a model for the 21st century Huber, M T (2004) Balancing acts: The scholarship of teaching and learning in academic careers Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Hunt, L (2012) Report on the audit of the OLT project: Building distributed leadership in designing and implementing a quality management framework for online learning environments Retrieved rom http://www.olt.gov.au/project-building-distributed-leadership-designing-and-implementing-qualitymanagement-framework-onli 398  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Hunt, L., Huijser, H., & Sankey, M (2011) Learning spaces for the digital age: Blending space with pedagogy In M Keppell., K Souter, & M Riddle (Eds.), Physical and virtual learning spaces in higher education: Concepts for the modern learning environment (pp 182–197) Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global Hunt, L., & Peach, N (2009) Planning for a sustainable academic future In iPED Research Network (Eds.), Academic futures: Inquiries into higher education and pedagogy (pp 1-14) Newcastle-uponTyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing Hunt, L., & Sankey, M (2013) Getting the context right for quality teaching and learning In D Salter (Ed.), Cases on quality teaching practice in the social sciences (pp 261–279) Hershey, PA: IGI Global doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-3661-3.ch016 Jackson, M (2006) Great classroom teaching and more: Awards for outstanding teaching evaluated International Journal of Educational Management, 20(4), 261–278 doi:10.1108/09513540610665388 Jenkins, A., & Healey, M (2012) Research-led undergraduate curricula In L Hunt & D Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 128–144) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Jones, S., Ladyshewsky, R., Oliver, B., & Flavell, H (2009) Leading courses: Academic leadership for course coordinators Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/project-building-academic-leadershipcapability-cut-2006 Kift, S (2009) Articulating a transition pedagogy to scaffold and to enhance the first year student learning experience in Australian higher education Retrieved from http://fyhe.com.au/ Krause, K (2012) A quality approach to university teaching In L Hunt & D Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 235–252) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press LeFoe, G., Parrish, D., Malfroy, J., McKenzie, J., & Ryan, Y (2011) Subject coordinators: Leading professional development for sessional staff Retrieved from http://www.cadad.edu.au/pluginfile.php/401/ course/section/100/ALTC_report_23-5v2.pdf Locke, W (2014) Shifting academic careers: Implications for enhancing professionalism in teaching and supporting learning York: HEA Macfarlane, B (2011) Intellectual leadership in higher education London: Routledge Malaysian Qualification Agency Retrieved from http://www.mqa.gov.my/ Marshall, S., Orrell, J., Cameron, A., Bosanquet, A., & Thomas, S (2011) Leading and managing learning and teaching in higher education Higher Education Research & Development, 30(2), 87–103 doi :10.1080/07294360.2010.512631 McDonald, J., Nagy, J., Star, C., Burch, T., Cox, M D., & Margetts, F (2012) Identifying and building the leadership capacity of community of practice facilitators Learning Communities Journal, 4, 63–84 McInnes, C., Ramsden, P., & Maconachie, D (2012) A handbook for executive leadership of learning and teaching in higher education Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/executive-leadership-learningteaching-higher-education-2012 399  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning McKenzie, J., Pelliccione, L., Cottman, C., Quinn, D., Allan, G., & Parker, N (2011) Peer review in online and blended learning environments Retrieved from http://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/ final-report.pdf McKinnon, K R., Walker, S J., & Davis, D (2000) Benchmarking: A manual for Australian universities Retrieved from http://science.uniserve.edu.au/courses/benchmarking/benchmarking_manual.pdf Menges, R J (1996) Awards to individuals: In honoring exemplary teaching New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 65(Spring), 3–10 doi:10.1002/tl.37219966504 Nash, R., Bolt, S., Barnard, A., Rochester, S., Mcevoy, K., Shannon, S., & Philip, R (2014) Developing a culture of peer review of teaching through a distributive leadership approach Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/project-developing-culture-peer-review-teaching-through-distributive-leadershipapproach-2011 Northedge, A (2005) Rethinking teaching in the context of diversity: Supporting social participation in a knowledge community In G Shaw (Ed.), Tertiary teaching and learning: Dealing with diversity Darwin: Charles Darwin University Press Office for Learning and Teaching (n d.) Awards Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/awards Organisation for Economic Development (OECD) Education at a glance Retrieved from http://www oecd.org/education/eag.htm Partridge, L., Hunt, L., & Goody A (2013) Future-proofing university teaching: An Australian case study of postgraduate teacher preparation Practice and Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 8(2), 112-131 Paulsen, M B., & Feldman, K A (2006) Exploring the dimensions of the scholarship of teaching and learning: Analytics for an emerging literature New Directions for Institutional Research, 129(Spring), 21–36 doi:10.1002/ir.169 Postereff, L., Lindblom-Ylanne, S., & Nevgi, A (2007) The effect of pedagogical training on teacher education Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 557–571 doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.013 Probert, B (2013) Teaching-focused academic appointments in Australian universities: Recognition, specialisation, or stratification Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-teaching-focusedacademic-appointment Probert, B (2014) Why scholarship matters in higher education? Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov au/resource-why-scholarship-matters-higher-education-2014 Probert, B (2015) The quality of Australia’s higher education system: How might it be defined, improved and assured Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-why-scholarship-matters-highereducation-2014 QAA Subject benchmark statements (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standardsand-quality/the-quality-code/subject-benchmark-statements QS World University Rankings (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.topuniversities.com/ 400  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Ramsden, P (1998) Managing the effective university Higher Education Research & Development, 17(3), 347–370 doi:10.1080/0729436980170307 Reeves, T C., & Reeves, P M (2012) Designing online and blended learning In L Hunt & D Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 112–127) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Sachs, J., & Parcell, M (2014) Peer review of learning and teaching in higher education: International perspectives London: Springer doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7639-5 Sachs, J., Parsell, M., Ambler, T., Cassidy, S., Homewood, J., Solomonides, I., du Toit, P (2013) Social, communicative and interpersonal leadership in the context of peer review Retrieved from http:// www.olt.gov.au/project-social-communicative-interpersonal-leadership-macquarie-2009 Sankey, M., & Hunt, L (2014) Flipped university classrooms: Using technology to enable sound pedagogy Journal of Cases on Information Technology, 16(2), 26–38 doi:10.4018/jcit.2014040103 Scott, G (2005) Accessing the student voice: Using CEQuery to identify what retains students and promotes engagement in productive learning in Australian higher education Retrieved from http://www uws.edu.au/ data/assets/pdf_file/0010/63955/HEIPCEQueryFinal_v2_1st_Feb_06.pdf Scott, G (2008) University student engagement and satisfaction with learning and teaching Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-university-student-engagement-scott-uws-2008 Scott, G., Coates, H., & Anderson, M (2008) Learning leaders in times of change: Academic leadership capabilities for Australian higher education Retrieved Senge, P (2006) The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organisation New York: Doubleday Skelton, A (2004) Understanding ‘teaching excellence’ in higher education: A critical evaluation of the National Teaching Fellowships Scheme Studies in Higher Education, 29(4), 451–468 doi:10.1080/0307507042000236362 Smigiel, H., Pannan, L., Szorenyi-Reischi, N., & Donnan P (2011) Sustaining distributive leadership in learning and teaching: Cascade and perpetual effectiveness of the faculty scholar model Stewart, M (2012) Understanding learning: Theories and critique In L Hunt & D Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach (pp 3–20) Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press Tagg, J (2003) The learning paradigm college Bolton: Anker The Department of Education and Training (2015) Retrieved from https://ministers.education.gov.au/ pyne/education-exports-hit-record-176-billion The Indian National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) (n d.) Retrieved from http:// www.naac.gov.in/ The International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.inqaahe.org/index.php 401  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning The Times Higher Education World University Rankings (n d.) Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/ Trivett, N., Lines, R., Brown, N., Warr, K., Flello, J., Kandlbinder, P., & McKenzie, J (2011) Embedding and sustaining leadership development for curriculum leaders through tailored support during curriculum review and renewal Trowler, P., Fanghanel, J., & Wareham, T (2005) Freeing the chi of change: The Higher Education Academy and enhancing teaching and learning in higher education Studies in Higher Education, 30(4), 427–444 doi:10.1080/03075070500160111 Tuning Educational Structures in Europe (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.unideusto.org/tuningeu/ UK Professional Standards Framework (n d.) Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/recognitionaccreditation/uk-professional-standards-framework-ukpsf USQ Strategic Plan 2013-2015 (n d.) Retrieved from http://www.usq.edu.au/about-usq/about-us/ plans-reports/strategic-plan West, D., Vilkinas, T., & Ladyshewsky, R (2011) Heads of school leadership – effective relationships as the cornerstone of teaching and learning improvement Retrieved, from http://www.olt.gov.au/resourceheads-school-leadership-effective-relationships-cornerstone-teaching-and-learning-improveme Wood, D., Freney, M., Friedel, M., Lamb, R., Scutter, S., Wache, D., & Wache, K (2011) Peer review of online teaching and learning Retrieved from http://www.communitywebs.org/peer_review/PP7334%20 Wood%20UniSA%20Final%20Report%20Part%201%20-%20FINAL.pdf Young, P (2006) Out of balance: Lecturers’ perceptions of differential status and rewards in relation to teaching and research Teaching in Higher Education, 11(2), 191–202 doi:10.1080/13562510500527727 KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Academic Development: Sometimes referred to as educational or professional development, it involves academic and professional staff in planned activities to enhance all dimensions of teaching, learning and scholarship in universities Change Leadership: Processes that facilitate positive change in an organisation It involves both vision and strategies to enable an organisation to better things Distributed Leadership: Collegial and collaborative approaches to change that build on the expertise and needs of all those involved in advancing the vision of an organisation Higher Education Teaching Awards: Monetary awards that confer prestige and career enhancement for those who can demonstrate excellence in university teaching in accordance with specified criteria and standards, normally including evidence of peer review Quality: Qualitative and quantitative measurement of a range of input, process, output and outcome indicators to inform a reflective cycle of benchmarking and evidence-based action aimed at improvement 402  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning Student Learning Journey: A holistic, student-centered, cross-organisational planning framework that ensures connectedness between a university’s responses to students needs at relevant points in their progress towards obtaining a university qualification University Learning: Processes through which students demonstrate their mastery of the theories, evidence-base and skills associated with a discipline as well as a university’s required graduate attributes University Teaching: A range of adult learning strategies to engage students actively in: discipline based studies; the acquisition of graduate attributes; life-long learning; and critical and creative thinking 403 ... Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning ance with teaching and learning standards These are normally monitored by external... between learning objectives, teaching and learning activities, student assessment, marking 392  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning. .. retention rates, and student feedback, were collated and fed back 393  Change Leadership, Management and Strategies to Promote Quality University Teaching and Learning to staff teaching a specific