Glossary

Active learning involves students doing things and thinking about what they are doing, rather than merely receiving information chosen for and delivered to them (passive learning). Active learning can include discussing, debating, critical thinking, researching, solving problems and so on. Many studies indicate that students learn better from active rather than passive learning. Active learning strategies result in meaningful learning for students, and are an effective way to:

• motivate and engage students in the topic or area of study;
• encourage them to develop self-directed learning skills;
• develop their research & critical thinking capacities;
• develop skills in problem identification and solution, or community-engaged learning to prepare them for real work contexts; and
• help them to understand the processes involved in the ongoing construction of knowledge in their field of interest.

Chickering, A. W. & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education, AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.

Approaches to learning describe what students do when they go about learning, and why they do it. The basic distinction is that in a deep approach, where students are aiming towards understanding, whereas in a surface approach, they are aiming to reproduce material in a test or exam without necessarily understanding it.

Deep learning involves the critical analysis of new ideas, linking them to already known concepts and principles, and leads to understanding and long-term retention of concepts so that they can be used for problem solving in unfamiliar contexts. Deep learning promotes understanding and application for life. In contrast, surface learning involves the tacit acceptance of information, and memorisation of isolated and unlinked facts. It generally leads to superficial retention of material for summative assessment tasks such as examinations, and does not promote understanding or long-term retention of knowledge and information.

Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

A way of thinking about various types of assessment and their function in learning is:

Assessment of learning

• Evidence of learning against intended outcomes.
• A snapshot of learning at a specific point in a course.
• Summative: Assignment, test, or exam.

Assessment as learning

• Empower and engage students in the assessment process.
• Opportunities for students to practise/perform the intended outcomes.
• Build agency, self-assessment, and goal setting skills.
• Foster self-reflection and self-managed learning.
• Improve metacognitive skills and application of knowledge.
• Usually formative: May be self-assessment questions/quizzes, practice assignments, optional review exercises.

Assessment for learning

• Gain feedback and feedforward, to evaluate and monitor progress.
• Formative: may be report or essay outlines, first drafts, to identify gaps in understanding or alter course delivery.

For more, see Rethinking Assessment: Alignment and progression.

Things that occur at a different time are asynchronous. Learning asynchronously is seen as one of the benefits of online learning as students can work collaboratively (through tools such as blogs, wikis and discussion boards) despite separation of time and space.

Authentic learning refers to educational and instructional techniques focused on connecting students’ learning to real-world issues, problems, and applications. The basic idea is that students are more likely to be interested in what they are learning, more motivated to learn new concepts and skills, and better prepared to succeed in university, careers, and adulthood if what they are learning mirrors real-life contexts, equips them with practical and useful skills, and addresses topics that are relevant and applicable to their lives.

Another principle of authentic learning is that it mirrors the complexities and ambiguities of real life. For this reason, it tends to be designed around open-ended questions without clear right or wrong answers, or around complex problems with many possible solutions that could be investigated using a wide variety of methods. Authentic learning is also more likely to be interdisciplinary, given that life, understanding, and knowledge are rarely compartmentalised into subject areas, and after graduation students will have to apply multiple skills or domains of knowledge in any given educational, career, civic, or life situation.

Generally speaking, authentic learning is intended to encourage students to think more deeply, raise hard questions, consider multiple forms of evidence, recognise nuances, weigh competing ideas, investigate contradictions, or navigate difficult problems and situations.

Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments [pdf, 460KB]. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23-48.

Lombardi, M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview, EduCause Learning Initiative, ELI Paper 1.

Blended and flexible learning, or BFL, is a design approach that fosters relationships between flexible and face to face learning opportunities in order to optimise student engagement and equivalence in learning outcomes regardless of mode of study.

This approach acknowledges that layering technology onto existing course structures is not enough. BFL offers a potentially transformative process to reconceptualise and reorganise learning experiences to optimise student engagement and learning outcomes. While we can use technology to recreate old teaching methods (e.g. publishing PowerPoint presentations online), we may be better served by acknowledging that learning is a set of personal and interpersonal activities rooted in specific social and cultural contexts – and that the changing contexts associated with our current digital age are influencing the way people learn most effectively.

Effective integration of blended learning into a course requires an understanding of the affordances and potential best uses of various offline and online technologies as well as face to face teaching, and the tasks that they help to support, so that an appropriate mix of these elements can be constructed. Just as students’ learning needs change from first year to final year, so also will change the kinds of tasks and hence the technologies needed.

By taking the focus away from the cohort and onto the kinds of learning experiences – for example, those learning experiences that require face to face or virtual teacher presence, those that require teacher guidance without being physically present, and those that require the learners to work independently – the goal of optimising engagement and personalisation becomes more attainable.

Bonk, C. J. & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning environments: Global perspectives, local designs, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Oliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2003). Exploring technology-mediated learning from a pedagogical perspective. Journal of Interactive Learning Environments, 11(2), 111-126.

Collaborative learning (or group work) is “students learning with and from each other as fellow learners without any implied authority to any individual, based on the tenet that students learn a great deal by explaining their ideas to others and by participating in activities in which they can learn from their peers” (Boud, 2001). Collaborative learning is an “umbrella term for a variety of educational approaches involving the joint intellectual effort from small group projects to the more specific form of group work known as cooperative learning. Collaborative learning suggests a way of dealing with people which respects and highlights individual group members’ abilities and contributions. There is a sharing of authority and acceptance of responsibility among group members for the groups’ actions” (Larl & Larl, 2012).

Boud, D. (2001). Introduction: Making the move to peer learning. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & J. Sampson (Eds.). Peer learning in higher education: Learning from and with each other (pp. 1-17). London, England: Kogan Page Ltd.

Larl, M., & Larl, M. (2012). Collaborative learning: What is it?, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 491-495.

Communities of Interest form across the University as colleagues operating across domains seek to share experiences and learn from each other. For example, a CoI may form to develop knowledge and continuous improvement recommendations in areas important to the University such as Health and Safety or Project Management or to bring together people in roles not already covered by Communities of Practice (CoP). CoI’s will tend to have a more operational focus than CoP’s.

CoIs might also be considered as less formal than CoPs, for example, they are not required to report and acquire approval from the Vice Chancellor and relevant members of the University Executive Committee. They are, however, encouraged to use many of the same principles that govern CoPs.

Communities of Practice (CoP’s) identify and recommend opportunities for continuous improvement, innovation and good practice. This is supported through the development of strategic working relationships that span faculties, and service divisions, in common areas of practice. Annual reporting to University Executive Committee and other senior leaders is a requirement, to summarise the community’s contribution to University objectives.

CoPs tend to have three defining characteristics:

• Shared domain: members participate in a shared domain of interest, with shared capabilities that need to be developed to be effective in their roles.
• Community: members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other and share information from within and outside the University in order to transfer appropriate best practice in their field. Building strong relationships with others in the domain facilitates succession planning, retention and communication and is essential for the development of professional skills and competencies.
• Common practice: members are practitioners who develop a shared repertoire of resources: experiences, stories, tools, techniques, ways of identifying and addressing recurring problems.

View the Service Excellence website for details.

Constructive alignment means that all assessment tasks, and learning and teaching experiences (and therefore content and methods) must be linked to the desired unit of study learning outcomes. In order to do this you may find it easier to work from the desired outcomes first, and then organise your assessment tasks, and then your teaching and learning experiences and activities based on these. The alignment between all three elements will ensure that the unit flows and is linked to the desired outcomes. The focus then becomes facilitating the students’ achievement of the learning outcomes, and all tasks should be geared towards providing a learning environment and experiences in which students are able to show you – and themselves – what they know and can do.

With constructive alignment, learning experiences and assessment tasks become purposeful, and learners are motivated to explore concepts both inside and outside their classes. A deeper approach to learning and teaching is facilitated, reinforced and encouraged.

Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. S. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.

Constructivism is a widely accepted theory about how people learn. First articulated by Jean Piaget in the 1950s, it asserts that people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. When we encounter something new, we have to reconcile it with our previous ideas and experience, maybe changing what we believe, or maybe discarding the new information as irrelevant. In any case, we are active creators of our own knowledge. To do this, we must ask questions, explore, and assess what we know.

Generally, a constructivist approach to education usually means encouraging students to use active techniques (e.g. experiments, real-world problem solving) to create more knowledge and then to reflect on what they are doing and how their understanding is changing. The teacher makes sure s/he understands the students’ pre-existing conceptions, and guides the activity to address them and build on them.

Constructivist teachers encourage students to constantly assess how the activity is helping them gain understanding. By questioning themselves and their strategies, students ideally become ‘expert learners’. This gives them ever-broadening tools to keep learning. With a well-planned learning environment, the students learn not just the specialist subject knowledge, but how to learn.

Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms, ASCD.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. New York, NY: Routledge.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Criterion-referenced assessment evaluates students’ learning against criteria (often referred to as rubrics), defined as desirable qualities or dimensions of a student’s performance. It can be contrasted with norm-referenced assessment, which compares students’ performance with that of their current peers, often represented in the form of a ‘bell curve’.

Criteria are always task-specific, and can express expectations of student performance that relate to required subject knowledge, as well as information literacy, application, analysis, evaluation and synthesis skills. They may also address other academic and graduate skills or skill groups such as research, communication, decision-making, problem-solving, and creativity. Criterion-referenced assessment allows for some definition of learning standards, when assessment criteria are combined with descriptions of expected student performance for each of a range of grades.

Sadler, D. R. (2005). Interpretation of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 175-194.

The curriculum is an “academic plan” which should include: the purpose of the curriculum (i.e., goals for student learning), content, sequence (the order of the learning experience), instructional methods, instructional resources, evaluation approaches, and how adjustments to the plan will be made based on experience. May also be referred to as training packages, qualifications, units of competency, learning objectives and outcomes, course requirements.

Lattuca, L., & Stark, J. (2009). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in context. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. (as cited by the Centre for Research on Learning and Teaching, University of Michigan. www.crlt.umich.edu/assessment/curriculumdesign

Siemens, Gašević and Dawson (2015) identify ‘digital learning’ as an umbrella term and highlight other ways to distinguish between the variations, including whether learning and teaching is asynchronous or synchronous; and what type of interactions is included (student-student, student-content, and student-instructor).

Siemens, G., Gašević, D., & Dawson, S. (2015). Preparing for the digital university: A review of the history and current state of distance, blended, and online learning. Retrieved from http://linkresearchlab.org/PreparingDigitalUniversity.pdf [pdf, 1.42MB]

Jisc.ac.uk defines digital literacy as “the capabilities which fit someone for living, learning and working in a digital society”. The OECD definition of digital literacy is “problem solving in a technology-rich environment” or “using digital technology, communication tools and networks to acquire and evaluate information, communicate with others and perform practical tasks”.

Elearning or online learning is learning that is facilitated via the Internet. See the definition for online learning for more details.

An eportfolio is a collection, created by a learner, of digital artefacts articulating experiences, achievements and learning. Underpinning this collection are complex processes of planning, synthesising, sharing, discussing, reflecting, as well as giving, receiving and responding to feedback. A learner makes a purposeful aggregation of digital items to present to an audience. Since there could be more than one reason for making a presentation, with a different audience in each case, multiple eportfolio variations might be created from the same repository or set of repositories.

Typical user requirements include an authoring environment (e.g. Mahara); facilities for sharing and publishing; tools for action planning, discussion and feedback; space for storing digital artefacts; and opportunities to link to other systems where data of importance to the learner is located (e.g., Moodle).

The aims of an eportfolio may be to collect evidence for summative assessment, to demonstrate achievement, record progress and set targets, and/or to nurture a continuing process of personal development and reflective learning. These different approaches are not mutually exclusive.

Jisc (2008). Effective practice with e-portfolios: Supporting 21^st century learning. Retrieved from https://www.jisc.ac.uk/rd/projects/e-portfolios

The flipped classroom describes a reversal of traditional teaching, whereby students gain first exposure to new material outside of class, usually via reading or lecture videos, and then class time is used to do the harder work of assimilating and applying that knowledge through strategies such as problem-solving, discussion or debates. The flipped classroom is informed by constructivist pedagogy and represents a shift from passive to active learning to focus on higher order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The important feature of flipped classrooms is not that they are new, or that they represent a move away from traditional lectures, or even that they use digital technologies. Rather, the issue is that flipped classroom approaches combine pedagogy and learning technologies in ways that extend to large numbers of students and provide opportunities for deep learning through application and consolidation.

In the flipped classroom, the roles and expectations of students and teachers change, whereby students take more responsibility for their own learning, studying core subject knowledge either individually or in groups before class, and then applying that knowledge and skills to a range of activities using higher order thinking. Significant learning opportunities can be gained through facilitating active learning, engaging students, guiding learning, correcting misunderstandings and providing timely feedback using a variety of pedagogical strategies, and there is a greater focus in the face-to-face setting on concept exploration, meaning-making and demonstration or application of knowledge.

Bishop, J. L. & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research, ASEE National Conference Proceedings. Atlanta, GA.

Lage, M. J., & Platt, G. J. (2000). The internet and the inverted classroom. Journal of Economic Education, 31(11).

O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85-95.

When designing learning activities, inclusive design considers designing for accessibility for those with varying levels of motor control, sensory perception, or cognitive ability. Developing accessible content improves the learning experience, not only for those with special requirements but for everyone.

Other influences in diversity among learners can be described by differences in emotions, self- motivation/ determination, ability to sustain effort, self-regulation etc. (Ministry of Education, n.d.).

The range of needs and challenges among learners is under-reported and often unrealised, even by the learners themselves. Therefore, it is imperative that our approach to inclusive design is pre-emptive and not merely reactive.

Visit Rethinking Assessment: Inclusive design for more.

Ministry of Education, Te Tāhuhu o Te Māatauranga. (n.d.). Guide to universal design for learning. Te Kete Ipurangi. https://inclusive.tki.org.nz/guides/universal-design-for-learning/the-affective-network-and-engaging-learners/

Intended Learning Outcomes are statements that describe significant and essential learning that students will have achieved and can reliably demonstrate at the end of any organised module of learning—from individual activities and tasks to whole classes or sessions, to semester units or full multi-year programs.

Biggs, J. (2003). Aligning Teaching and Assessment to Curriculum Objectives, Imaginative Curriculum Project, LTSN Generic Centre.

Hauenstein, A. D. (1988). A conceptual framework for educational objectives: A holistic approach to teaching taxonomies, Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Marzano, R. J. (2001). Designing a New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Strayhorn, T. L. (2006). Frameworks for assessing learning and development outcomes. Washington, DC: Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education.

Intrinsic motivation arises from a desire to learn a topic due to its inherent interest, for self-fulfillment, enjoyment and to achieve a mastery of the subject. In contrast, extrinsic motivation is motivation to perform and succeed for the sake of accomplishing an externally imposed specific result or outcome. For example, pleasing a parent is an extrinsic motivation to do well.

Lowry, B. P., Gaskin, J., Twyman, N., Hammer, B., & Roberts, T. (2013). Taking ‘fun and games’ seriously: Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption model (HMSAM),. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(11), 617-671.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54-67.

Learning that maximises the affordances of mobile technology is known as m-learning or mobile learning. Mobile technology enables contextual learning, learner mobility and is more likely to facilitate communication and collaboration via features and apps that enable student to create their own content.

Online learning (also referred to as e-learning) seeks to provide greater access to learning for all students via the internet. An online learning environment is one that goes beyond the replication of learning events that have traditionally occurred in the face-to-face classroom and are now made available through the internet. It provides for different ways of learning and the construction of a potentially richer learning environment that provides for fresh approaches to learning, caters for different learning styles as well as allowing for greater diversification in learning and greater access to learning. An online learning environment can include any or all of a number of aspects ranging from administration details relevant to the class, to learning experiences mediated through interactive multimedia, to a total course delivered via the internet.

An online learning environment can supplement or complement a traditional face-to-face learning environment (see Blended and Flexible Learning), or it may provide a complete learning package that requires little to no face-to-face contact.

Bates, A. (2005). Technology, e-learning and distance education, London, England: Routledge.

Moore, M. G. (2007). Handbook of distance education, Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Oliver, R. (2001). Assuring the quality of online learning in Australian higher education. Proceedings of 2000 Moving Online Conference (pp. 222-231). Gold Coast, Australia: Norsearch Reprographics.

Shank, P. (2007). The online learning idea book: 95 proven ways to enhance technology-based and blended learning, San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Patchwork assessment, (originally patchwork text, but now expanded to include any media) is

“… made up of a gradually assembled set of writing tasks (patches) that are further engaged with, through a reflective commentary known as stitching. The patchwork format is underpinned by a social ethos; students are encouraged to share their patches with peers to enable the learner to develop their own understandings through engagement.” (Arnold et al., 2009, p. 151)

“Each stage in the sequence of critical, responsive, reflective and locating reading informs the next and builds on the last. Or more properly, the process is not so much cyclic as an upward spiral of ever more critical, ever more informed reading.” (Parker, 2003, p. 182)

Patchwork assessment allows students to choose from a few assessment tasks they would like to do and on what topic (within parameters). A series of such tasks are undertaken, and at the end, students ‘pull it all together’ in a reflection task. Students are able to pursue their interest and develop particular skill sets depending on the choices they make. This encourages personal engagement and deeper learning.

Further reading at Rethinking Assessment: Student choice.

Arnold, L., Williams, T., & Thompson, K. (2009). Advancing the patchwork text: The development of patchwork media approaches. International Journal of Learning, 16(5), 151-166.

Parker, J. (2003). The patchwork text in teaching Greek tragedy. Innovations in education and teaching International. 40(2), 180-193.

In peer assessment, students evaluate and grade the work of their colleagues. Regarding summative collaborative assessment, this is not something to be considered without careful planning and preparation, especially with large classes. Smaller groups may be handled manually on old-school pen and paper, or through a survey platform like Qualtrics. For tools that can handle peer assessment at scale, consider FeedbackFruits or Canvas’ peer review feature (PDF).

Unlike peer assessment, peer review is more about sharing feedback and suggestions. Having students submit a draft or an outline or some other initial element of a longer assignment task can be an effective way of ensuring students have exposure to the ideas of their colleagues, gain feedback and pay attention to requirements.

For more, visit Rethinking Assessment: Collaborative and peer assessment

Personalised learning refers to a diverse variety of educational programs, learning experiences, instructional approaches, and academic-support strategies that are intended to address the distinct learning needs, interests, aspirations, or cultural backgrounds of individual students.

Personalised learning is generally seen as an alternative to ‘one-size-fits-all’ approaches to education in which teachers may, for example, provide all students in a given course with the same type of instruction, the same assignments, and the same assessments with little variation or modification from student to student.

Personalised learning is related to student-centred learning, since the general goal is to make individual learning needs the primary consideration in important educational and instructional decisions, rather than what might be preferred, more convenient, or logistically easier for teachers and institutions.

Personalised learning is intended to facilitate the academic success of each student by first determining the learning needs, interests, and aspirations of individual students, and then providing learning experiences that are customised—to a greater or lesser extent—for each student. To accomplish this goal, universities, teachers, guidance counsellors, and other educational specialists may employ a wide variety of educational methods, from modifying assignments and instructional strategies to entirely redesigning the ways in which students are grouped and taught.

Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. Internet and Higher Education, 15, 3-8.

Educause (2009, May). 7 things you should know about personal learning environments, EDUCASE Learning Initiative. Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/resources/2009/5/7-things-you-should-know-about-personal-learning-environments

Keppell, M. (2014). Personalised learning strategies for higher education. In K. Fraser (Ed.), The future of learning and teaching in next generation learning spaces (international perspectives on higher education research), 12, 3-21.

A processes for implementing a streamlined, tailored approach to assuring quality and maintaining standards in the higher education sector.

See the University’s page on quality assurance.

A rubric is an evaluation tool or set of guidelines used to promote the consistent application of learning outcomes and expectations, and to measure their attainment against a consistent set of criteria (see criterion-referenced assessment). Rubrics clearly define academic expectations for students and help to ensure consistency in the evaluation of academic work from student to student, and assignment to assignment. Rubrics are also used as scoring instruments to determine grades or the degree to which learning standards have been demonstrated or attained by students.

Rubrics are commonly provided and explained to students before they begin an assignment, to ensure that learning expectations have been clearly understood by them. Rubrics may take many forms, but are generally designed to be simple, explicit, and easily understood. They may help students see connections between learning (what will be taught) and assessment (what will be evaluated) by making the feedback they receive from teachers clearer, more detailed, and more useful in terms of identifying and communicating what students have learned or what they may still need to learn. Rubrics may also encourage students to reflect on their own learning progress and help teachers to tailor curriculum design, academic support, or future assignments to address distinct learning needs or learning gaps. In some cases, students may be involved in the co-creation of rubrics for a class project or for the purposes of evaluating their own work or that of their peers.

Arter, J., & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring Rubrics in the Classroom, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press Inc.

Reddy, Y. M., & Andrade, H. (2009). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 435-448.

Scaffolding, which is widely considered to be an essential element of effective teaching, refers to a variety of teaching techniques used to move students progressively toward stronger understanding and, ultimately, greater independence in the learning process. The term itself offers the relevant descriptive metaphor: teachers provide successive levels of temporary support that help students reach higher levels of comprehension and skill development that they would not be able to achieve without assistance. Like physical scaffolding, the supportive strategies are incrementally removed when they are no longer needed, and the teacher gradually shifts more responsibility over the learning process to the student.

In addition, scaffolding is often used to bridge learning gaps—i.e., the difference between what students have learned and what they are expected to know and be able to do at a certain point in their education. One of the main goals of scaffolding is to reduce the negative emotions and self-perceptions that students may experience when they get frustrated, intimidated, or discouraged when attempting a difficult task without the assistance, direction, or understanding they need to complete it.

Beed, P., Hawkins, M., & Roller, C. (1991). Moving learners towards independence: The power of scaffolded instruction. The Reading Teacher, 44(9), 648-655.

Simons, K. D., & Klein, J. D. (2007). The impact of scaffolding and student achievement levels in a problem-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 35, 41-72.

Yelland, N., & Masters, J. (2007). Rethinking scaffolding in the information age. Computers and Education, 48, 362-382.

The scholarly teacher discusses teaching with others and reads the learning and teaching literature to be informed about what others have learnt before them. This teacher also then, in light of that reading, investigates their own teaching and their students’ learning, experimenting in their classes. The difference between the scholarly teacher and the teacher who engages in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) is that the former does not disseminate and publish the finding of their investigations.

Potter, M. K., & Kustra, E. (2011). The relationship between scholarly teaching and SoTL: Models, distinctions, and clarifications. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1).

“Teachers who are more likely to be engaging in scholarship of teaching … seek to understand teaching by consulting and using the literature on teaching and learning, by investigating their own teaching from the perspective of their intention in teaching while seeing it from the students’ position, and by formally communicating their ideas and practice to their peers” Trigwell, Martin, Benjamin, & Prosser, 2000, p. 164)

Trigwell, K., Martin, E., Benjamin, J., & Prosser, M. (2000). Scholarship of teaching: A model. Higher Education Research and Development, 19(2), 155-168.

In education, the term stakeholder typically refers to anyone who is invested in the welfare and success of a school and its students, including administrators, teachers, staff members, students, parents, families, community members, local business leaders, and elected officials such as school board members, city councilors, and state representatives. Stakeholders may also be collective entities, such as local businesses, organisations, advocacy groups, committees, media outlets, and cultural institutions, in addition to organisations that represent specific groups, such as teachers unions, parent-teacher organizations, and associations representing superintendents, principals, school boards, or teachers in specific academic disciplines (e.g. the National Council of Teachers of English or the Vermont Council of Teachers of Mathematics). In a word, stakeholders have a “stake” in the school and its students, meaning that they have personal, professional, civic, or financial interest or concern.

Great Schools Partnership. (2014). The glossary of education reform. Retrieved from http://edglossary.org/stakeholder/

Structured progression describes a curriculum and assessment plan, devised across all courses in a programme of study, that builds student capabilities incrementally. For example, a course assessment plan should be reviewed against other courses in the programme to ensure alignment throughout. Assignment tasks should cumulatively develop the learner’s ability to produce the required evidence to satisfy learning outcomes through a structured progression of tasks that build capability incrementally.

See Rethinking Assessment: Alignment and progression for more.

Student engagement refers to the degree of attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and passion that students show when they are learning or being taught, which extends to the level of motivation they have to learn and progress in their education. Student engagement is influenced by a range of factors, not all of which may be within the scope of influence of the teacher or the university, but engagement has been consistently shown to be higher when the curriculum is designed to promote student-centred, deep, active, constructivist learning via well-scaffolded, authentic experiences.

Gibbs, G. (2014, May). Student engagement, the latest buzzword, Times Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/student-engagement-the-latest-buzzword/2012947.article

Krause, K.-L., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493-505.

Zhao, C., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45, 115-138.

Student-centred learning refers to a wide variety of educational programs, learning experiences, instructional

approaches, and academic-support strategies that are intended to address the distinct learning needs, interests, aspirations, or cultural backgrounds of individual students and groups of students. To accomplish this goal, institutions, teachers, guidance counsellors, and other educational specialists may employ a wide variety of educational methods, from modifying assignments and instructional strategies to entirely redesigning the ways in which students are grouped and taught.

Universities are often organised and managed in ways that work well for organisational operations, but that might not reflect the most effective or engaging ways to educate students. For example, it may be far more manageable—from an institutional, administrative, or logistical perspective—if all students are taught in classrooms under the supervision of teachers, if they are given a fixed set of course options to choose from, if they all use the same textbooks and learning resources, and if their education unfolds according to a predetermined schedule.

Some educators use the term synonymously with personalised learning, while others see personalised learning as one aspect of student-centred learning, but not a synonymous term or concept.

Farrington, I. (1991). Student-centred learning: Rhetoric and reality. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 12(1), 3-19.

Kember, D. (2009). Promoting student-centred forms of learning across an entire university. Higher Education, 58(1), 1-13.

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London, England: Routledge.

Students as partners is fundamentally about meaningful relationships between students and staff members at a university (Matthews, 2016). Cook-Sather, Bovill and Felten (2014) define partnership as ‘a collaborative, reciprocal process through which all participants have the opportunity to contribute equally, although not necessarily in the same ways, to curricular or pedagogical conceptualization, decision-making, implementation, investigation, or analysis’ (pp. 6-7). Healey, Flint and Harrington (2014) suggest that partnership teams may work to:

1. enhance teaching, learning and assessment;
2. design curricula and evaluate pedagogy;
3. engage in subject-based research; or
4. participate in the scholarship of teaching and learning.

As an institutional culture, partnership values students as participants in knowledge construction, as producers of knowledge, within the university learning community, which translates into them being active participants in their own learning in the classroom and engaged in all aspects of university efforts to enhance education with university staff (Matthews, Cook-Sather, & Healey, in press). For eight examples of student-staff partnerships, see Matthews (2017).

Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York, England: Higher Education Academy.

Matthews, K. E. (2016). Students as partners as the future of student engagement. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 1(1).

Matthews, K. E. (2017). Students and staff as partners in Australian higher education: Introducing our stories of partnership. Teaching & Learning Together in Higher Education, 1(21), https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss21/1/

Matthews, K. E., Cook-Sather, A., & Healey, M. (in press). Connecting learning, teaching, and research through student-staff partnerships: Toward universities as egalitarian learning communities. In V. Tong, A. Standen, A., & M. Sotiriou, (Eds.). Research equals teaching: Inspiring research-based education through student-staff partnerships. London, England: University College of London Press.

Learning events that are synchronous happen at the same time. For example, students attending a face-to-face class, or attending a virtual classroom session online.

Learning and teaching that is in any way supported by the use of technology (educational technologies or other general technologies) can be described as technology enhanced learning. This can include online learning, eLearning, blended learning or the inclusion of technology in face-to-face learning and teaching, including discipline specific tools (software or hardware). Alternative term is technology-enabled learning.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework rooted in cognitive science principles that emphasise flexibility in presenting and assessing knowledge. It focuses on adapting the learning environment to accommodate the diverse needs and preferences of all students. UDL underscores the importance of providing multiple means of instruction to ensure that students can access, engage with the material, and express their knowledge on their own terms. This approach helps design interactions with learners so that they do not need to seek special accommodations, regardless of barriers such as time constraints, connectivity issues, or disabilities (Tobin et al., 2018).

UDL can also be referred to as: Universal Design for Instruction, Universal Design for Education, Universal Design for Teaching.

Tobin, Thomas J., & Kirsten T. Behling. (2018) Reach Everyone, Teach Everyone: Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education. West Virginia University Press.