NASI KIT

Teaching and Educational Development (TED) @

TED-NASI-08-02-2011

New Academic Staff Induction (NASI) Kit

I, _______________________________, Staff ID: ________________,

Division: _________________________, hereby confirmed that I have received:

No Item Total Acknowledged Receipt

1. General NASI info pack 1 copy

2. Latest NASI Schedule of the month (TED will broadcast the schedule updates via email on monthly basis. Please refer the latest schedule via email.)

NIL- notification

only

3. Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities (Softcopy is available in the Staff Portal.)

1 copy

4. Teaching and Learning Framework (Softcopy is available in the Staff Portal.)

1 copy

5. Additional NASI Reading Materials 1 booklet

Date of Collection

Collected by

TED Staff in-charge

Note:

1) Please attach this copy with your NASI Checklist.

2) This copy must be submitted together with the NASI checklist upon obtaining final signatures from TED

HoD and Deans, once all the eight modules have been completed.

CONTENTS

PART A BRIEF ABOUT TEACHING & EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

(TED)

PART B BRIEF ABOUT N.A.S.I.

PART C TAYLOR’S GRADUATE CAPABILITIES (TGC)

PART D TEACHING AND LEARNING FRAMEWORK (TLF)

PART A

BRIEF ABOUT

TEACHING &

EDUCATIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

(TED)

1

Integrated Teaching and Life-long Learning @ Taylor’s

1

INTELLECT stands for Integrated Teaching and Life-long Learning Center at Taylor’s.

The aim of the Center is to ensure provision of relevant, innovative, and excellent learning experience at Taylor’s.

This mandate emanates from the commitment of Taylor’s University to become the leading teaching and learning institution in the region.

2

2

INTELLECT brings to fusion the three-fold

functions of enhancing total learning experience through excellent teaching, outstanding student life support initiatives, and innovative and technology-driven learning environment.

3

Taylor’s (Total) Learning

Experience (TLE)

Excellent Teaching +

Outstanding Student Support

Initiatives +

Innovative and Technology Driven

Learning Environment

3 - MAJOR DRIVERS

4

3

Strategic Priorities

Our strategic positioning is to establish INTELLECT as the institutional clearing house for all teaching and learning initiatives. Inclusive of this goal are the following activities:

• Integration of policies and procedures relevant and related to teaching and learning

• Creation of teaching and learning database, analysis, and dissemination

• Full implementation of the Taylor’s Teaching and Learning Philosophy and Framework (TLF), and the Taylor’s Graduate Capability (TGC)

5

InTeLLeCT ‘s 3-Divisions

• Teaching and Educational Development (TED) - The role of TED is to complement the academics’ initiatives to enhance their role in the total learning experience.

• Learning and Academic Skills (LAS) – LAS is tasked to ensure a balanced and rewarding student’s life experience.

• Technology, Research and Innovation (TRI) – TRI’s role is to ensure that learning experiences at Taylor’s are driven by creativity, innovation, and technology.

6

4

7

TEACHING AND EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (TED)

8

5

Training and Educational Development (TED) is one of the divisions under InTeLLeCT. The overarching goal is to cultivate excellence in teaching through practice, development, and innovation. TED assists the academics by providing platforms in order to achieve the desired Taylor's teaching excellence standard. TED ensures provision of developmental activities that would enhance their teaching capability and learning engagement.

9

TED's Direction:

TED’s Direction

• Strategic – long term, developmental, engaging, holistic

• Leveraging – generating, innovating, setting new standard

• Sustainable – inclusive, integrating, enhancing

10

6

Classification Certification

Continuing Assessment

Development

TED’s Main Tasks

11

TED’s Teaching and Learning Support

• New Academic Staff Integration (NASI) Program – NASI was designed to assist newly hired academic staff in their integration in the new learning environment. The initiative provides the significant dimensions of Taylor’s total learning experience. The NASI training modules help the new academic staff to journey from Taylor’s teaching and learning philosophy and framework to Taylor’s graduate capability components.

12

7

NASI Modules

• Teaching in Higher Education

• Effective Classroom Management

• Student-Centered Learning

• Empowering and Motivating Students

• Appreciating and Managing Learner Diversity

• Student Assessment and Monitoring

• Technology as Cognitive Tool

• Engaging in Academic Research

13

• Continuing Professional Training (CPT) – The CPT is designed for all academic staff. This is another platform to encourage them to participate in various training development initiatives aimed to enhance their teaching capability and learning engagements. The topics varies from pedagogy to soft skills and even technology.

14

8

• Trainer's Training Program (TTP)– This platform gives opportunities to academic staff to become advocates and leaders in their teaching engagement experiences. Those who are willing to undergo further training will be asked to mentor and share their advanced knowledge and skills to their peers and others.

15

TED’s Complimentary Platforms

• Teaching and Learning Conference

• Teaching and Learning Festival

• TED’s Echo Seminars

• TED’s Lecture Series

• Teh Tarik Sessions

16

9

Dr. Angelo Cruz Maduli Head

Wahida Binti Mohamed Saleh TED Development Adviser

Angie Lim Loo Ing Senior Executive

17

Teaching and Educational Development (TED) Integrated Teaching and Life-long Learning Center @ Taylor’s (InTeLLeCT)

Taylor’s University

Lakeside Campus

No. 1 Jalan Taylor’s, 47500 Subang Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan

T : +603-5629 500 extension 5293

F : +603-5629 5001

E : [email protected]

18

PART B

BRIEF ABOUT N.A.S.I.

22/3/2012

w.e.f January 2011 1

New Academic Staff Induction (NASI) 2011

By Teaching and Educational Development

(TED) @ InTeLLeCT

Prepared by Angie Lim/ W.e.f January 2011/ Updated as at 21 March 2012 1

NASI Modules for New Academic Staff

2

I. Teaching in Higher Education

II. Effective Classroom Management

III. Student-Centered Learning

IV. Empowering and Motivating Students

V. Appreciating and Managing Learner Diversity

VI. Student Assessment and Monitoring

VII. Technology as Cognitive Tool

VIII. Engaging in Academic Research

Prepared by Angie Lim/ W.e.f January 2011/ Updated as at 21 March 2012

22/3/2012


3

STEP 1

Submit Checklist to Teaching and Educational Development (TED), Block C, Level 2, InTeLLeCT

STEP 2

Obtain NASI Kit To attach the acknowledge receipt and checklist until the

completion of all modules

STEP 3

Check the NASI Schedule

STEP 4

Attend Modules

STEP 5

Submit Assessments after each modules to the trainers.

STEP 6

Obtain Trainers’ signatures for your checklist

STEP 7

Obtain signature from TED HoD and Dean Once all modules are verified by trainers.

STEP 8

Submit a copy of the completed checklist

to:

1. TED Dept.,

2. Your individual respective Dean

3. A copy for your own reference.

4. Original copy to the HR Department.


Important Notification for New Academic Staff

4

I. This exercise is applicable for all new academic staff who are commencing from 1st

January 2011 onwards.

II. Academic Staff who have commenced before 1st January 2011, may only require to

adhere to “Step 7” and “Step 8” as stated in the process.

III. This exercise is applicable only to all academic staff of Taylor’s University.

IV. TED has the rights to change any contents and items in NASI Kit prior to any

notifications.

V. Attendance for each module will only be considered FULL attendance once you have

attended the FULL session for each module and completed the assessments

provided by the Trainers.

VI. The NASI modules are currently under review.

VII. TED has the rights to change the modules or any other information/procedures,

relating to NASI, without prior notice.


22/3/2012


Our NASI Trainers… No Trainer Position Department Ext No Email

1 Dr Angelo Cruz Maduli

Head, Teaching and

Educational Development

(TED)

Teaching and

Educational

Development (TED) @

InTeLLeCT

5293 [email protected]

2 Nurlida Ismail Senior Lecturer Taylor’s Business School 5667 [email protected]

3 Adrian Yao

Senior Lecturer & Manager,

Educational Content,

Technology, Research &

Innovation (TRI)

Technology, Research &

Innovation (TRI) @

InTeLLeCT


4 Ratneswary Rasiah Senior Lecturer Taylor’s Business School 5675 [email protected]

5 Irene Ong Pooi Fong Senior Lecturer Taylor’s Business School


6 Dr Ann Tan Senior Lecturer School of Hospitality 5401 [email protected]

7 Associate Prof. Dr

Vikneswaran Nair

Director, Centre for

Research and Development

Centre for Research and

Development 5377 [email protected]

8 Professor Dr Richard

Watkins Pro Vice-Chancellor

Strategic Development

& International

Relations


5 Prepared by Angie Lim/ W.e.f January 2011/ Updated as at 21 March 2012

mailto:[email protected]








PART C

TAYLOR’S

GRADUATE

CAPABILITIES

(TGC)

Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities, a Conceptual Framework, by Minni K. Ang, PhD, for Taylor’s University College

© 2007 Taylor’s University College, Malaysia Page 1 of 24

TAYLOR’S GRADUATE CAPABILITIES

Past achievement is but an indicator of future potential – Minni K. Ang.

Introduction

The aim of this paper is to present the conceptual framework for the concrete integration

of Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities (TGC) within the teaching and learning philosophy of

Taylor’s University College (TUC) as well as all TUC degree-level curricula.

Structure of this paper

The first section below presents the case

for why the present TGC initiative is

needed, both in the global as well as the

local context.

The remainder of the paper presents the

conceptual framework. The idea of a

distinctive “TUC graduate” means that the

criteria that define such a person must be

identified from broad categories of

fundamental qualities that can be acquired

through a university education and that are

yet consistent with values deemed

important by TUC top leadership. The next

two main sections below coherently

address this in comprehensive terms.

• Foundations

- Defining the successful individual

- Identifying the role of tertiary

education in developing the

complete person

- Defining key terms – the

importance of semantics

• Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities

- Beliefs, assumptions and values

- List of capabilities

The final section of the paper integrates TGC within the teaching and learning philosophy

of TUC. Our model is student-centred as well as intentional-learning based, which

directly impacts how discipline-specific content is delivered as well as how students are

evaluated. This in turn affects the design of our curricula and introduces also the idea of

mapping students’ acquisition of generic skills through the use of a cumulative student

portfolio. The overview of our TGC initiative is presented in Figure 1.

TGC

Teaching

& learning

philosophy

Curricular

design

Relevance

(incl. global

trends)

Full profile

for success

TUC

values

Student-centred and intentional-learner based

directly impacts upon

Delivery of content

& evaluation methods

Knowledge base

(Discipline specific)

Program structure

Subject templates

(LAN compliant)

Skills base

(Generic skills)

Student portfolios

(Mapping generic

skills)

integrates

TGC

Figure 1. TGC initiative overview



Why the Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities initiative is needed

There is a current worldwide drive to review and revamp university level education due

to pressure from market forces and increased competition (Hopper, 2002; Nunan, 1999

p.3), as evidenced by various recent nationwide developments among the leading global

exporters of higher education services. The main directly relevant issues involved are:

- the trend towards privatization and the new role of students as customers that demand

student-centred curricula that genuinely prepare them for life “in the real world”

- the trend towards globalization and the challenge not only to produce globally

competitive graduates but also to compete for students at an international level

The American, Australian and British responses to these issues have varied in form but

are similar in their essence, that essence being to acknowledge that university education

needs to prepare its graduates for success: at work in particular and at life in general; and

to identify key qualities, abilities and skills that define the successful graduate.

The Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU) recommends emphasis

on educating students to become intentional learners, whereby skills learnt in one

situation (for example, the classroom) can be adapted to solving problems in another (for

example, at work) (AACU, 2002 p.21). In line with this, a set of essential learning

outcomes has been identified to provide a “new framework to guide students’ cumulative

progress from school through college” – this is essentially a list of knowledge, skills and

attitudes gained by graduates that prepares them for “success in meeting 21st century

challenges” (AACU, 2007 p.3).

The British equivalent of this is articulated on Prospects.ac.uk, the UK’s official graduate

career website, which emphasizes employable skills (Prospects, 2007) that should be

acquired during the course of an undergraduate education. A recent study published by

the City of London (Dawson et al, 2006) reiterates the importance of generic skills in

relation to graduate employability. An alternative British perspective advocates the use of

the term graduate identity where “the ability to engage in knowledge production,

according to the traditions of academia (universality, essential contestability, etc) may be

articulated as being amongst the aims of the undergraduate curriculum alongside the

ability to apply knowledge, in different contexts.” (Holmes, 2002). Essentially, the

British objection to the use of the term “generic” or “transferable” skills stems from

artificially imposing generic-specific training upon students (Gibbs and McAlpine, 2006).

Australia’s Business/Higher Education Round Table (B-HERT) has identified graduate

attributes and generic skills (Goldsworthy, 2003) as being key factors in defining

successful graduates. Australia’s initiative has been more thorough in that B-HERT has

spearheaded a nationwide effort to incorporate these concepts directly within the

curricula of the different universities (Goldsworthy, 2003; Markwell, 2003), as well as to

identify emerging skills that will define successful graduates of the future and the nature

of education and training required to meet those needs (Goldsworthy, 2006). A farsighted

paper by Nunan (1999) highlighted that in a mass education market, “Where graduate

skills or literacies connect with employment skills, their specification and reporting offers

an edge to a degree” (Nunan, 1999 p.3).



On the local front, Malaysian universities have yet to explicitly incorporate the idea of

intentional learners’ learning outcomes1 / employable skills / graduate identity / graduate

attributes / generic skills into their curricula, although some may claim it is implicitly

included anyway. The value in incorporating these concepts within the curricula lies

however in its purposefulness being made known to students from the very start of their

undergraduate careers – in other words, educating students to be intentional learners

(Hart et al, 1999 p.302). “Becoming such an intentional learner means developing self-

awareness about the reason for study, the learning process itself, and how education is

used.” (AACU, 2002 p.22). A concrete strategy towards this end is to require students to

build their own personal skills development portfolio that maps their achievements

against their university’s expectations (Hay et al, 2003 p.11).

As Taylor’s University College embarks on a new era with the upgrade to University

College status and the corresponding authority to design and structure our own curricula

and issue our own degrees, the concrete integration of Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities

within our teaching and learning philosophy as well as into the very fabric of all our

tertiary-level curricula will go a long way towards firmly establishing these new

programs as being the among the very best and will reinforce TUC’s position as the

leading private tertiary institution in Malaysia2.

“It is contended that, where institutions can present credible information about their

commitment to developing qualities in graduates and students can provide evidence

of the attainment of these qualities, both the institution and its students will be

advantaged in a buyer’s market for graduates.” (Nunan, 1999 p.9).

Foundations

What kind of individual is most likely to succeed in life? What role does tertiary

education have to play in the formation of such an individual?

These are two soul-searching questions that have to be comprehensively and coherently

answered when reinventing our institution and ourselves in terms of our tertiary teaching

and learning philosophy.

Defining Success

There are different ways of defining success in life. Some would equate success in life

with public eminence or individual glory. For our purposes, and a definition which would

likely satisfy most parents who are the primary stakeholders in each individual’s life

besides the individual himself (or herself) is this: success in life means achieving self-

1 The term “learning outcomes” is used in Malaysian curricula, as required by Lembaga Akreditasi Negara

(LAN), to define specific learning outcomes for various courses. However this is different from the term

“learning outcomes” as used in the context of this paragraph, which can be taken to be the US equivalent of

the other terms listed here. 2 Recent independent market surveys indicate that Taylor’s University College still maintains its standing

as the No.1 private tertiary institution in Malaysia, but with a narrowing gap over its nearest competitors.

The Graduate Capabilities initiative will serve to strengthen TUC’s position by not only strengthening its

academic curricula but also by being seen to be doing so in a very concrete manner that is easily grasped by

students, potential students, and their parents.



fulfilment or developing the individual to his or her fullest potential in all aspects of life

including self, family and work.

While the primary role of any tertiary curriculum is to significantly contribute towards

this last aim – the development of full potential at work – it is acknowledged that all three

aspects of self-fulfilment are interrelated and impact upon each other to a significant

degree, and also that life experiences while enrolled in tertiary education do play a role in

developing the complete individual from all aspects.

What kind of individual is most likely to succeed in life?

In comparing life success, a reasonable first yardstick is when fresh graduates seek their

first employment. The judges here are typically job interviewers and recruitment decision

makers. True success however involves far more than merely starting ahead. It includes a

continual drive to stay ahead. The successful graduate is therefore defined by two distinct

sets of key qualities, abilities and skills. These are listed in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Key qualities, abilities and skills that define the successful graduate3

Starting ahead

1. Mastery of subject area, evidenced by excellent academic record

2. Mastery of people skills, evidenced by ability to relate to interviewers and referees

3. Mastery of self, evidenced by self composure, confidence, enthusiasm, ease with self

Staying ahead

4. Drive to update own expertise => lifelong learning 5. Initiative – ability to identify work-related problems that need solving

6. Problem-solving skills – ability to define issues and workable solutions

7. Communication skills – oral, written and presentation skills

8. Interpersonal skills – ability to work well with others 9. Intrapersonal skills – ability to manage self

Additional qualities that provide long-term competitive edge

10. Cosmopolitan thinking and intercultural competence

11. Technology savvy 12. Leadership, creativity, innovation and enterprise* (Items 2-12 can be considered generic qualities, skills and abilities as they are not discipline-specific).

*These qualities may or may not be considered advantageous depending on the context of employment

Traditionally, university curricula have focused on only the first item from the list above,

assuming that students should be able to acquire generic skills naturally as a by-product

of their discipline-specific studies. The trends described and citations mentioned in our

opening section clearly show that this traditional approach no longer meets the needs of

3 Drawn up taking into consideration research data from different countries, as tabulated in Appendix 1.



the 21st century student and that generic skills need to be intentionally and explicitly

integrated within the curricular design for students to gain maximum benefit.

To come up with a coherent framework that describes the kind of individual that is most

likely to succeed in life, Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences provides a

useful frame of reference. Of the original seven intelligences identified by Gardner, it

would seem that six (with the sole exception of musical intelligence), contribute towards

general life and career success. Table 2 below explains this further.

Table 2. Multiple Intelligences and their relation to Life Success Gardner’s

Intelligence

Definition Relation to life success

Verbal-

Linguistic

The ability to use words and

language

Output: it is obvious that one’s ability to speak and

write well directly impact on one’s success.

Input: the ability to comprehend a wide variety of

literature is less obvious yet no less significant in

contributing to overall advancement in life.

Interpersonal The capacity for person-to-person

communications and relationships

Another very obvious trait of the successful is the

ability to build good business/working

relationships, with all levels of corporate/working

hierarchy as well as customers/clients. Team work,

leadership and cultural awareness fit here.

Poor personal and social relationships negatively

impact one’s potential, good ones positively so.

Logical-

Mathematical

The capacity for inductive and

deductive thinking and reasoning,

as well as the use of numbers and

the recognition of abstract patterns

This is directly related to most on-the-job demands

and is especially required for problem solving

skills.

Visual-Spatial The ability to visualize objects and

spatial dimensions, and create

internal images and pictures

Perhaps not as directly critical, but helpful in

managing and organizing information. Attributes

such as cosmopolitan thinking fit here.

Intrapersonal The spiritual, inner states of being,

self-reflection, and awareness

Authenticity, integrity, self-esteem, self-confidence,

personal initiative, and self-motivation are all

important personal attributes towards success.

Good time management, self-awareness and self-

reflection are learned intrapersonal skills that are

required for true and sustained success.

Body-

Kinaesthetic

The wisdom of the body and the

ability to control physical motion

The ability to carry oneself well and to effectively

manage body language and gestures provides an

advantageous edge to one’s external persona.

The inability to keep fit and stay healthy can prove

a severe hindrance to success.

The above provides a comprehensive and coherent description of the factors that

contribute4 towards an individual’s success in life. The next step is to identify what role,

if any, tertiary education plays in developing each of these factors in any individual

student. This step helps towards defining a realistically achievable set of expectations of

TUC graduates through eliminating attributes that are inherent or only minimally

influenced by tertiary education.

4 For completeness, it is noted here that there are other factors that contribute to an individual’s success in

life, such as family connections and unexpected opportunities, that are outside the scope of our discussion.



The role of tertiary education

Defining key terms – the importance of semantics

Before we can effectively describe the role of tertiary education in moulding the

individual for success in life, we will need to clarify the use of key terms as well as

related terms, as listed in Tables 3 and 4 below.

Table 3. Key terms/definitions

abilities power to perform, competence in doing

capabilities the facility or potential for an indicated use

skills mastery of technique

proficiency thorough competence derived from training and practice

adept special aptitude as well as proficiency

aptitude natural ability

competent having requisite or adequate abilities

knowledge having information

understanding to grasp the nature, significance, or explanation of [knowledge]

qualities distinguishing traits, characteristics or attributes

attribute inherent characteristic

attitude a mental position, feeling or emotion towards a fact or state

Table 4. Dichotomy of terms

Qualities

Attributes

Characteristics

Traits

Identity

� Who someone is

Capabilities

Abilities

Skills

Proficiencies

Competencies

� What someone can do

It is clear that certain terms describe inherent qualities that can only be indirectly

influenced while others describe learned skills. Some terms describe achievement, while

others describe aptitude. And finally, some describe who a person is, while others

describe what a person can do.

An individual’s aptitudes (or lack thereof) are inherent and are thus not changed or

shaped by education – however, an individual’s aptitudes should ideally be what draws

the individual to certain academic disciplines or career paths.

Other inherent qualities/traits/attributes/characteristics are only minimally influenced by

the short period one spends in tertiary education. These include most of what we have

listed under intrapersonal and bodily-kinaesthetic intelligences, as well as an individual’s

inherent aptitudes in all the other areas of intelligence.



Traditionally, the main role of a university education has been to facilitate students’

acquisition of discipline-specific knowledge. The new paradigm places emphasis also on

the conscious development and enhancement of generic skills, something which the

traditional model assumed occurred naturally as a by-product of the learning experience,

perhaps with a little guidance from the university career guidance unit or its equivalent.

We have already seen how this traditional model falls short (this paper, page 3, first

paragraph; page 4, last paragraph; Nunan, 1999 pp.3-4; AACU, 2002 pp.21-24).

Why the term Graduate “Capabilities”?

Considering the meanings of the different key terms listed in Table 3, it is most apt to use

the term “capabilities” when defining the list of TUC’s expectations of its graduates. This

term is realistic and reasonable – by using it, TUC is effectively stating that TUC

graduates have been taught and trained and have proven themselves to be able5 to do

what is listed, and to presumably be capable of doing so again in future work-related

contexts6. The term “capabilities” is thus both precise as well as accurate, and its use

reflects well upon the integrity of TUC as an institution.

We are now in a position to start building our list of Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities. This

is a four-step process:

1. Grouping of key terms/definitions from Table 3 into three categories: those

unaffected by education, those slightly influenced or shaped through various

experiences while enrolled in tertiary education, and those directly acquired through

deliberate study. Table 5 below does this.

2. Acknowledging that while most components of our multiple intelligences from Table

2 are essentially inherent, almost all can be moulded/developed through education,

especially those pertaining to skills. The differences in personal aptitudes may lead to

differences in levels of skill achievable in any of the given areas, ranging from

competent to proficient to truly adept. One goal of a university education should be to

bring its graduates to at least a baseline level of competency in all areas.

3. Expanding on Table 1, based on the information in points 1 and 2 above, to build a

complete set and subsets of key qualities, abilities and skills that define the successful

graduate. This gives us Table 6 below.

4. Identifying from Table 6 those items that are realistically achievable as well as

consistent with the values and aims of TUC to come up with a definitive description

of Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities.

Table 5. Impact of education on personal qualities, abilities and skills Unaffected by education /

inherent

Influenced or shaped by life

experiences

Acquired through deliberate study

Attributes, Qualities

Attitudes Skills, Proficiencies, Competencies

Aptitudes, Adeptness Knowledge and Understanding

Abilities, Capabilities

5 (through past performance during the course of their degree studies)

6 Past achievement is but an indicator of future potential.



Table 6. Key qualities, abilities and skills that define the successful graduate

(expanded version)

Starting ahead

1. Mastery of subject area, evidenced by excellent academic record

- Sound understanding of foundational concepts and theories in subject area

2. Mastery of people skills, evidenced by ability to relate to interviewers and referees

- Excellence in oral and interpersonal communication skills

3. Mastery of self, evidenced by self composure, confidence, enthusiasm, ease with self

Staying ahead

4. Drive to update own expertise

- Foundations and skills for lifelong learning

- Initiative to continually improve and learn

- Ability to comprehend a wide variety of literature

- Awareness of contemporary global issues

- Learns autonomously

- Able to use appropriate tools

- Able to acquire and manage information

- Able to learn effectively

5. Initiative – ability to identify work-related problems that need solving

6. Problem-solving skills

- Defines issues or problems well

- Analyses problems comprehensively

- Applies knowledge effectively and applies theory to practise

- Able to arrive at workable and effective solutions

7. Communication skills

- Speaks and writes well

- Able to organize, synthesize and present information effectively

8. Interpersonal skills

- Understands team dynamics, power of teams and teamwork

- Works well with others in a team

- Able to assume leadership in small and/or big groups

9. Intrapersonal skills

- Able to manage self, personal life, good time management, personal

image/professionalism

- Works independently in context of tasks to be completed

Additional qualities that provide long-term competitive edge

10. Cosmopolitan thinking and intercultural competence

- Forms opinions and articulates views from a global perspective

11. Technology savvy - Executive keyboarding

- Effective use of ICT and related technologies

12. Leadership, creativity, innovation and enterprise* (Items 2-12 can be considered generic qualities, skills and abilities as they are not discipline-specific).

*These qualities may or may not be considered advantageous depending on the context of employment



Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities

Lists of a university’s expectations of its graduates, whatever terminology is used, must

be drawn up in context and based on the particular institution’s important values as

determined by its top leadership. As such, each institution will have its own unique set of

expectations of its graduates. Keeping this in mind, in order to draw up the list of

Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities we need to start with values identified as important by

TUC’s top leadership. The following list (Table 7 below) is extracted from key

statements published in various TUC official documents7.

Table 7. Values identified as important by TUC leadership

productivity

leadership

well-roundedness

competitiveness

resilience

global perspective

economic prosperity

success

excellence

continual learning

integrity

commitment

enthusiasm

respectful of personal and cultural differences

initiative

responsibility

effort of individuals and teams

frankness and sincerity

amenable and amiable

supportive and nurturing

healthy balance between professional and personal life

enjoyment of work

The next step is to collate the values listed in Table 7 with the key qualities, abilities and

skills that define the successful graduate in Table 6. This is done in Table 8 below.

The final step is to comprehensively and coherently define the list of Taylor’s Graduate

Capabilities (TGC). Retaining only those items from Table 8 that are achievable through

deliberate study8, including both discipline-specific knowledge as well as generic skills,

and organizing them into groupings based on definitions given in Table 2, the description

of what it means to be a Taylor’s graduate is uniquely defined as in Table 9 below.

Beliefs and assumptions underlying our institutional goal of the concrete integration of

TGC within the teaching and learning philosophy of TUC as well as all TUC degree-level

curricula are presented following that.

7 Appendix 2.

8 See Table 5.



Table 8. Collating TUC values with successful graduate qualities, abilities and skills competitiveness Mastery of subject area, evidenced by excellent academic record

- sound understanding of foundational concepts and theories in

subject area excellence

Mastery of people skills, evidenced by ability to relate to

interviewers and referees frankness and sincerity

enthusiasm Mastery of self, evidenced by self composure, confidence,

enthusiasm, ease with self enjoyment of work

continual learning

initiative and enthusiasm

individual effort

excellence

Drive to update own expertise – foundations and skills for

lifelong learning

- Initiative to continually improve and learn

- Ability to comprehend a wide variety of literature

- Awareness of contemporary global issues

- Learns autonomously

- Able to use appropriate tools

- Able to acquire and manage information

- Able to learn effectively enjoyment of learning

initiative

individual effort Initiative – ability to identify work-related problems that need

solving responsibility

Problem-solving skills

- Defines issues or problems well

- Analyses problems comprehensively

- Applies knowledge effectively and applies theory to practise - Able to arrive at workable and effective solutions

productivity

well-roundedness Communication skills

- Speaks and writes well

- Able to organize, synthesize and present information

effectively excellence

teamwork

amenable and amiable

supportive and nurturing

Interpersonal skills

- Understands team dynamics, power of teams and teamwork

- Works well with others in a team

- Able to assume leadership in small and/or big groups leadership

integrity

resilience Intrapersonal skills – able to manage self, personal life, good

time management, personal image/professionalism healthy balance between

professional and personal life

Intrapersonal skills – works independently in context of tasks to

be completed commitment

productivity Technology savvy

- Executive keyboarding - Effective use of ICT and related technologies

well-roundedness

global perspective Cosmopolitan thinking and intercultural competence

Forms opinions and articulates views from a global perspective respectful of personal and

cultural differences



Table 9. Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities

The teaching and learning approach at Taylor’s University College is focused on

developing the Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities in its students, capabilities that encompass

the knowledge, cognitive capabilities and soft skills of our graduates.

A Taylor’s graduate has proven ability and is capable in the following areas

Discipline-specific knowledge

Sound understanding of foundational concepts and theories in subject area

Cognitive capabilities

Foundations and skills for lifelong learning

Learns autonomously

Able to acquire and manage information

Ability to comprehend a wide variety of literature

Awareness of contemporary global issues


Defines issues or problems well

Analyses problems comprehensively

Applies knowledge effectively and applies theory to practise

Able to arrive at workable and effective solutions

Soft skills

Communication skills

Ability to speak and write well

Able to organize, synthesize and present information effectively


Understands team dynamics, power of teams and teamwork

Works with others in a team

Able to assume leadership in small and/or big groups

Intrapersonal skills

Ability to manage time effectively

Understands the role of personal image and professionalism at work

Works independently in context of tasks to be completed

Cosmopolitan thinking and intercultural competence

Forms opinions and articulates views from a global perspective

Awareness of and sensitivity to cross-cultural differences

Technology savvy

Executive keyboarding

Effective use of ICT and related technologies

The learning environment at Taylor’s is further geared towards nurturing the Taylor’s

Core Values: the personal attributes of excellence, integrity, passion for work,

interpersonal respect and care, openness in communication and a healthy balance

between professional and personal life.

Through participation in various optional electives, including co-curricular activities,

Taylor’s students may also develop additional knowledge, cognitive capabilities and soft

skills other than those listed. These, as well as the Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities above,

are recorded by students in the form of individual student portfolios and verified by

Taylor’s University College against the set of expectations for each subject, program and

co-curricular activity.



Beliefs and assumptions

The two fundamental beliefs we hold as an institution are stated here:

1. Tertiary education is fundamental in developing human resource.

2. Tertiary education is capable of equipping individuals with both discipline-specific as well as generic abilities

9.

There are three underlying assumptions in defining TGC that need further clarification:

1. The TUC student’s goal is employability.

2. The TUC student is self-motivated to learn.

3. All individuals are equally able to achieve desired abilities. These three assumptions are discussed in further detail below.

Assumption #1 Student goal is employability

There are two alternative goals to being employed for those enrolled in a first degree

program: postgraduate study is the first, and wanting to be self-employed or to start one’s

own business is the other. Of course the latter goal does not actually require a degree, but

many students with such aspirations choose to enroll in a degree program first with the

idea that it will better equip them for success in that arena, as well as provide them with

some fallback qualifications, just in case. The attainment of a good first degree, on the

other hand, is a prerequisite for entry into postgraduate study. There are two main points

to take note of here: while the list of TGC (Table 9) is still relevant in both cases, either

goal requires certain additional capabilities10 not mentioned in our TGC list; secondly,

only a minority of students have either of these goals, the vast majority still enter

university with the aim of enhancing their employability11. In view of this, our TGC list

can be considered complete as a baseline description of a Taylor’s graduate. The rationale

for not including the additional capabilities of originality/creativity/innovation is justified

under assumption #3 below12.

9 We have already discussed at length the difference between inherent qualities and those capable of being

developed through education and training. 10 Candidates for postgraduate study engage with the body of knowledge in a field as a set of knowledge

claims that are essentially contestable, as opposed to the requirement in the working world to merely find

real-world applications of discipline-specific knowledge. (Holmes, 2002). The additional set of capabilities

required here include “original, independent and critical thinking, and the ability to develop theoretical

concepts” (UK GRAD, 2007). Graduates who want to start their own businesses also require additional

capabilities, including exceptionally high self-motivation, the ability to think out-of-the-box

(creativity/innovation), exceptional resilience and an irrepressible entrepreneurial spirit. 11 In lieu of actual figures as to how many first degree holders in Malaysia immediately continue onto a

postgraduate degree, Table 10 below provides a rough guide as to the percentage of students continuing to

postgraduate studies.

Table 10. Malaysian student cumulative enrolment 2000-2005*

Level/institution First degree Masters degree Percentage enrolled in

postgraduate study

Public universities 1,133,539 161,322 14.2%

Private universities 484,310 18,247 3.8 %

Total 1,617,849 179,569 11.1% *Extracted from MOHE statistics (2007).

12 As are some other qualities or capabilities.



Assumption #2 Students are self-motivated to learn

Not all students may be self-motivated. Self-motivation is a fundamental quality without

which other qualities may be difficult or even impossible to develop. Students lacking

this prerequisite quality may be considered dysfunctional – however such students do

exist13 and in such cases this dysfunctionality needs to be rectified in order for them to

fully develop the TGC and for TUC to authoritatively say that every single Taylor’s

graduate does indeed possess the complete set of TGC14.

Assumption #3 All individuals are equally able to achieve desired abilities

Individuals have varying capacities for learning and achievement15 (Gottfredson, 1998,

2003). TGC does not discount these differences but rather offers a baseline set of

capabilities that potential employers can count on from TUC graduates, that serve to

distinguish TUC graduates from graduates of other institutions. TGC adds both real as

well as perceived value to TUC graduates (Nunan, 1999 p.9). TGC essentially provides

assurance of TUC graduates’ competence in all areas listed, while acknowledging that a

portion of its graduates will achieve levels of proficiency in some or all areas and an even

smaller proportion will be truly adept, again in some or all areas. This assurance, which

essentially upholds the integrity of the TUC brand, is the reason why inherent qualities

such as true creativity and innovation, entrepreneurial spirit, real leadership qualities,

integrity or authenticity have not been included in the list of TGC – it would be

impossible for TUC to guarantee that each and every one of its graduates possess all

these essentially inherent (though not to say insusceptible to development) qualities. By

restricting the list of TGC to achievable as well as verifiable capabilities, TGC addresses

the issues raised by opponents of the so-called “key skills agenda” (Holmes, 1998) and

remains highly applicable in the context for which it is designed.

Implementation Strategies

The final section of the paper integrates TGC within the teaching and learning philosophy

of TUC. Our model is student-centred as well as intentional-learning based, which

directly impacts how discipline-specific content is delivered as well as how students are

evaluated. This in turn affects the design of our curricula and introduces also the idea of

mapping students’ acquisition of generic skills through the use of a cumulative student

portfolio.

13 Typically they may be enrolled in an undergraduate degree of their parents’ choice, not their own, or they

may severely lack confidence in their own ability to succeed. The reasons for lack of motivation could be

any of several reasons and these will need to be discovered and addressed on an individual basis. It is

beyond the scope of the present paper to discuss strategies for dealing with this at this juncture, however

such strategies are envisioned to utilize the student advisor/counsellor system. 14 This is an appropriate juncture to reiterate the already cited quotation (p.3, para.2), “It is contended that,

where institutions can present credible information about their commitment to developing qualities in

graduates and students can provide evidence of the attainment of these qualities, both the institution and its

students will be advantaged in a buyer’s market for graduates.” (Nunan, 1999 p.9). 15 This topic is undoubtedly a sensitive as well as a potentially controversial one, especially in terms of

publications discussing the issues involved such as “The Bell Curve” (Herrnstein and Murray, 1994).



Teaching and learning philosophy

The central focus of the TUC teaching and learning philosophy is on developing the

complete set of TGC in all its students. This goal aligns itself naturally with the concept

of student-centred learning, which focuses on the student's needs, abilities, interests and

learning styles with the teacher as a facilitator of learning.

Graduate capabilities are best developed when they are embedded in the process and

content of learning (Hart et al, 1999 p.304; Gibbs and McAlpine, 2006). Such embedding

requires a thoughtful review of the learning objectives, teaching approaches, and

assessment methods to ensure the development of authentic learning environments (Hart

et al, 1999 p.304). Students also need to develop an explicit understanding of their own

approach to learning as well as confidence in their discipline-specific knowledge base in

order to confidently address generic skills as well as meta-cognitive functions – this is

what is meant by “intentional learning” (Hart et al, 1999 p.302; AACU, 2002 p.21).

This student-centred as well as intentional-learning based teaching and learning approach

is characterized by the following:

1. Learning environment

- An existing knowledge base, opportunities to reflect on and to regulate learning,

personal motivation, individual development, and the social context of learning

describing aspects of the learning environment that reflect a learning rather than a

teaching orientation. (Hart et al, 1999 p.304).

- Authentic learning environments that are purposefully designed to simulate

situations in which students may ultimately be employed, linking experience,

previous understandings, and new knowledge in a way that is readily apparent to

the learner. (Hart et al, 1999 p.304).

2. Learning process The development of graduate capabilities is a spiral rather than a linear process

requiring reflection and structured opportunities to compare variety in experience.

(Hart et al, 1999 p.304). This reflects a constructivist view of learning that

encourages students to use active techniques (experiments as well as real-world

problem solving) to create more knowledge and to constantly assess how the activity

is helping them gain understanding. This continuous reflection helps the student’s

ideas to gain complexity and power, and develops increasingly strong abilities to

integrate new information, with the primary goal being to help students to learn how

to learn (Grennon Brooks, 2004).

3. Learning strategies - Variety in learning opportunities that allows students to experiment with

integrating and applying skills and knowledge and then reflecting in a structured

manner on the relative success of similar solutions in different situations. (Hart et

al, 1999 p.303 and 307).

- Consideration of different student learning styles when planning varied learning

opportunities as well as methods of student evaluation/assessment.



4. Learning facilitator (teacher’s role) One of the teacher's main roles becomes to encourage this learning and reflection

process, so that the teacher helps the student to construct knowledge rather than to

reproduce a series of facts. The constructivist teacher provides tools such as problem-

solving and inquiry-based learning activities with which students formulate and test

their ideas, draw conclusions and inferences, and pool and convey their knowledge in

a collaborative learning environment. (Grennon Brooks, 2004).

Curricular design

Hart et al (1999 p.307) suggest a two-pronged strategy for explicitly addressing the focus

on graduate capabilities throughout the curriculum:

1. University staff need to ensure that students experience a variety of learning experiences and have structured opportunities for reflection and interaction with other

students (peer consultation) throughout the course of their studies.

2. Students need assistance to develop profiles of their learning experiences from the

commencement of their course programmes. Ideally, this individual account of

professional development should be integrated as a core component of the

curriculum.

These strategies, and also our entire TGC initiative, are consistent with the requirements

of the Malaysian National Accreditation Board. The Malaysian Qualifications

Framework defines a general set of expectations of a Bachelors (Honours) degree holders

(LAN, 2006 p.18), including broad statements as to discipline-specific knowledge as well

as generic skills, but does not stipulate how the attainment of such skills should/can be

verified. Appendix 3 shows that TGC not only meets these specific LAN requirements

but exceeds them in a non-irrelevant way, defining a truly distinctive Taylor’s graduate.

Curriculum design is also required to incorporate the following aspects (LAN, 2004 p.2):

Vision; Mission; Goals; Objectives; Learning outcomes; Curriculum content;

Organization of the curriculum; Teaching and learning strategies; Assessment and

evaluation. Appendix 4 (LAN, 2004 p.4) reproduces the distinctions between

“objectives” and “learning outcomes” – this is directly relevant for our current purposes

as the “learning outcomes” are where we will be able to specify our TGC agenda

throughout new TUC degree level curricula. Our TGC initiative however goes

significantly further than merely specifying LAN-required learning outcomes: using

previously developed models (UNSW, 2005; Adelaide, 2001), we specifically state

expectations regarding the progress which students will be expected to make towards

achieving the graduate capabilities in each phase of the new curricula, including a

summary of the development of each capability over all phases of the curriculum, with all

capabilities being cumulative so that once developed in any phase they are expected to be

refined and exercised in subsequent phases. The expectations in the different phases

provide a framework for assessment. Further to this, we provide templates for student’s

to build their individual portfolios that map their development of TGC throughout the

course of their studies. These student portfolios should then be endorsed or verified by

the university against the set of expectations for each subject and program.



Knowledge base

Three sets of documents will need to be prepared in tandem: the tables mapping the

development of each capability over the entire program of study; the tables stating the

expectations for TGC within each academic year of a program; and the individual subject

syllabi, with the individual subject syllabi initially focusing on only the objectives and

learning outcomes as explained in Appendix 4.

The following (Table 11) is adapted from the model by UNSW (2005). Details for

specific degree programs will need to be filled in by program heads and subject

specialists. The development of each capability over the entire curriculum is mapped and

indicated by a black dot within the grid on the right hand side of the table.

Table 11. Development of each Capability over the entire program of study* 1: Sound understanding of foundational concepts and theories in subject

area

Please fill in specific details of particular discipline/subject area here

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

2: Foundations and skills for lifelong learning

Learns autonomously

1.2.1

2.2.5 3.2.2

4.2.1


1.2.2


1.2.3


1.2.4

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

*Similar tables are required for all eight capability areas. Details to be included within the tables are

dependent on discipline-specific content.

The next step is to determine the achievement level of each capability for each phase

(academic year) of the program of study. The following (Table 12) is also adapted from

the model by UNSW (2005). Details for specific degree programs will need to be filled in

by program heads and subject specialists. When drawing up specific program

expectations, it is important to always keep in mind the TUC teaching and learning

philosophy (this paper, pp.14-15) and the fact that graduate capabilities are best

developed when they are embedded in the process and content of discipline-specific

learning. The other point to consider is that not every single course within a particular

program needs to address every single graduate capability – it is the cumulative

experience of the student that develops the entire set of TGC in this individual by the

time they are ready for graduation.



Table 12. First Year Expectations for Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities* 1.1 Sound understanding of

foundational concepts and

theories in subject area

1.2 Foundations and skills

for lifelong learning

1.3 Problem-solving skills 1.4 Communication skills

In relation to themes and

content areas which have been studied, the student:

Learns autonomously

1.2.1

Able to acquire and manage

information 1.2.2


1.2.3

Awareness of contemporary

global issues

1.2.4

Defines issues or problems

well 1.3.1


1.3.2

Applies knowledge effectively

and applies theory to practise

1.3.3

Able to arrive at workable and

effective solutions 1.3.4

Ability to speak well

1.4.1

Ability to write well

1.4.2

Able to organize, synthesize

and present information effectively

1.4.3

1.5 Interpersonal skills 1.6 Intrapersonal skills 1.7 Cosmopolitan thinking

and intercultural

competence

1.8 Technology savvy

Understands team dynamics,

power of teams and teamwork 1.5.1

Works with others in a team 1.5.2


1.5.3

Ability to manage time

effectively 1.6.1

Understands professionalism at work

1.6.2

Works independently in

context of tasks to be

completed 1.6.3

Forms opinions and articulates

views from a global perspective

1.7.1

Awareness of and sensitivity

to cross-cultural differences

1.7.2


1.8.1

Effective use of ICT and

related technologies 1.8.2

*similar tables for second, third and final year expectations are required.

The information to be included in Tables 11 and 12 will need to be correlated with each

other and also with individual subject syllabi.

Skills base

The final set of documents are the templates for the student’s TGC portfolios (Table 13),

adapted from this model by Adelaide University (2001), that allow the student to map

their own development of TGC during the course of their studies. The explanation for

these documents is extracted directly from the Adelaide (2001 p.8) document.

“Form 1 is suitable to record your skills development during your program of study. Mapping your

skills will help you be more aware of the particular transferable skills involved in your learning tasks

and where you are in your skills development. It will help you work more effectively with your teachers

to develop these skills. It will also help you, as graduates, to know your skills and how to promote them

to prospective employers.”

“Form 2 is suitable for summarising transferable skills developed over an entire program of study that is

the perfect complement to your Degree Certificate or Academic Transcript. A Form 2 Portfolio is more

suitable for job applications than Form 1, but it is best completed at the end of your program of study. If

you build up a Form 1 Portfolio, Form 2 can be very easily derived from it.”



Table 13. Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities Portfolio*

PERSONAL TAYLOR’S GRADUATE CAPABILITIES PORTFOLIO course by course, year by year This portfolio proforma is provided by Taylor’s University College. The details within are the work of the individual student

Name: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… Program of Study: ………………………………………………………………………………………….

YEAR 1 COURSES Year: ………... Course: ………………………………………………………………………………

Task TGC developed

Sound understanding of foundational concepts and theories in subject area:

Foundations and skills for lifelong learning:

Problem-solving skills:


Interpersonal skills:

Intrapersonal skills:

Cosmopolitan thinking and intercultural competence:

Technology savvy:

REPEAT AS NECESSARY

*one portfolio proforma should be filled out for every course, with individual tasks within the courses to be

filled in by the student, resulting in one set of documents for each year of study.

References

AACU (Association of American Colleges and Universities). 2002. Greater

Expectations. A New Vision for Learning as a Nation goes to College. National

Panel Report. Washington DC: AACU. (ISBN 0-911696-92-x).

AACU (Association of American Colleges and Universities). 2007. College Learning for

the New Global Century, a report from the National Leadership Council for

Liberal Education and America’s Promise. Washington DC: AACU. (ISBN 978-

0-9779210-4-1).

Adelaide (Adelaide University). 2001. Transferable Skills Mapping for Students. Faculty

of Sciences, Adelaide University.



Azizah, T. 2004. “Facing the Realities of the World of Work”. Workshop on Enhancing

Graduate Employability in a Globalised Economy. 26 July 2004, Putrajaya:

Economic Planning Unit, Malaysia Prime Minister’s Department.

Chang, M. 2004. “Why some Graduates are more Marketable than others”. Workshop on

Enhancing Graduate Employability in a Globalised Economy. 26 July 2004,

Putrajaya: Economic Planning Unit, Malaysia Prime Minister’s Department.

Dawson, I., Jackson, A. and Rhodes, M. 2006. Graduate Skills and Recruitment in the

City. Financial Services Skill Council. Guildhall: City of London.

DEST (Department of Education, Science and Training, Australia). 2002. Employability

Skills for the Future. Report. Commonwealth of Australia.

Gibbs, G. and McAlpine, L. 2006. “Developing graduate’s skills and accrediting

graduates to HEA professional teaching standards: combining two initiatives

through preparing for academic practice”. Workshop conducted at UK Grad Fifth

Annual Conference. 7 September 2006, London: SRHE, UKCGE, Universities

UK and UUK Europe Unit.

Goldsworthy, Ashley. (Ed.). 2003. Developing Generic Skills: Examples of Best Practice.

B-HERT News, Issue 16, April 2003. Available at:

http://www.bhert.com/documents/B-HERTNEWSNo.16_001.pdf

Goldsworthy, Ashley. (Ed.). 2006. Emerging Skills: 2020 and Beyond – What will they be

and as a nation how are we placed? B-HERT News, Issue 23, March 2006.

Available at: http://www.bhert.com/documents/B-HERTNEWS23.pdf

Gottfredson, L.S. 1998. “The General Intelligence Factor”. Scientific American Presents.

9(4): 24-29.

Gottfredson, L.S. 2003. The challenge and promise of cognitive career assessment.

Journal of Career Assessment. 11(2): 115-135.

Grennon Brooks, J. 2004. Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning.

Thirteen Ed Online, Educational Broadcasting Corporation. Available at:

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html

Hart, B., Bowden, J. and Watters, J. 1999. “Graduate Capabilities: a Framework for

Assessing Course Quality”. Higher Education in Europe, XXIV: 301-308.

Hay, I., Orrell, J. and Torjul, P. 2003. “Well What Do You Know? A Skills Portfolio

Project.” In Developing Generic Skills: Examples of Best Practice. B-HERT

News, Issue 16, April 2003. Pp.11-12.

Herrnstein, R. and Murray, C. 1994. The Bell Curve. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Holmes, Leonard. 1998. “One more time, transferable skills don't exist ... (and what we

should do about it).” Presented at Higher Education for Capability conference,

'Embedding Key Skills Across the Curriculum'. Nene College, Northampton. 27th

February 1998.

Holmes, Leonard. 2001. “Reconsidering Graduate Employability: The Graduate Identity

Approach”, in Quality in Higher Education, vol 7, no 2, 2001, pp. 111-120.



Holmes, Leonard. 2002. “Reframing the skills agenda in higher education: graduate

identity and the double warrant”, in Preston, D. (Ed.), University of Crisis. New

York: Rodopi Press.

Hopper, R. (Ed.). 2002. Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challenges for Tertiary

Education. World Bank. (ISBN 0-8213-5143-5).

LAN (Lembaga Akreditasi Negara). 2004. Guidelines on Developing Learning

Outcomes. Petaling Jaya: National Accreditation Board, Malaysia.

LAN (Lembaga Akreditasi Negara). 2006. Malaysian Qualifications Framework.

Petaling Jaya: National Accreditation Board, Malaysia.

Lee Cheng Suan. 2004. “Economic Growth & Employment Generation: Employers’

Perspective”. Workshop on Enhancing Graduate Employability in a Globalised

Economy. 26 July 2004, Putrajaya: Economic Planning Unit, Malaysia Prime

Minister’s Department.

Markwell, Donald. (Ed.). 2003. Improving Teaching and Learning in Universities. B-

HERT News, Issue 18, November 2003. Available at:

http://www.bhert.com/documents/b-hertnews18.pdf

MOHE (Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia) official website. 2007. Jumlah

Enrolmen Pelajar di Institusi Pengajian Tinggi, tahun 2000 – 2005. Available at:

http://www.mohe.gov.my/statistik_v3/stat_pdf.php?no=1_2_makro.pdf

Nunan, Ted. 1999. “Graduate Qualities, Employment and Mass Higher Education.”

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999.

Otter, Sue. 1997. The ability based curriculum: some snapshots of progress in key skills

in higher education. Oxford Brookes University, UK. Available:

http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/6_archive/abc/abcconts.html

Prospects.ac.uk. 2007. Employability and Myths Uncovered. Manchester: HECSU,

Graduate Prospects Ltd and AGCAS. Available at:

http://www.prospects.ac.uk/cms/ShowPage/Home_page/What_do_graduates_do_

_2007/Employability_and_myths_uncovered/p!ebfleki

UK GRAD website (www.grad.ac.uk). 2007. Just for Postgrads: Evaluate Your Skills.

Cambridge, UK: UK GRAD Programme®. Available at:

http://www.grad.ac.uk/cms/ShowPage/Home_page/Resources/Just_for_Postgrads

/Managing_yourself/Evaluate_your_skills/p!elkimXX

Ungku Harun Al’Rashid Ahmad. 2004. “Meeting the Demands of Global Firms: Survey

Finding”. Workshop on Enhancing Graduate Employability in a Globalised

Economy. 26 July 2004, Putrajaya: Economic Planning Unit, Malaysia Prime

Minister’s Department.

UNSW (University of New South Wales). 2005. Expectations for the Level of

Achievement of the Graduate Capabilities in Each Phase of the Curriculum.

Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales.



APPENDIX 1. Comparison of desirable graduate qualities, abilities and skills

Australiaa, b

UKc, d

USAe

Malaysiaf, g, h, i

Abstract

qualities

Balanced attitude

to work and home

Ability to handle

pressure

Motivation

Adaptability and

flexibility

Appropriate behaviour

and personal

presentation, social

maturity

Commitment

Resilience

Motivation

Ethical reasoning and

action

Civic knowledge and

engagement

Confidence

Dedication

Decisiveness

Integrity

Disciplined

Flexibility

Enthusiasm

Multi-skilled

Relevant experience

Written

communication

Interpersonal

communication

Networking

Communication skills:

written, oral and

presentation

Business writing skills

Social interaction skills

Written and oral

communication

English fluency

Communication

skills: written, oral

and presentation

Negotiation skills

Business writing


Teamwork Teamwork

Leadership potential

Teamwork Teamwork

Leadership potential

Problem solving Problem solving Problem solving

Inquiry and analysis

Critical and creative

thinking

Problem solving

Analytical skills

Critical and creative

thinking

Initiative and

enterprise

Innovation and fresh

insight

Resourcefulness

Innovative

Planning and

organising

Time management Planning and

administrative skills

Time management

Self management Self management

Lifelong learning Proven intellectual

ability

Foundations and

skills for lifelong

learning

Learning ability

Easily trainable

Technology Computer literacy Information literacy ICT skills

Numeracy Quantitative literacy Numeracy

Ability

to work as an

individual

Independence

Possess

international

perspectives

Cultural understanding

and foreign language

skills

Intercultural

knowledge and

competence

Bi/multi-lingual

Intercultural

Soft

skills

Thorough study of

human culture,

physical and natural

world

Broad knowledge

Hard

skills

Basic awareness and

knowledge, including

current developments, in

disciplinary area

Synthesis and

advanced

accomplishment

across general and

specialized studies

Technical skills

Relevant degrees

a DEST, 2002 p.58. b Nunan, 1999 p.4.

c Otter, 1997 Section 2.

d Dawson et al., 2006 pp.22, 34

e AACU, 2007 p.3. f Ungku Harun, 2004.

g Azizah, 2004. h Lee, 2004.

i Chang, 2004.



APPENDIX 2. Key statements in official documents reflecting TUC Core Values

“At Taylor’s College, we believe in educating the youth of the world to take their productive place as leaders in the global community.” “Since its inception in 1969, Taylor’s University College has undertaken the important task of developing our nation’s youth into well-rounded, competitive and resilient contributors with global perspectives to the development of Malaysia’s economic growth and prosperity.” “Our curriculum and learning outcomes are designed to equip our graduates, not only to meet the expectations of industry and their chosen profession, but to possess the necessary communication, leadership and lifelong learning skills that are essential for success in the fast-changing global environment.” “Our Core Values: We believe in - being dedicated to a culture of excellence

o we desire to be the best that we can be in the realisation of our personal and organisational aspirations

o we will continually look for ways to be better than we were before, adopting continual learning as the path towards excellence in every aspect of what we do

- acting with integrity o we will be well intentioned and consistent in everything we do o through adherence to a code of conduct that reflects honesty, accountability and ethical

practice, we build and sustain a healthy culture of openness and trust within the organisation and society at large

- being passionate in what we do o we have a belief that what we do is meaningful and fulfilling o passion commits us to our work o through our commitment and enthusiasm we inspire others

- respecting and caring for each other o we will promote an environment where every member is valued and appreciated, where

personal and cultural differences are respected and members have a safe place for expression

o we will encourage our people to exercise initiative and responsibility and the effort of individuals and teams will always be recognised

- openness in communication o openness in communication means we need to be frank and sincere in our exchanges o conducted in an amenable and amiable manner, it promotes trust and understanding

- creating enjoyable environments o we will create environments that are supportive, nurturing and conducive to their purpose o we are also committed to creating an employee friendly work environment that allow for a

healthy balance between our professional and personal lives o these commitments will enable us to attract and retain the best qualified people and create

a workplace of which we can be proud and where we can always enjoy our work while carrying out our mission”



APPENDIX 3. Comparison of LAN Bachelor (Honours) graduating requirements

against Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities.

LAN requirement Corresponding TGC menunjukkan pengetahuan dan kefahaman

prinsip-prinsip asas sesuatu bidang yang diperoleh

daripada buku teks lanjutan dan di sempadan ilmu

exhibits knowledge and understanding of basic principles

in a specific discipline, obtained from advanced text

books and frontiers of knowledge


Sound understanding of foundational concepts and

theories in subject area

dapat mengguna ilmu pengetahuan dan kefahaman

dengan kaedah yang menunjukkan keprofesionalan dalam

pekerjaan

able to use knowledge and understanding in ways that

show professionalism at work

Applies knowledge effectively and applies theory to

practise


berhujah dan menyelesaikan masalah dalam bidang

gives opinions and solves problems in field of study





mempunyai teknik dan kebolehan mencari

dan mengguna data untuk membuat keputusan yang

mengambil kira isu sosial, saintifik dan etika yang

relevan

has ability and techniques to find and use data to make

decisions that take into account relevant social, scientific

and ethical issues


cekap berkomunikasi dan dapat menyampaikan

maklumat, idea, masalah dan penyelesaian kepada pakar

dan bukan pakar

effective communicator and able to present information,

ideas, problems and solutions to experts and laypeople



Able to organize, synthesize and present information

effectively

mempunyai kemahiran berpasukan dan interpersonal

yang bersesuaian dengan pekerjaan

workplace teamwork and interpersonal skills


Understands team dynamics, power of teams and

teamwork


mempunyai kemahiran belajar untuk meneruskan

pengajian lanjutan dengan autonomi yang tinggi

highly autonomous learning skills suited for further

education


Learns autonomously





Understands the role of personal image and

professionalism at work

Works independently in context of tasks to be

completed


Forms opinions and articulates views from a global

perspective

Awareness of and sensitivity to cross-cultural

differences

Technology savvy





APPENDIX 4. Why do we need to develop the objectives as well as the learning

outcomes? (LAN, 2004 p..4 section 2.2).

Objectives Learning Outcomes

Objectives should be developed:

• to ensure the changes of behaviour

in students in the process of

teaching and learning.

• to determine the topics, concepts,

generalizations, or the content of

other elements to be covered in the

courses of study and subjects.

• to prepare guidance in developing

and designing the curriculum and

instructions, which comprise the

contents and students behaviour in

the process of teaching and

learning.

Learning outcomes should be developed:

• to evaluate the performance of students

on what they know and can do at the

end of their courses.

• to ensure that students can manage

their learning.

• to ensure that what is taught and

learned is intentional.

• to know what is supposed to be

changed.

• to improve as well as to enhance the

quality of learning.

• to plan towards improving the quality

of education and the effectiveness of

the institutions.

• to know where the human resources

can be invested.

• to prepare the accountability that can

be put forward to the outside

constituents.

PART D

TEACHING

AND

LEARNING

FRAMEWORK

(TLF)

TUC Teaching and Learning Framework, by Minni K. Ang, PhD, for Taylor’s University College


Taylor’s University College Teaching and Learning Framework

The aim of this paper is to present the Taylor’s University College (TUC) Teaching and

Learning Framework (TLF) that integrates the newly developed Taylor’s Graduate

Capabilities (TGC). This paper is presented in the following logical progression:

1. Goals of the TUC TLF

2. Philosophy behind the TLF

3. General approach adopted

4. Specific strategies and instructional models

5. Coherent plans for implementation

6. Anticipated challenges and possible resolutions

Goals The primary goal of the TUC TLF is to develop the complete set of TGC in all our

students, capabilities that encompass the knowledge, cognitive capabilities and soft skills

of our graduates and that are believed to be essential for sustained individual success in

life and work.

The TUC TLF is both a guide to effective teaching for staff and a presentation of the

central role of learning at TUC to the public.

The purpose of the TUC TLF is to:

• highlight TUC’s aspirations for teaching and learning;

• outline the assumptions, expectations and responsibilities relating to good practice;

• provide a framework for Schools to develop their own Teaching and Learning Action

Plans; and

• provide a framework for monitoring progress within Schools towards desired goals

related to teaching and learning

Philosophy The TUC teaching and learning philosophy is student-centred as well as intentional-

learning based. The goal of developing the TGC in all TUC students aligns itself

naturally with the concept of student-centred learning, which focuses on the student's

needs, abilities, interests and learning styles with the teacher as a facilitator of learning.

Students also need to develop an explicit understanding of their own approach to learning

as well as confidence in their discipline-specific knowledge base in order to confidently

address generic skills as well as meta-cognitive functions – this is what is meant by

“intentional learning” (Hart et al, 1999 p.302; AACU, 2002 p.21).



Student-Centred Learning

Student-centred learning, also known as learner-centred learning, is well-defined by

McCombs (2001 p.186), “Learner-centred is the perspective that couples a focus on

individual learners - their heredity, experiences, perspectives, backgrounds, talents,

interests, capacities, and needs – with a focus on learning – the best available knowledge

about learning and how it occurs and about teaching practices that are most effective in

promoting the highest levels of motivation, learning, and achievement for all learners.

This dual focus then informs and drives educational decision making.”

This definition is based on the Learner-Centred Psychological Principles (APA, 1997)

about learners and learning. These principles provide firm research-validated knowledge

about learners and learning, the understanding of which is crucial to any student-centred

teaching and learning framework. The principles are thus directly relevant to our TUC

TLF. The Learner-Centred Psychological Principles are reproduced in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Learner-Centred Psychological Principles (APA, 1997)

COGNITIVE AND METACOGNITIVE FACTORS

Principle 1: Nature of the learning process

The learning of complex subject matter is most

effective when it is an intentional process of

constructing meaning from information and experience.

Principle 2: Goals of the learning process

The successful learner, over time and with support and

instructional guidance, can create meaningful, coherent

representations of knowledge.

Principle 3: Construction of knowledge

The successful learner can link new information with

existing knowledge in meaningful ways.

Principle 4: Strategic thinking

The successful learner can create and use a repertoire of

thinking and reasoning strategies to achieve complex

learning goals.

Principle 5: Thinking about thinking

Higher-order strategies for selecting and monitoring

mental operations facilitate creative and critical

thinking.

Principle 6: Context of learning

Learning is influenced by environmental factors,

including culture, technology, and instructional

practices.

MOTIVATIONAL AND AFFECTIVE FACTORS

Principle 7: Motivational and emotional influences

on learning

What and how much is learned is influenced by the

learner’s motivation. Motivation to learn, in turn, is

influenced by the individual’s emotional states, beliefs,

interests and goals, and habits of thinking.

Principle 8: Intrinsic motivation to learn

The learner’s creativity, higher-order thinking, and

natural curiosity all contribute to motivation to learn.

Intrinsic motivation is stimulated by tasks of optimal

novelty and difficulty, relevant to personal interests,

and providing for personal choice and control.

Principle 9: Effects of motivation on effort

Acquisition of complex knowledge and skills requires

extended learner effort and guided practice. Without

learners’ motivation to learn, the willingness to exert

this effort is unlikely without coercion.

DEVELOPMENTAL AND SOCIAL FACTORS

Principle 10: Developmental influence on learning

As individuals develop, they encounter different

opportunities and experience different constraints for

learning. Learning is most effective when differential

development within and across physical, intellectual,

emotional, and social domains is taken into account.

Principle 11: Social influences on learning

Learning is influenced by social interactions,

interpersonal relations, and communication with others.

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES FACTORS

Principle 12: Individual differences in learning

Learners’ different strategies, approaches, and

capabilities for learning are a function of prior

experience and heredity.

Principle 13: Learning and diversity

Learning is most effective when differences in learners’

linguistic, cultural, and social backgrounds are taken

into account.

Principle 14: Standards and assessment

Setting appropriately high and challenging standards

and assessing the learner and learning progress—

including diagnostic, process, and outcome

assessment—are integral parts of the learning process.



Intentional Learning

The value in incorporating the graduate capabilities concept within the curricula lies in its

purposefulness being explicitly made known to students from the very beginning.

“Becoming such an intentional learner means developing self-awareness about the reason

for study, the learning process itself, and how education is used.” (AACU, 2002 p.22).

This principle is a focused articulation of principles 1, 2, 3 and 7 from the Learner-

Centred Psychological Principles listed in Table 1, but can also be considered an

articulation of the cognitive theory of learning where “Learning is viewed as an active

process that occurs within the learner and which can be influenced by the learner”

(Dabbagh, 2007) and “Emphasis is on the building blocks of knowledge (e.g. identifying

prerequisite relationships of content).” (Ibid).

Approach The student-centred intentional-learning based teaching and learning approach is

characterized by the following:

1. Learning environment - An existing knowledge base, opportunities to reflect on and to regulate learning,

personal motivation, individual development, and the social context of learning

describing aspects of the learning environment that reflect a learning rather than a

teaching orientation. (Hart et al, 1999 p.304).

- Authentic learning environments that are purposefully designed to simulate

situations in which students may ultimately be employed, linking experience,

previous understandings, and new knowledge in a way that is readily apparent to

the learner. (Ibid).

2. Learning process The development of graduate capabilities is a spiral rather than a linear process

requiring reflection and structured opportunities to compare variety in experience.

(Hart et al, 1999 p.304). This reflects a constructivist view of learning that

encourages students to use active techniques (experiments as well as real-world

problem solving) to create more knowledge and to constantly assess how the activity

is helping them gain understanding. This continuous reflection helps the student’s

ideas to gain complexity and power, and develops increasingly strong abilities to

integrate new information, with the primary goal being to help students to learn how

to learn (Grennon Brooks, 2004).

3. Learning strategies - Variety in learning opportunities that allows students to experiment with

integrating and applying skills and knowledge and then reflecting in a structured

manner on the relative success of similar solutions in different situations. (Hart et

al, 1999 p.303 and 307).

- Consideration of different student learning styles when planning varied learning

opportunities as well as methods of student evaluation/assessment.



4. Learning facilitator (teacher’s role) One of the teacher's main roles becomes to encourage this learning and reflection

process, so that the teacher helps the student to construct knowledge rather than to

reproduce a series of facts. The constructivist teacher provides tools such as problem-

solving and inquiry-based learning activities with which students formulate and test

their ideas, draw conclusions and inferences, and pool and convey their knowledge in

a collaborative learning environment. (Grennon Brooks, 2004).

The four areas of focus within our teaching and learning approach are discussed in further

detail in the following paragraphs.

Learning Environment

Eight mutually interacting characteristics provide guidelines for designing constructivist

learning environments (Jonassen, 2006) that are completely consistent with our TUC TLF

goals and philosophy – the constructivist learning environment is: active, constructive,

collaborative, intentional, complex, contextual, conversational, and reflective. The

following descriptions of the characteristics are extracted from Jonassen (2006) for our

purposes. All these need to be taken into consideration when designing TUC curricula

and specific teaching and learning approaches.

Active: Learners are engaged by the learning process in conscious processing of

information where they are responsible for the result. Through formal and informal

apprenticeships and communities and play and work, learners develop skills and

knowledge which they then share with other members of those communities with whom

they learned and practiced those skills. In all of these situations, learners actively

manipulate the objects and tools of the trade and learn by reflecting on what they have

done.

Constructive: Learners integrate new ideas with prior knowledge in order to make sense

or reconcile a discrepancy, curiosity, or puzzlement. They construct their own meaning

for different phenomena. The models that they build to explain things are initially simple

and unsophisticated, but with experience, support, and reflection, they become

increasingly complex.

Collaborative: Learners naturally work in learning and knowledge building

communities, exploiting each others skills while providing social support and modeling

and observing the contributions of each member.

Intentional: When learners are actively and willfully trying to achieve a cognitive goal

they think and learn more. Learning environments need to support learners in articulating

what their goals are in any learning situation.

Complex: Real-world problems include multiple components and multiple perspectives

and cannot be solved in predictable ways. Students must be engaged in solving complex

and ill-structured problems as well as simple problems. Unless learners are required to

engage in higher order thinking, they will develop oversimplified views of the world.



Contextual: Learning tasks are situated in meaningful real world tasks or simulated in

case-based or problem-based learning environments rather than abstracting ideas in rules

that are memorized and then applied to other canned problems. Knowledge and skills are

taught as in real life, useful contexts and providing new and different contexts for

learners to practice using those ideas.

Conversational: Learning is inherently a social, dialogical process: given a problem or

task, people naturally seek out opinions and ideas from others. Technologies can support

this conversational process by connecting learners across locations. When learners

become part of knowledge building communities both in and outside of the classroom,

they learn that there are multiple ways of viewing the world and multiple solutions to

most problems.

Reflective: Learners are required to articulate their actions, decisions, strategies and

answers. When they articulate what they have learned and reflect on the processes and

decisions that were entailed by the process, they understand more and are better able to

use the knowledge that they have constructed when faced with new situations.

The relationship among these characteristics is illustrated in Figure 1. Each impacts upon

all the others and none occurs in isolation.

Figure 1. Constructivist Learning Environment Characteristics (Jonassen, 2006)

Learning Process

The key to designing an effective teaching approach lies in a thorough understanding of

the learning process. We have already considered the Learner-Centred Psychological

Principles (this paper, page 2) as our initial step towards a better understanding of

learners and learning.



The goal of our TUC TLF is to develop the TGC, embedded as an integral part of the

curriculum and not superficially superimposed in any way. Anderson and Krathwohl

(2001) revised Bloom's (1964) original taxonomy by combining both the cognitive

process (process used to learn) and knowledge dimensions (knowledge to be learned).

This new expanded taxonomy is not only useful in understanding the learning process but

also central to designing efficiently aligned learning objectives, teaching approaches and

assessment methods. The revised taxonomy is presented in Table 2 below.

Table 2. The Revised Taxonomy Table (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001) The Cognitive Process Dimension The

Knowledge

Dimension

Remember

(Knowledge)

Understand

(Comprehension)

Apply

(Application)

Analyze

(Analysis)

Evaluate

(Evaluation)

Create

(Synthesis)

Factual

Conceptual

Procedural

Metacognitive

Using Table 2 above, the objectives for an entire subject can be plotted out, ensuring that

all levels of the cognitive process are used and that students learn different types of

knowledge, while simultaneously ensuring that every subject syllabus is aligned to the

overall goal of developing the TGC. Using such detailed objectives helps students to

better understand the purpose of each activity by clarifying the student’s activity (Cruz,

2003) and is consistent with our intentional learning approach. Anderson and Krathwohl

(2001) also list specific verbs to be used when writing objectives for each column of the

cognitive process dimension that define explicit1 performance to be carried out by the

learner. These verbs are listed in Table 3 below, which also integrates the revised

hierarchy2 of learning behaviours in the cognitive domain.

Table 3. Revised Hierarchy for Bloom’s Cognitive Learning Domain Complexity Process Description Specific verbs

Synthesis builds a pattern from

diverse elements

Create: generating, planning, producing

Evaluation judges the value of

information

Evaluate: checking, critiquing

Analysis separates information into

part for better

understanding

Analyze: Differentiating, organizing,

attributing

Application applying knowledge to a

new situation

Apply: Executing, implementing

Comprehension understanding

information

Understand: Interpreting, exemplifying,

classifying, summarizing, inferring,

comparing, explaining

Knowledge recall of data Remember: Recognizing, Recalling

1 This reiterates the importance of explicit learning outcomes being made known to students if they are to

be intentional learners. 2 The six categories are arranged on scale of difficulty, meaning that a learner who is able to perform at the

higher levels of the taxonomy, is demonstrating a more complex level of cognitive thinking (Martin, 2001).



Figure 2. Constructivist TLF (Bencze, 2005)

Savery and Duffy (1996) characterize the constructivist view of the learning process in

terms of three primary propositions:

1. Understanding is in our interactions with the environment – what the learner

understands is a function of the content, the context, the activity of the learner, and

the goals of the learner.

2. Cognitive conflict or puzzlement is the stimulus for learning and determines the

organization and nature of what is learned – we have already read an explanation of

this in the section on learning environments: “Learners integrate new ideas with prior

knowledge in order to make sense or reconcile a discrepancy, curiosity, or

puzzlement.” (Jonassen, 2006).

3. Knowledge evolves through social negotiation and through the evaluation of the

viability of individual understandings. The important consideration here is that all

views, or all constructions, are not equally viable – understandings must be tested to

determine how adequately they allow us to interpret and function in our world. Our

social environment provides alternative views and additional information against

which we can test the viability of our understanding and in building the set of

propositions (knowledge) compatible with those understandings.

VonGlasersfeld (1989) states that “The analysis of the process of linguistic

communication shows that knowledge cannot simply be transferred by means of words.

Verbally explaining a problem does not lead to understanding…”.

Bencze’s (2005) teaching framework based on constructivism provides an appropriate

model for our purposes: “The framework (Figure 2) assumes that learners often already

possess 'ideas', such as concepts, skills & attitudes, relating to those teachers plan to

teach. Because such student ideas affect, often negatively, their reactions to new

experiences, teachers should first encourage students to express them. Because students

may not already have some important ideas, however, teachers need to help students to

learn new ones. Finally, the

teacher should encourage

students to judge which ideas are

best for them. This three-phase

cycle (which need not be strictly

followed) can then be repeated.

Moreover, similar 'mini-cycles'

(around the larger cycle) can be

intermeshed with the main cycle.

In other words, teachers can

encourage students to reconstruct

conceptions in at least two

different domains (e.g.,

conceptual3 & procedural

4) more

or less simultaneously.”

3 e.g., developing new conceptions about nature, including laws, theories and inventions (Bencze, 2005).

4 e.g., learning about the nature of the subject area and its relationships with people and living and non-

living environments and skills for inquiry and design (Bencze, 2005).



Constructivism views the learning process as a spiral, where learners continually reflect

on their experiences, gaining complexity, depth of understanding and increasingly strong

abilities to integrate new information (Grennon Brooks, 2004). The constructivist TLF

model in Figure 2 is better represented by spirals rather than circles – the gains in

learning and broadening scope of the learner are reflected by the increasingly large

spirals as learners assess and reassess their ideas on a specific topic (Figure 3 below).

Figure 3. Diagrammatic representation of the constructivist learning process

It is clear that this learning process is reflective of how the graduate capabilities may be

effectively embedded within the curriculum (this paper, page 3). The affective learning

domain of Bloom’s taxonomy is also helpful in understanding the learning process that

occurs in this context. The affective learning domain addresses a learner's emotions

towards learning experiences. A learner's attitudes, interest, attention, awareness, and

values are demonstrated by affective behaviours. These emotional behaviours are

organized in a hierarchical format also, starting from simplest and building to most

complex (Table 4 below). (Martin, 2001).

Table 4. Bloom’s Affective Learning Domain (Martin, 2001)

Internalizing Values behaviour which is controlled by a value

system

Organization organizing values into order of priority

Valuing the value a person attaches to something

Responding to phenomena taking an active part in learning;

participating

Receiving phenomena an awareness; willingness to listen

Learning Strategies

Cognitive flexibility theory (Spiro et al, 1988) is a particular constructivist theory that

focuses on the nature of learning in complex and ill-structured domains and the transfer

of knowledge and skills beyond their initial learning situation (Dabbagh, 2007), making

its learning strategy ideally suited to the acquisition of graduate capabilities. Emphasis is

judging

expressing

learning judging expressing

learning

judging

expressing

learning

PAST

FUTURE

PRESENT



placed upon the presentation of information from multiple perspectives and the use of

many case studies that present diverse examples (Dabbagh, 2007).

A central claim of cognitive flexibility theory is that revisiting the same material, at

different times, in rearranged contexts, for different purposes, and from different

conceptual perspectives is essential for attaining the goals of advanced knowledge

acquisition (mastery of complexity in understanding and preparation for transfer). (Spiro

et al, 1992). Knowledge that will have to be used in a large number of ways has to be

organized, taught, and mentally represented in many different ways (Ibid.). Such an

approach also accommodates the fact that students have differences in learning styles that

may put certain students at a disadvantage in a classroom that utilizes only one approach

when communicating conceptual knowledge.

Besides teaching and learning strategies, an important facet of university education is

assessment. The constructivist assessment model includes student works, observations,

and points of view, as well as tests, with the process being as important as the product.

Many different specific instructional models may be used that are consistent with the

overall learning strategy advocated by the constructivist cognitive flexibility theory. We

will consider some of these in more detail in a later section (Strategies) of this paper. For

now, let us consider the role of the lecturer or teacher first.

Learning Facilitator

Contrary to criticisms by some (conservative/traditional) educators, constructivism does

not dismiss the active role of the teacher or the value of expert knowledge (Grennon

Brooks, 2004). Constructivism modifies that role, so that teachers help students to

construct knowledge rather than to reproduce a series of facts (Ibid.).

Hanley (1994) summarizes the role of the constructivist teacher:

1. Become one of many resources that the student may learn from, not the primary

source of information.

2. Engage students in experiences that challenge previous conceptions of their existing

knowledge.

3. Allow student responses to drive lessons and seek elaboration of students' initial

responses. Allow student some thinking time after posing questions.

5. Encourage the spirit of questioning by asking thoughtful, open-ended questions.

Encourage thoughtful discussion among students.

6. Use cognitive terminology such as "classify," "analyze", and "create" when framing

tasks.

7. Encourage and accept student autonomy and initiative. Be willing to let go of

classroom control.

8. Use raw data and primary sources, along with manipulative, interactive physical

materials.

9. Don't separate knowing from the process of finding out.

10. Insist on clear expression from students. When students can communicate their

understanding, then they have truly learned.



This role is very different from the traditional behaviourist concept of teachers. In the

behaviourist approach to teaching and learning, the teacher’s task consists of providing a

set of stimuli and reinforcements that are likely to get students to emit an appropriate

response. If the goal is to get students to replicate a certain behaviour, this method works

well; but if understanding, synthesis, eventual application, and the ability to use

information in new situations is our goal, this type of training rarely produces it. (Yager,

1991). Table 5 below compares some of the main differences between behaviourist and

constructivist teacher roles.

Table 5. Comparing traditional and constructivist teacher roles TRADITIONAL TEACHER CONSTRUCTIVIST TEACHER

Teachers disseminate information to students;

students are recipients of knowledge

Teachers have a dialogue with students, helping

students construct their own knowledge

Teacher's role is directive, rooted in authority Teacher's role is interactive, rooted in negotiation

Teacher’s main role is telling/talking Teacher’s main role is mentoring/facilitating

Teacher strictly follows a fixed curriculum Pursuit of student questions and interests is valued

Students materials are primarily textbooks,

lecture notes and teacher handouts

Student materials include primary sources of material

and manipulative materials

In fact there are also different “flavours” of constructivism and the one proposed for

adoption by TUC in its TLF is what is known as “interactive constructivist” (Yore, 2001).

In this form of constructivism knowledge is perceived as individualistic conceptions that

have been verified by the epistemic traditions of a community of learners (NRC, 1996,

p. 201). The interactive-constructivist perspective recognizes the limitations of people

and procedures in attaining an accurate interpretation of the real world and stresses

evaluation of all knowledge claims, requiring that explanations and interpretations are

judged against the available data and canonical theories using evidence from Nature and

scientific warrants to justify claims about reality (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997; Kuhn, 1993).

The basic constructivist assumptions about the role of prior knowledge, the plausibility of

alternative ideas, and the resiliency of these ideas are preserved in an interactive-

constructivist perspective; but professional wisdom, the accountability of public

education, and the priorities of learning institutions mediate decisions about what to teach

and how to teach in the classroom (Yore, 2001) The constructivist lecturer / teacher /

learning facilitator’s role is therefore extended to include making sure that students gain

an accurate interpretation of the real world.

Strategies

Instructional Models

In congruence with our discussion so far on learning strategies and the distinct advantage

of adopting multiple instructional models for the communication of conceptual

knowledge and the acquisition of transferable capabilities as explained by the cognitive

flexibility theory, our TUC TLF includes a selection of constructivist instructional



models that may be adopted for use within any particular individual subject syllabus5.

The following descriptions are all either adopted or modified from Dabbagh (2007).

Problem-Based Learning

Problem-Based Learning (PBL) engages the learner in a problem-solving activity. In this

process, instruction begins with a problem to be solved rather than content to be

mastered. Students are introduced to a real-world problem and are encouraged to dive

into it, construct their own understanding of the situation, and eventually find a solution.

Major goals of PBL are to help students develop collaborative learning skills, reasoning

skills, and self-directed learning strategies. PBL is used as a stimulus for Authentic

Learning – the problem is used to develop skills necessary to solve it and other problems

– skills can include physical skills, recall of prior knowledge, and metacognitive skills

related to the problem solving process.

Authentic Learning

Authentic Learning refers to the idea that learners should be presented with problems that

are realistic situations and found in everyday applications of knowledge (Smith and

Ragan, 1999). Young (1993), recommends the following test of authenticity: learning

situations should include some of the characteristics of real-life problem solving,

including ill-structured complex goals. There should also be an opportunity to distinguish

between relevant and irrelevant information. Finding and defining problems as well as

solving them should be a generative process. Finally, students should engage in

collaborative activities in which they draw upon their beliefs and values.

Action Learning6

Action Learning (AL) is a form of problem solving combined with intentional learning in

order to bring about change. The essential elements of action learning are:

1. tackling real tasks in the real world and their real roles

2. learning with and through each other

3. taking individual responsibility and actually implementing solutions and plans

At the heart of the process is a group of 4-6 individuals who meet at regular intervals for

each member to explore a challenging open-ended problem or opportunity. Every

member in turn works on his or her task with the others providing support and challenge.

The aim is to help each member both to tackle the task and to learn from this. A basic

premise of action learning is: “there is no learning without action and no action without

learning”. Another premise is that learning has two elements: programmed knowledge

(traditional instruction or knowledge in current use) and questioning insight. By using the

knowledge and experience of a small group of people combined with skilled questioning,

individuals are enabled to re-interpret old and familiar concepts and produce fresh ideas.

5 In fact each topic should be presented using at least two (or even more) different models, in keeping with

the principles of the cognitive flexibility theory. 6 This section on Action Learning (AL) is as defined by the International Foundation for Action Learning

(IFAL, 2007).



Case-Based Learning

Case-based learning uses case studies to present learners with a realistic situation and

require them to respond as the person who must solve a problem (Smith and Ragan,

1999). In order to solve problems, learners select and manipulate several principles.

According to Hudspeth and Knirk (1989) a complete case describes an entire situation

and includes background information, the actions and reactions of persons involved, the

solution, and the possible consequences of the actions taken. Case materials should have

enough background information and detail so that they are readable and believable (p.

31). Case-based learning is appropriate for learning to problem solve when there is no

one correct solution, particularly with more complex ill-structured problems (Smith &

Ragan, 1999). Case studies can be written so that learners use more cognitive strategies

as they proceed through increasing levels of instruction. Cases were traditionally used in

professional education to teach decision making skills, such as the Harvard Business

School case approach, and is also widespread in the field of medical education.

Collaborative Learning

Collaborative learning, also called cooperative learning, is heavily emphasized in most

constructivist approaches (Roblyer et al, 1996). Students working in groups to solve

problems demonstrates the notion of distributive intelligence, which states that

accomplishment is not a function of one person, but rather a group in which each

contributes to the achievement of desired goals. Cooperative learning is an ideal way for

students to learn the skills that extend beyond the classroom of sharing responsibility and

working together toward common goals. According to Driscoll (2000), collaboration also

provides students with a way to understand point of view outside their own. Advances in

technology over the past several years have made computer-supported collaborative

learning possible. Web-based technologies can make thinking more visible through

virtual access to knowledge experts as well. (Perkins, 1991).

Discovery Learning

Discovery learning has various definitions. At one end of the spectrum we find discovery

learning in its simplest form. The tools and information needed to solve a problem or

learn a concept are provided and the learner makes sense of them. Another definition is

discovery learning as experimentation with some extrinsic intervention such as clues,

coaching, and a framework to help learners get to a reasonable conclusion. At the other

end of the continuum is the expository teaching model of discovery learning where the

learner "discovers" what the teacher decides he is to discover using a process prescribed

by the teacher.

Generative Learning

Generative Learning is a learning process in which learners are given an overall problem

and are asked to generate sub-problems, sub-goals, and strategies in order to achieve the

larger task. Generative learning strategies can be divided into four major stages:

1. recalling information from long-term memory

2. integrating new knowledge with prior knowledge

3. relating prior knowledge to new concepts and ideas in a meaningful way

4. connecting new materials to information or ideas already in the learner's mind.



Using this strategy, a learner relates new ideas to prior knowledge in order to provide

meaning to the new material.

Goal-Based Scenarios

Goal Based Scenarios (GBS) offer learners the opportunity to role-play from a certain

point of view. Their goal is for the learner to accomplish a mission or task associated

with their role in the scenario. In order to achieve this goal, the learner needs to acquire

particular skills and knowledge. This is where and when learning takes place. A GBS

serves both to motivate learners and to give them the opportunity to learn by doing. A

designer of a GBS looks at it from the top-down: what drives the design of a GBS is the

set of target skills the designer wishes the student to gain in the GBS. A student, on the

other hand, tends to look at a GBS from the bottom-up. What drives a student is the

context and structure of the activities the GBS offers.

Microworlds/Simulations

In microworlds, students test 'What do you think will happen if…?' questions in

constrained problem spaces that resemble existing problems in the real world. Learners

generate hypotheses as they use their knowledge and skill to guess what will happen, try

out those guesses, and reformulate them based on the results of their actions within the

microworld. Microworlds provide the learner with the observation and manipulation tools

necessary to explore and test. The key idea behind microworlds is creating an

environment in which students explore the ideas being learned.

Simulations are similar to microworlds in that they are experiential and model reality.

Simulations range from models that mirror the simplified essence of reality to elaborate

synthetic environments with immersion interfaces that place students inside alternate

virtual worlds. Microworlds differ from simulations in that microworlds are structured to

match the user's cognitive level so that it is appropriate to the users needs and level of

experience.

Reciprocal Teaching

Reciprocal teaching refers to an instructional activity that takes place in the form of a

dialogue between teachers and students regarding segments of text. The dialogue is

structured by the use of four strategies: summarizing, question generating, clarifying, and

predicting. The teacher and students take turns assuming the role of teacher in leading

this dialogue. The purpose of reciprocal teaching is to facilitate a group effort between

teacher and students as well as among students in the task of bringing meaning to the

text.

Strategies for Implementing a Constructivist Lesson7

1. Starting the lesson

- Observe surroundings for points to question

- Ask questions

- Consider possible responses to questions

7 This section is from Yager (1991).



- Note unexpected phenomena

- Identify situations where student perceptions vary

2. Continuing the lesson

- Engage in focused play

- Brainstorm possible alternatives

- Look for information

- Experiment with materials

- Observe a specific phenomena

- Design a model

- Collect and organize data

- Employ problem-solving strategies

- Select appropriate resources

- Students discuss solutions with others

- Students design and conduct experiments

- Students evaluate and debate choices

- Students identify risks and consequences

- Define parameters of an investigation

3. Proposing explanations and solutions

- Communicate information and ideas

- Construct and explain a model

- Construct a new explanation

- Review and critique solutions

- Utilize peer evaluation

- Assemble appropriate closure

- Integrate a solution with existing knowledge and experiences

4. Taking action

- Make decisions

- Apply knowledge and skills

- Transfer knowledge and skills

- Share information and ideas

- Ask new questions

- Develop products and promote ideas

- Use models and ideas to elicit discussions and acceptance by others

Assessment Strategies

The traditional model for student assessments and evaluations, which includes timed tests

and examinations, does not assess the full range of essential learning outcomes that we

have defined for our students in the form of our TGC8. In order to verify that students

have indeed gained the knowledge, abilities and skills listed, assessments have to also be

able to directly demonstrate that they can indeed apply this acquired knowledge,

capabilities and skills in authentic, meaningful contexts.

8 Appendix 1



Mueller (2006a) states, “Authentic assessment, in contrast to more traditional assessment,

encourages the integration of teaching, learning and assessing. In the traditional

assessment model, teaching and learning are often separated from assessment, i.e., a test

is administered after knowledge or skills have (hopefully) been acquired. In the authentic

assessment model, the same authentic task used to measure the students' ability to apply

the knowledge or skills is used as a vehicle for student learning. For example, when

presented with a real-world problem to solve, students are learning in the process of

developing a solution, teachers are facilitating the process, and the students' solutions to

the problem becomes an assessment of how well the students can meaningfully apply the

concepts.”

Assessment Formats

Wiggins (1998) recommends that multiple and varied assessments be used so that a

sufficient number of samples are obtained, and a sufficient variety of measures are used.

Badders (2000) identifies the range of assessment formats that are useful in Table 6

below: “Assessment can be divided into three stages: baseline assessment, formative

assessment, and summative assessment. Baseline assessment establishes the starting point

of the student's understanding. Formative assessment provides information to help guide

the instruction throughout the unit, and summative assessment informs both the student

and the teacher about the level of conceptual understanding and performance capabilities

that the student has achieved.”

Table 6. Assessment Formats (Badders, 2000)

Format Nature/Purpose Stage Baseline

Assessments

Oral and written responses based on individual experience /

Assess prior knowledge

Baseline

Written

Tests

Multiple choice, short answer, essay, constructed response,

written reports / Assess students acquisition of knowledge

and concepts

Formative

Embedded

Assessments

Assess an aspect of student learning in the context of the

learning experience

Formative

Oral Reports Require communication by the student that demonstrates

conceptual understanding

Formative

Interviews Assess individual and group performance before, during,

and after a learning experience

Formative

Performance

Tasks

Require students to create or take an action related to a

problem, issue, or conceptual concept

Formative and

Summative

Checklists Monitor and record anecdotal information Formative and

Summative

Investigative

Projects

Require students to explore a problem or concern stated

either by the teacher or the students

Summative

Extended or

Unit Projects

Require the application of knowledge and skills in an open-

ended setting

Summative

Portfolios Assist students in the process of developing and reflecting

on a purposeful collection of student-generated data

Formative and

Summative



Assessment Standards

Standards need to be specified in terms of both the knowledge dimension as well as the

cognitive processes dimension. Knowledge standards are typically determined by test9

scores and assigned marks and grades. Process standards may also be assigned marks and

grades, typically using rubrics10, which is a scoring scale used to assess student

performance along a task-specific set of criteria. Teaching staff need to be trained in

methods of assessment, including how to set test questions to accurately assess students

conceptual knowledge as well as how to design rubrics for authentic assessment

purposes. To ensure TUC-wide consistency of standards, general models and procedures

for all modes of assessment need to be drawn up that can be adapted by individual

lecturers for classroom use.

Student Portfolios

Students’ acquisition of generic skills is mapped through the use of a cumulative student

portfolio. These student portfolios are endorsed or verified by TUC against the set of

expectations for each subject, program and co-curricular (optional) activity. The format

of the student portfolios has been specified in the TUC Graduate Capabilities paper.

Implementation Plans The implementation of the TUC TLF that embeds the TGC concepts is projected occur in

two phases and follow the progression outlined below11.

A. Curriculum design

1. Identify what learners need to learn in terms of Knowledge Domain and TGC12

2. Map learning goals across entire duration of study

3. Identify subjects to be included through the mapping of these learning goals

4. Define individual subject objectives and learning outcomes

5. Chart subjects taken over duration of study

6. Identify specific topics to be included and the instructional models to

communicate them, including learning goals achieved through these13 as well as

modes of assessment to be utilized

9 There are two general categories of test items: (1) objective items which require students to select the

correct response from several alternatives or to supply a word or short phrase to answer a question or

complete a statement; and (2) subjective or essay items which permit the student to organize and present an

original answer. Objective items include multiple-choice, true-false, matching and completion, while

subjective items include short-answer essay, extended-response essay, problem solving and performance

test items. (Duvall, 2007). 10 Authentic assessments typically are criterion-referenced measures. To measure student performance

against a pre-determined set of criteria, a rubric, or scoring scale, is typically created which contains the

essential criteria for the task and appropriate levels of performance for each criterion. (Mueller, 2006b). 11 Phases A and B may start concurrently. Phase A is expected to be spearheaded by Program Heads while

Phase B should be managed by the TUC Teaching and Learning Centre. However, teaching staff should be

involved in Step A.6. of the curriculum design. 12 The TGC goals have already been determined, but domain-specific knowledge objectives must be

identified according to the different knowledge domains or degree programs.



B. Align teaching staff to new TUC TLF

1. Introduce TLF to TUC teaching staff using constructivist learning approach

2. Explain role of Student Portfolios and TGC evaluation through these

3. Provide necessary training in constructivist classroom and student management,

including methods of assessment, test and rubric design

Challenges Implementing a student-centred constructivist teaching and learning framework will

certainly face challenges due to the general lack of familiarity among students and staff

alike with the proposed approaches. Yet such challenges can be effectively addressed if

properly identified and change management strategies put in place. Two major challenges

that must be prepared for are:

1. Aligning teaching staff with the new framework, especially those very senior staff

who may be set in their ways and who may resist change.

2. Reorienting student mindsets – new students will almost certainly be entering TUC

having spent 12-13 years in traditional behaviourist educational environments that are

very far removed from the constructivist models we are adopting at TUC. As such, it

is unlikely that the majority will be naturally able to adapt to the new learning

paradigm and a specifically designed orientation period will be required for this aim.

It is strongly suggested that both staff and students be prepared for the new teaching and

learning framework using the constructivist approaches outlined in this paper.

References AACU (Association of American Colleges and Universities). 2002. Greater Expectations. A New

Vision for Learning as a Nation goes to College. National Panel Report. Washington DC:

AACU.

Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl (Eds.). 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing:

A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.

APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs. 1997, November. Learner-centred

psychological principles: A framework for school reform and redesign. (Rev. Ed.).

Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Badders, W. 2000. Methods of Assessment. Houghton Mifflin Company. Available at:

http://www.eduplace.com/science/profdev/articles/badders.html

Bencze, J.L. 2005. Procedural Education. Retrieved March 6th, 2007 from JL Bencze’s Website,

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. Available at

http://leo.oise.utoronto.ca/~lbencze/ProceduralEd.html

Bloom, B, Mesia, B., and Krathwohl, D. 1964. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York:

David McKay.

13 This is a spiral constructivist process. In fact, each step of our implementation plan should be revisited

with the constructivist model in mind, in order to obtain the best possible results for implementation.



Cruz, E. 2003. “Bloom's revised taxonomy”. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Educational

Technology. Available on-line, retrieved March 6th, 2007, from

http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/bloomrev/start.htm

CTG (Cognition and Technology Group). 1990. “Anchored instruction and its relationship to

situated cognition”. Educational Researcher. 19(8), 2-10.

Dabbagh, N. 2007. The Instructional Design Knowledge Base. Retrieved March 5th, 2007 from

Nada Dabbagh's Homepage, George Mason University, Instructional Technology

Program. Available on-line at: http://classweb.gmu.edu/ndabbagh/ Resources/

IDKB/models_theories.htm

Driscoll, M. 2000. Psychology of learning for instruction. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &

Bacon.

Duvall, K. 2007. Improving Your Test Questions. Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of

Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Available on-line, retrieved March 13th 2007 from

http://www.cte.uiuc.edu/dme/exams/ITQ.html

Grennon Brooks, J. 2004. Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Thirteen Ed

Online, Educational Broadcasting Corporation. Available on-line at:

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html

Hanley, S. 1994. On constructivism. College Park, MD: Maryland Collaborative for Teacher

Preparation. Available on-line, retrieved March 7th 2007 from http://

www.inform.umd.edu/UMS+State/UMD-Projects/MCTP/Essays/Constructivism.txt

Hart, B., Bowden, J. and Watters, J. 1999. “Graduate Capabilities: a Framework for Assessing

Course Quality”. Higher Education in Europe, XXIV: 301-308.

Hofer, B.K., & Pintrich, P.R. 1997. “The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about

knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning”. Review of Educational Research.

67: 88-140.

Hudspeth, D., & Knirk, F.G. 1991. “Case study materials: Strategies for design and use”.

Performance Improvement Quarterl. 2(4): 2.

IFAL (International Foundation for Action Learning). 2007. Action Learning – Some Defining

Descriptions. Retrieved March 7 2007, from IFAL website, available at

http://www.ifal.org.uk/descriptions.html

Jonassen, D.H., Cernusca, D., Ionas, I.G. 2006. “Constructivism and instructional design: The

emergence of the learning sciences and design research”. In R. Reiser & J. Dempsey

(Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Columbus, OH:

Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Kuhn, D. 1993. “Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking”.

Science Education. 77: 319-337.

Martin, J. 2001. “Bloom's learning domains”. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of

Educational Technology. Available on-line, retrieved March 6th 2007, from

http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/bloomsLD/start.htm

McCombs, B.L. 2001. “What Do We Know About Learners and Learning? The Learner-Centered

Framework: Bringing the Educational System into Balance.” Educational Horizons.

Spring 2001: 182-193.



Mueller, J. 2006a. “Why Use Authentic Assessment?” Authentic Assessment Toolbox.

Napierville, IL: North Central College. Retrieved March 13th 2007, from

http://jonathan.mueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/whydoit.htm

Mueller, J. 2006b. “Rubrics.” Authentic Assessment Toolbox. Napierville, IL: North Central

College. Available on-line, retrieved March 13th 2007, from

http://jonathan.mueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/rubrics.htm

NRC (National Research Council). 1996. National science education standards. Washington,

DC: National Academy Press.

Perkins, D. 1991. “Technology meet constructivism: Do they make a marriage?” Educational

Technology. 31(5): 18-23.

Roblyer, M.D., Edwards, J. and Havriluk, M.A. 1996. “Learning Theories and Integration

Models.” In Roblyer, Edwards, and Havriluk, Integrating educational technology into

teaching. Chapter 3. Prentice Hall.

Savery, J.R. and Duffy, T.M. 1996. “Problem Based Learning: An instructional model and its

constructivist framework.” In B. Wilson (Ed.). Constructivist Learning Environments:

Case Studies in Instructional Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology

Publications.

Smith, P. and Ragan, T. 1999. Instructional design (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Spiro, R.J., Coulson, R.L., Feltovich, P.J., & Anderson, D. 1988. “Cognitive flexibility theory:

Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains.” In V. Patel (Ed.),

Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum.

Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. 1992. “Cognitive flexibility,

constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge

acquisition in ill-structured domains.” In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.),

Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Pp. 57-76. Hillsdale,

NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.

VonGlasersfeld, E. 1989. “Cognition, Construction of Knowledge, and Teaching.” Synthese.

80(1): 121-140.

Wiggins, G. P. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve

student performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Yager, R. 1991. “The Constructivist Learning Model towards Real Reform in Science

Education.” The Science Teacher. 58(6): 52-57.

Young, M. (1993). “Instructional design for situated learning”. Educational Technology Research

& Development. 41(1), 43-58.

Yore, L.D. 2001. “What is Meant by Constructivist Science Teaching and Will the Science

Education Community Stay the Course for Meaningful Reform?” Electronic Journal of

Science Education. 5(4): Guest Editorial. Available at http://

http://wolfweb.unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/yore.html



APPENDIX 1

TAYLOR’S GRADUATE CAPABILITIES

The teaching and learning approach at Taylor’s University College is focused on

developing the Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities in its students, capabilities that encompass

the knowledge, cognitive capabilities and soft skills of our graduates.

A Taylor’s graduate has proven ability and is capable in the following areas


Sound understanding of foundational concepts and theories in subject area

Cognitive capabilities


Learns autonomously







Applies knowledge effectively and applies theory to practise


Soft skills



Able to organize, synthesize and present information effectively


Understands team dynamics, power of teams and teamwork





Understands the role of personal image and professionalism at work

Works independently in context of tasks to be completed


Forms opinions and articulates views from a global perspective

Awareness of and sensitivity to cross-cultural differences

Technology savvy



The learning environment at Taylor’s is further geared towards nurturing the Taylor’s

Core Values: the personal attributes of excellence, integrity, passion for work,

interpersonal respect and care, openness in communication and a healthy balance

between professional and personal life.

Through participation in various optional electives, including co-curricular activities,

Taylor’s students may also develop additional knowledge, cognitive capabilities and soft

skills other than those listed. These, as well as the Taylor’s Graduate Capabilities above,

are recorded by students in the form of individual student portfolios and verified by

Taylor’s University College against the set of expectations for each subject, program and

co-curricular activity.

NASI KIT

Documents

Transcript of NASI KIT