Te Komiti Ako|
Learning and Teaching Committee
NGĀ ĀMIKI/MINUTES
Rā Date:
Friday, 24 February 2023
Wā Time:
10.00 am
Wāhi Venue:
Council Chamber Level 6 Matariki and via Zoom
Tangata i tae mai
Professor C Moran (Chair),S 9(2)(a) OIA
Present:
Tangata i tae mai
S 9(2)(a) OIA
In Attendance:
Whakapāha
S 9(2)(a) OIA
Apologies:
Welcome: The Chair welcomed S 9(2)(a) OIA to the meeting. S 9(2)(a) OIA
will be joining the committee in place
of S 9(2)(a) OIA
. The Chair thanked S
for S significant contributions to this
committee.
1.
Minutes of the previous meeting
Moved by the Chair:
That the minutes of the LTC meeting held on 27 January were a true and accurate record.
Carried
2.
Matters Arising
Distributed Leadership and Teaching Programme (DLTP) is now open for applications and all of
the information for potential applicants is available on the UC website here. S 9(2)(a) OIA is the
main point of contact but S 9(2)(a)
can also help. A message to staff should be communicated
soon.
This is the fourth year that DLTP has run with funding available for five projects. For 2023 the
approach is more targeted. There are a number of core themes that applications are encouraged
to tackle:
-
S 9(2)(b)(ii) OIA
-
S 9(2)(b)(ii) OIA
There is funding for a further three projects that address Ako ā-Mahi | Work Integrated Learning
(WIL). These projects have the following core themes:
-
S 9(2)(b)(ii) OIA
For questions specific to WIL, contact S 9(2)(a) OIA
.
Applications are reviewed by an expert panel which considers the potential projects from the
perspective of impact at faculty level, impact at institution level, and the appropriate spread of
DLTP scholars between faculties. New panellists are required for the reviewing of application
portfolios this year. ContactS
if you are interested in supporting the DLTP as a panel
member. Members are asked to encourage their colleagues to apply.
A member suggested making a sea
t on faculty learning and teaching committees to be held by
current or past DLTP scholars as an effective way of leveraging their expertise and sharing their
learnings.
The Graduate Attribute Review is on-going. The review is part of the UC 2020-2030 Strategy
because the attributes have not been considered since their introduction in 2016. Kā Waimaero |
Office of Treaty Partnership are reviewing ‘Bicultural Confidence and Competence’ (BICC), the
Sustainability Committee is reviewing ‘Globally Aware’ and an LTC working group has been
convened to review ‘Employable, Innovative and Entrepreneurial’ (EIE). Pro-Vice-Chancellor
Jan Evans-Freeman will be invited to provide an update on her work with the ‘Globally Aware’
attribute at a future LTC.
CNRE Engagement Initiatives: S 9(2)(a) OIA
provided members some information
about a range of initiatives his department are introducing to encourage student engagement with
their studies, the advertising for which is shown in Appendix 1 below. This includes monitoring
lecture attendance at cohort level and rewarding those groups who meet 70%+ attendance as a
group with cake. The focus is first and second year because habits are likely set by third year. A
member suggestedS 9(2) look at ACE data as it will show how many students are watching the
class online, too
S 9(2) w
ill be tracking what these initiatives do to engagement and learner
outcomes and will re port ba
ck.
3.
Chair’s Report
Moved by the Chair:
That the minutes of the LTC meeting held on 25 November 2022 were a true and accurate record.
Carried
Congratulations to S 9(2)(a) from the department of S 9(2)(a) OIA
,
who has achieved Fellow
ship of the S 9(2)(a) OIA
.
The Chair noted that the next meeting in March will include a substantive conversation on
universal lecture capture policy because this needs to be firmed up following the November 2020
academic board decision to expand lecture capture. Data will be provided on patterns of use of
recorded lectures.
4.
Faculty Learning and Teaching Plans
The Learning and Teaching Framework was approved at the end of last year, so this is a new
initiative for the UC learning and teaching committee. Each faculty will be in a different place as
new Executive Deans and Associate Deans settle in. The Chair noted that the discussions today
are a starting point and that this is not an audit exercise. The frameworks is meant to provide a
way of connecting faculty together and creating a thread between the institutional strategy, the
work of LTC, and the specific work happening in faculties.
S 9(2)(a) OIA
presented the Faculty of Business learning and teaching plan (this has
been removed from the agenda papers on his request). It provides operational detail over five
years including KPIs. The alignment with the framework is not perfect. This is because some
parts of the framework are the responsibility of the whole institution, and other parts are covered
off in other faculty plans. The plan is reviewed every September and updated. The plan was
drafted by S 9(2) l based on information gathered over about 18-months. S 9(2) recommended
that other facul
ties work on these plans with their learning and teaching comm
ittee
to ensure that
they are co-crea
ted and don’t feel like an edict from leadership. Faculty managers or Academic
Service Managers could be useful resources for coordinating this work.
S 9(2)(a) OIA
contextualised the document from the Faculty of Education. It
is a high-level vision document that was the work of a small committee with an aim to define the
identity of the faculty. Once drafted, input was sought from all corners of the faculty. The next
stage is to develop a plan similar to what S 9(2) presented with specific actions and KPIs and
the faculty LTC is responsible for this.
S 9(2)(a) OIA noted that the Library is working through the framework and aligning their plans
where appropriate. The library plan will be shared with this committee when it is finalised.
The Chair thanked S 9(2) and S
for presenting their work. She reminded members that the
purpose of the framew ork, and aligning faculty plans to it, is to connect work that is happening
in teaching and learning across cam
pus. Schools and departments have to be connected within
faculties, but faculties also have to be connected with each other and the overall institutional
direction. The other benefit of the framework is that it is adaptable. Faculty can develop plans in
line with their specific needs while using the framework as a tool. The Chair recommended
linking the plan to the overall faculty plans, so a discussion at faculty boards may be a good idea.
The Chair is happy to come and speak at your LTC to help start the discussion.
Members agreed for a regular agenda item to be set for this meeting over the coming months on
this topic as faculty LTCs move through the early stages of this work. This will allow for short
updates from each faculty.
5.
Peer Review Framework
This was designed at the request of the faculty of engineering LTC, and given that at the time the
TQM working group was talking about additional sources of evidence for teaching quality,
bringing it to the larger LTC for dissemination and discussion seemed like a logical thing to do.
The next step is that S 9(2)(a) is designing a workshop on how to do peer observations of
teaching, with a focus on fa ce to face teaching. This will be piloted in March with colleagues who
are currently mentors in the early career mentoring programme that is led by S 9(2)(a) OIA in
People & Culture.
The framework provides a standardised format for providing feedback and links to promotions
via other work being produced by the TQM working group which will be presented at this
committee over the coming months. Members suggested that the TQM working group consider
how the peer review framework can be meaningfully implemented with a reward system similar
to a pedagogy academy (i.e. financial reward).
6.
Moodle 4 Update
S
updated members on the recent upgrade to Moodle. Around 1300 courses have been
transferred to the new format. The new format has been received well amongst students, and
ther
e have been a few niggles for staff. The time staff have invested in updating to the new
templ
ates is a one-off. Once the initial work is done, rollovers are mirrored year-to-year. Because
of the new templates, roll-overs this year have been completed by S 9(2) team. This will not be
continued because there is real value in teaching staff doing this themse
lves semester to semester
and year to year – it encourages them to do updates based on information a
vailable to them such
as the ACE dashboards which shows what resources students are and are not engaging with.
Members are also to note that files were transferred over, but the files themselves were not
updated (e.g. course outlines still need to be updated with the new dates for 2023). The transition
for semester two begins next week and is planned to be finished in time to give teaching staff c6
weeks to look at courses before the start of second semester.
A question from a member about support levels for teaching staff started a longer discussion
about Service Now. The member had waited more than 8 days for a response to a ticket in Service
Now about an issue in LEARN. S 9(2)(a) OIA
will follow up on those wait times as
they are clearly a problem. He will also suggest to his team that they look at a similar live chat
function that the library use to allow staff to get immediate support. Another member raised that
help is getting harder to find for staff that want to help themselves – such as ‘LEARN help for
staff’ which used to be on the homepage but is no longer there. This page still exists but staff
have to be enrolled S
will look in to getting all staff enrolled.
Members also discusse
d templates. A member used to use templates that are now no longer
available.
team of
S 9(2)
flexible leaning advisors can help with creating new templates, and
have already created a template for the entire PSYCH programme. S 9(2)(a) OIA
is ga
thering feedback on the Moodle upgrade from around his faculty and will share
this in due course.
7.
Evaluation Tools
These tools are available for staff to use so that they can get real time feedback while teaching.
Members are encouraged to share this resource with their colleagues, and further information
will be made available to staff across this year as the TQM working group nears completion.
Please note that these tools are not to replace the formal evaluation processes which still need to
go through course and teacher evaluations.
8.
Graduate Attributes – Summary Data
A member raised an issue with student awareness of the graduate attributes because, from their
experience, students are unaware of the UC graduate profile. This review of the graduate
attributes needs to consider how the attributes are communicated to students so they understand
why their education from the UC is distinct and to enable graduates to be able to tell a good story
about their UC education. S 9(2)(a) OIA
added that from his experience teachers never talk
about the attributes in class which is a contributing factor to this issue. Members suggested
making the graduate attributes a bigger part of induction/O-week activities. S
is going to speak
to S 9(2)(a) OIA
, about incorporating this in to the THRIVE lectures
and other induction materials.
A member noted that the data provided is high-level and lacks detail. More work is required to
establish what the data on graduate attributes is saying. Graduate Attributes remain critical for
new course development, planning teaching, programme reviews and academic development
such as Taipapaki.
9.
Teaching in an Artificial Intelligence World
The resources to support staff that were presented in an all staff session in mid-February are being
compiled on LEARN here. The slides presented contain four example statements that course
coordinators can use about the use of tools such as ChatGPT. Any emerging issues in this area,
or if you are particularly interested in exploring the issues further, contact S 9(2)(a) OIA
The remaining reports in Section B were received.
The meeting closed at 11.45 am.
Professor C Moran (Chair)…………………………….. Date……………………….
Appendix 1: CNRE Advertising
