‘Transformative’: the threshold learning outcomes for science

Madeleine Schultz; Daniel C. Southam; Mark Buntine; Kay Colthorpe; Susan Howitt; Elizabeth Johnson; Susan Jones; Jo-Anne Kelder; Sally Kift; Wendy A. Loughlin; Glennys A. O’Brien; Simon Pyke; John Rice; Susan Rowland; Robyn Yucel

doi:10.1071/CH23137

RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)

Previous Contents Vol 76(12)

‘Transformative’: the threshold learning outcomes for science

Madeleine Schultz

^A ^* , Daniel C. Southam

^B ^* , Mark Buntine ^B , Kay Colthorpe ^C , Susan Howitt ^D , Elizabeth Johnson ^E , Susan Jones ^F , Jo-Anne Kelder ^F , Sally Kift ^G , Wendy A. Loughlin

^H , Glennys A. O’Brien ^I , Simon Pyke

^J , John Rice ^K , Susan Rowland ^L and Robyn Yucel ^M

+ Author Affiliations

- Author Affiliations

^A School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, 75 Pigdons Road, Waurn Ponds, Vic. 3216, Australia.

^B School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.

^C School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia.

^D Research School of Biology, Australian National University, Building number 134, Linnaeus Way, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia.

^E Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Vic. 3125, Australia.

^F College of Sciences and Engineering, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 50, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia.

^G Victoria University, PO Box 14428, Melbourne, Vic. 8001, Australia.

^H School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Qld 4111, Australia.

^I School of Chemistry and Molecular Bioscience, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenue, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia.

^J School of Physics, Chemistry and Earth Science, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.

^K School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.

^L The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.

^M Faculty of Science, Engineering and Built Environment, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Vic. 3125, Australia.

^* Correspondence to: madeleine.schultz@deakin.edu.au, d.southam@curtin.edu.au

Handling Editor: Amir Karton

Australian Journal of Chemistry 76(12) 908-920 https://doi.org/10.1071/CH23137

Submitted: 14 July 2023 Accepted: 16 August 2023 Published online: 11 September 2023

© 2023 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Abstract

The Science Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) are a consensus set of academic standards for Australian university Science education. They were developed by Prof. Brian Yates and Prof. Sue Jones, supported by Dr Jo-Anne Kelder, during 2010–2011. The co-authors of this paper are key figures in Australian Science education, and in this manuscript, we have used a reflective semi-structured interview approach to describe the process of developing the Science TLOs and consider their subsequent effect on tertiary science education in Australia. This manuscript documents Sue and Brian’s impact on science curriculum through the lenses of leadership, community and practice. We have a twofold aim: first to draw lessons for harnessing consensus in scientific communities on the value and purpose of a tertiary science education, and second to celebrate the success of these influential and impactful leaders in our community. We demonstrate how work to develop the TLOs has transformed tertiary science education in Australia.

Keywords: employability, higher education policy, leadership, Learning and Teaching Academic Standards project, science education, student‐centred, threshold learning outcomes, undergraduate curriculum.

References

1 Mezirow J. On critical reflection. Adult Educ Q 1998; 48(3): 185-198.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

2 Department of Education. Higher Education Statistics. 2022. Available at https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-statistics [Verified 6 July 2023].

3 Bradley D, Noonan P, Nugent H, Scales B. Review of Australian Higher Education: final report. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations; 2008.

4 Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Transforming Australia’s Higher Education System. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian Government; 2009.

5 Commonwealth of Australia. Higher Education Support Act 2003. 2023. Available at https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2023C00057

6 Commonwealth of Australia. Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) Act 2021. 2021. Available at https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2022C00105

7 Australian and Qualifications Framework Council. Australian qualifications framework. Adelaide, SA, Australia: Australian Government; 2013.

8 Office of the Chief Scientist. Science, technology, engineering and mathematics: Australia’s future. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian Government; 2014.

9 Commonwealth of Australia. Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011. 2022. Available at https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2022C00328

10 Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Learning and teaching academic standards project: final report. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian Learning and Teaching Council; 2011. Available at https://ltr.edu.au/resources/altc standards.finalreport.pdf

11 Gora J. Watch out! Here comes the TEQSA juggernaut. Aust Univ Rev 2010; 52(2): 76-78.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

12 Ewan C. Disciplines setting standards: the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards (LTAS) Project. In: Proceedings of AuQF2010: Quality in Uncertain Times, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia, 30 June–2 July 2010. AUQA Occasional Publications Number 22. Melbourne, Vic., Australia: Australian Universities Quality Agency; 2010.

13 Jones SM, Yates BF, Kelder JA. Learning and teaching academic standards for science: where are we now. In: Proceedings of the Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (18th annual uniserve science conference), 26–28 September 2012, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Sydney, NSW, Australia: UniServe Science; 2012. pp. 105–109. Available at https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/IISME/article/view/5904/6662

14 Jones S, Yates B, Kelder JA. Science learning and teaching academic standards statement. Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian Learning and Teaching Council; 2011.

15 Schultz M, Southam D, O’Brien G. Development, evaluation, and application of chemistry threshold learning outcomes – a curriculum framework for tertiary chemistry in Australia. Aust J Chem 2020; 73(10): 825-831.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

16 Cornwall A, Jewkes R. What is participatory research? Soc Sci Med 1995; 41(12): 1667-1676.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

17 Drever E. Using semi-structured interviews in small-scale research: a teacher’s guide. Reprint ed. Using research series/Scottish Council for Research in Education. Glasgow, UK: Scottish Council for Research in Education; 1997.

18 Etikan I, Musa SA, Alkassim RS. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Am J Theor Appl Stat 2016; 5(1): 1-4.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

19 Birt L, Scott S, Cavers D, Campbell C, Walter F. Member checking: a tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qual Health Res 2016; 26(13): 1802-1811.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

20 Adu P. A step-by-step guide to qualitative data coding. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge; 2019.

21 Al-Husseini S, El Beltagi I, Moizer J. Transformational leadership and innovation: the mediating role of knowledge sharing amongst higher education faculty. Int J Leadersh Educ 2021; 24(5): 670-693.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

22 Owusu-Agyeman Y. Transformational leadership and innovation in higher education: a participative process approach. Int J Leadersh Educ 2021; 24(5): 694-716.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

23 Smith AE, Humphreys MS. Evaluation of unsupervised semantic mapping of natural language with Leximancer concept mapping. Behav Res Methods 2006; 38(2): 262-279.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

24 Ramsden P. Learning to teach in higher education, 2nd edn. London; New York, NY, USA: RoutledgeFalmer; 2003.

25 Biggs JB, Tang CSk. Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student does, 4th edn. SRHE and Open University Press imprint. Maidenhead, UK:Society for Research into Higher Education; and New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill & Open University Press; 2011.

26 The Legal Education Associate Deans Network Australia. Resources: Good Practice Guides. 2023. Available at http://www.lawteachnetwork.org/resources.html [Verified 10 July 2023].

27 Yucel R. Good Practice Guide: Science Threshold Learning Outcome 1: Understanding Science. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Education, Skills and Employment; 2013.

28 Jones SM. Good Practice Guide: Science Threshold Learning Outcome 2: Scientific Knowledge. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Education, Skills and Employment; 2013.

29 Kirkup L, Johnson E. Good Practice Guide: Science Threshold Learning Outcome 3: Inquiry and problem-solving. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Education, Skills and Employment; 2013.

30 Colthorpe K, Rowland S, Leach J. Good Practice Guide: ScienceThreshold Learning Outcome 4: Communication. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Education, Skills and Employment; 2013.

31 Loughlin W. Good Practice Guide: Science Threshold Learning Outcome 5: Personal and professional responsibility. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Education, Skills and Employment; 2013.

32 Australian Council of Deans of Science. Science Threshold Learning Outcomes. 2023. Available at https://www. acds.edu.au/teaching-learning/science-threshold-learning-outcomes-tlos/science-tlos/ [Verified 10 July 2023].

33 Kirkup L. Inquiry-oriented learning in science: transforming practice through forging new partnerships and perspectives. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Education, Skills and Employment; 2013.

34 Schmid S, Schultz M, Priest SJ, O’Brien G, Pyke SM, Bridgeman A, et al. Assessing the assessments: development of a tool to evaluate assessment items in chemistry according to learning outcomes. In: Schultz M, Schmid S, Holme T, editors. Technology and Assessment Strategies for Improving Student Learning in Chemistry. Vol. 1235. Washington, DC, USA: American Chemical Society; 2016. pp. 225–244. 10.1021/bk-2016-1235.ch013

35 Schultz M, O’Brien G, Schmid S, Lawrie GA, Southam DC, Priest SJ, et al. Improving the assessment of transferable skills in chemistry through evaluation of current practice. In: Schultz M, Schmid S, Lawrie GA, editors. Research and Practice in Chemistry Education. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2019. pp. 255–274. 10.1007/978-981-13-6998-8_15

36 Schultz M. A personal reflection on the formation of the Chemistry Discipline Network (Guest Editorial). Aust J Educ Chem 2012; 72: 5.
| Google Scholar |

37 Schultz M, O’Brien G. The Australian Chemistry Discipline Network: a supportive community of practice in a hard science. In: McDonald J, Cater-Steel A, editors. Implementing Communities of Practice in Higher Education. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2017. pp. 501–530. 10.1007/978-981-10-2866-3_22

38 Pyke SM, O’Brien G, Yates B, Buntine MA. Chemistry Academic Standards Statement, 2nd edn. Melbourne, Vic., Australia: The Royal Australian Chemical Institute; 2022.

39 Kelder JA, Jones SM. The Science Learning and Teaching Academic Standards project: a discipline community’s response to regulatory change in Australian higher education. In: Thomas T, Levin E, Dawson P, Fraser K, Hadgraft R, editors. Research and Development in Higher Education. Vol. 38: Learning for Life and Work in a Complex World, 6–9 July 2015, Melbourne, Vic., Australia. Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australiasia; 2015.

40 Jones SM. Assessing the science knowledge of university students: perils, pitfalls and possibilities. J Learn Design 2014; 7(2): 16-27.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

41 Colthorpe K, Chen X, Zimbardi K. Peer feedback enhances a ‘journal club’ for undergraduate science students that develops oral communication and critical evaluation skills. J Learn Design 2014; 7(2): 105-119.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

42 Colthorpe K, Zimbardi K, Bugarcic A, Smith A. Progressive development of scientific literacy through assessment in inquiry-based biomedical science curricula. Int J Innov Sci Math Educ 2015; 23(5): 52-64.
| Google Scholar |

43 Mercer-Mapstone LD, Matthews KE. Student perceptions of communication skills in undergraduate science at an Australian research-intensive university. Assess Eval High Educ 2017; 42(1): 98-114.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

44 Schultz M. Teaching and assessing ethics and social responsibility in undergraduate science: a position paper. J Learn Design 2014; 7(2): 136-147.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

45 Jones S, Johnson E, Kelder JA. Discipline learning outcomes: design resource and quality assurance mechanism. Adv Scholarsh Research High Educ 2021; 2(1): 1-27.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |