La Trobe University

Strange bedfellows: Embedding development of skills into

discipline curricula

Kate ChanockCraig Horton

Academic Language & Learning Unit

La Trobe University

The context

Pressures: o Wider Participationo Good Practice Principleso Graduate skills/attributes/capabilities

Opportunities & risks for ALL providerso Unis need ALL supporto But do they understand what is needed

and why?

La Trobe University

Skills generic & transferable? Common language, but different referents, e.g.:

“[t]erminology widely used by tutors and/or guidelines to name academic writing conventions …. [such as] argument and structure.…have been signalled … as being hugely problematic by a number of researchers” (Lillis & Turner 2001, p. 58)

Problem solving, critical thinking: “the status of data, how evidence is evaluated and the assumptions about the sort of evidence that can be used are quite different depending upon the epistemological context" (Jones, 2009,p. 88).

La Trobe University

Transfer from generic to discipline-specific??

Disciplines differ in epistemology→ Questions→ Methods→ Genres

→ Structures→ Language → Use of sources

Jones: "rather than a set of discrete, … technical skills that transcend disciplines, generic attributes can be understood as social practice”; it follows that "rather than a super-disciplinary list of skills, generic attributes require a fine-grained examination of disciplinary and professional practice" (pp. 93-94). 

La Trobe University

“… not 'learning how to learn' but learning how to do the learning in that subject—how to think, question, search for evidence, accept evidence, and put evidence together to make an argument that is acceptable in that discipline. …. has to take place in specific contexts before any aspect of transfer can be made, rather than the other way round.” (Kift & Moody, 2009)

AALL’s submission to the “Good Practice Principles” endorses the shift from generic tuition in academic reading and writing to “an integrated approach, [in which] the literacy demands of the discipline become an explicit part of the subjects that students study” (Appendix 2, p. 9).

La Trobe University

Whose responsibility to teach?

Wingate (2006) “Doing away with study skills” -- & study skills teachers?

“Because of the disciplinary differences in the construction of knowledge, the support of subject tutors rather than that of external ‘learning experts’ is needed” (p. 395)

La Trobe University

Why don’t discipline lecturers teach skills explicitly?• Think of skills and knowledge as

separate• Think that focus on skills must be at

expense of content

La Trobe University

La Trobe University

“Best practice” rarely practised!

• Baik & Greig: In Australia, “the most common approach to LAS development is still a generic study skills model typically consisting of extra-curricula short courses and workshops on various academic skills” (2009, p. 402)

• UK, too, Wingate: “[a] common approach to providing learning support … [is] by extra-curricular ‘study skills’ courses, often offered in dedicated learning support centres…. as opposed to the ‘built-in’ or embedded approach where learning is developed through the subject teaching” (2006, p. 457).

La Trobe University

But we came close …

2011: Our mission from Hum & Soc Sciences

• Encourage retention in large, challenging core subjects in 8 major disciplines taught across 5 campuses

• Design parallel tutorials for wks 2-5, too Anticipate problemso Explain subject expectationso Practise reading, note-making, planning & writing

• Train [extra] discipline tutors to teach these• Provide support during roll-out

La Trobe University

Problems of implementation

• Imposed on subject coordinators with little consultation, little time for planning, preparation

• Minimum collaboration:o Share learning guides & reading listso Hire tutors

• Maximum collaboration:o Meet with us 2-3 timeso Talk about design of subject, purpose of assignments,

nature of textso Read our drafts of tutorials, criticise, contribute ideaso Work with us in training tutors who would teach tutorials

La Trobe University

Short of embedding, but more integrated than generic approachTo prepare, we• read the subject guides, assessments, and early essential

readings; • found passages in subject readings to exemplify our

teaching points;• wrote tutorial plans incorporating

o teaching points o passages to focus on o activities o handouts o visual aids

Trained the tutors: purpose & use of materialsAcross all campuses of the university, 40 tutors and their

students participated in the program.

La Trobe University

In a nutshell• Using the set readings for each subject in those weeks, and

working towards the first marked assignment in each subject, the tutors show students:

• § What is characteristic of thinking at university• § How that way of thinking is embodied in the

structures and styles of academic texts • § How we use sources• § What these practices look like• • In this way, students get an introduction to the culture of

enquiry in HuSS; a sense of how it works in their chosen discipline(s); and formative practice towards an imminent assignment.

La Trobe University

Outline of tutorialsTutorial 1: Time and task management• Introduce culture of enquiry: knowledge as constructed by

disciplines, via conversations in print• Subject design • Activity: in pairs, map the semester’s work onto a planning

grid

Tutorial 2: Language of enquiry• Meaning of “argument”, “opinion”, “critical”• How to recognise argument early in a reading• Activity: work out what arguments might be made in

answer to next assignment, rough out a possible introduction

La Trobe University

Tutorial 3: Awareness of text structures• “Deductive” structure of Anglo-western academic texts • Skimming for argument of whole reading• Paragraph structure (point + evidence)• Coherence (links and transitions)• Activity: devise a framework for making notes from current

reading, distinguishing points from evidence

Tutorial 4: Use of sources• why, how, mechanics of quoting & paraphrasing

o Seen in readingo Used in writing

• Activity: students write sentences drawing on sources for use in next assignment

La Trobe University

Some materials were commonPublic argument Academic argument

Purpose Something needs to be done (action)

Something needs to be understood (interpretation)

Stance Only one perspective is right

Perspectives may be combined, and some things may remain unresolved (try to be clear, but don’t be afraid of complexity)

Persuasion Good points from the other perspective just weaken your argument!

Ignoring good points from the other perspective weakens your argument; draw your conclusions from the evidence, like it or not.

Tone May be aggressive, emotional

Formal, respectful, objective

La Trobe University

Others were tailored to subjectsAbstract “Moves” The successful adjustment of immigrants is usually considered in terms only of their cultural, sociological and psychological fitting into the receiving society. However, this attachment process is invariably accompan-ied by estrangement from the old society – a process of alienation. The effects of this alienation may include severe behavioural breakdown. Even some socially approved behaviours may reflect alienation. Focusing on alienation rather than assimilation permits a re-examination of the adjustment of immigrants. It suggests that preservation of elements of the donor society’s culture would facilitate this adjustment. This view is, therefore, consistent with a multicultural model of ethnic group interrelationships.

What is usually thought

Problematise this

Why it matters

Alternative perspectiveWhat the alternative perspective enables us to understand

La Trobe University

Evaluation: subjective

Surveyed all students, tutors, coordinators (scale: low 1- 5 high)

• Students:o Relevant for this subject: 4.0 - 4.5o Relevant for other subjects: 3.2 - 4.1o Recommend to others: 3.8 - 4.3

• Tutors:o Run again: 3.0 - 5.0

• Coordinators:o Run again: 3.5 - 5.0

La Trobe University

Evaluation: objective

End of semester, compared: • students’ marks with previous year’s• students’ entrance scores with previous year’s

Results, combining As with Bs and Ds with Fails: • Despite fewer students with entry score over 70 at

all but one campus, As+Bs rose in 14 out of 19 groups.

• Despite more students with entry score below 60, Ds+Fs dropped in 16 out of 19 groups.

La Trobe University

Engaged vs. Disengaged coordinators• Subject One

o As+Bs rose by up to 17%, o Ds+Fs dropped by as much as 24%

• Subject Twoo As+Bs rose by up to 18%, o Ds+Fs dropped by as much as 19%

• Subject Threeo As+Bs, rising slightly overall, dropped in 1group by 10%, o Ds+Fs, down slightly overall, rose in 1 group by 3%

• Subject Fouro As+Bs dropped by 12% o Ds+Fs rose by 5%

La Trobe University

2012?

• No money, but some momentum• Hope to promote genuine embedding:

o We provide teaching point, identify suitable text as example, design activity

o 5 x 15 minso Subject teaching staff teach each point

in their regular tutorials

La Trobe University

References• Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) (2009). Good practice principles for

English language proficiency for international students in Australian universities. Report to the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Canberra. Retrieved May 2, 2011 from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Publications/Pages/GoodPracticePrinciples.aspx

• Baik, C. & Greig, J. (2009). Improving the academic outcomes of undergraduate ESL students: The case for discipline-based academic skills programs. Higher Education Research and Development 28 (4), 401-416.

• Jones, A. (2009). Redisciplining generic attributes: The disciplinary context in focus. Studies in Higher Education 34 (1), 85-100.

• Kift, S. & Moody, K. (2009). Harnessing assessment and feedback in the first year to support learning success, engagement and retention. Paper presented at the ATN Assessment Conference 2009: Assessment in Different Dimensions, held November 19-20, 2009 at RMIT University, Melbourne. http://emedia.rmit.edu.au/conferences/index.php/ATNAC/ATNAC09/paper/viewFile/96/15

• Lillis, T. & Turner, J. (2001). Student writing in higher education: contemporary confusion, traditional concerns. Teaching in Higher Education 6 (1), 57-68.

• Wingate, U. (2006). Doing away with ‘study skills’. Teaching in Higher Education 11 (4), 457-469.