This presentation responds directly to the conference theme, in that “Education is defined by transition”.  The paper discusses the development, delivery and evaluation of a first year Foundations of Education  course (FoundEd) for students transitioning into a teacher education program at an Australian university. FoundEd was built on a research informed approach to transition pedagogy, curriculum design and continual improvement. Embedded in this course was a five year longitudinal research study that was designed to gather data and provide evidence of best-practice teaching and learning for students at the beginning of their professional journey towards a teaching career. The basic education practice and research question that informed this project was:

“What do teacher education students need to learn, know and understand about becoming and being a teacher?” 

FoundEd is the introductory course undertaken by students at the beginning their professional journey towards a teaching career at UoN. FoundEd is committed to responding to the diversity of our student cohort and their equity needs based on sound ‘backward mapping’ curriculum design and the teaching principles of authentic pedagogy (Newmann et al, 1996). FoundEd emphasises active student learning based on a curriculum built on ‘real world’ issues and debates affecting the profession.

In terms of curriculum scope, FoundEd provides a cognitive map of areas that students can use as they navigate through their degree and beyond. The map consists of: (1) Key ideas/concepts in education and their disciplinary basis; (2) An introduction to the specialist language of the profession, (3) Critical thinking skills, and (4) academic literacy skills.  The curriculum design, learning resources, assessment and communication strategy, scaffold students towards mastery of content, critical thinking and the development of academic skills.  We believe that teaching is the profession that teaches all other professions, and we seek to facilitate deep intellectual engagement so that our students can provide opportunities for significant learning for their students when they teach in schools.

Theoretical Framework:
FoundEd is underpinned by evidence from four research-led approaches to curriculum design:

1. Backward mapping for continual improvement:
The FoundEd course has been designed using backward mapping curriculum design (McTighe & Thomas, 2003). This design process starts with the identification of the desired learning outcomes and works backs to create assessment, content and pedagogical strategies that students help achieve these outcomes.  
2. Transition pedagogy: FoundEd has very high proportions of students from Low SES and First In Family backgrounds. These students can do well at university but may be initially ill-prepared and can feel ‘out-of-place’ within academic culture (Devlin & McKay, 2014). It is rare for university educators to systematically consider and respond to the learning needs of such students (Gale and Parker, 2014). 
3. Learning theory: Psychological learning theory suggests that learners require scaffolding in order to reach their learning potential (Elmgren et al. 2013). In FoundEd we explicitly discuss and develop metacognitive learning strategies (Askell Williams, 2012) so that our students begin to learn how they learn best. 

4. Integrated approach to academic literacy: Academic literacy is the ability to effectively use the English language to communicate orally and in writing in university study. Its elements are: grammar; sentence structure; comprehension; academic writing; oral communication style; and critical thinking (Rolls & Wignall, 2009). The academic literacy of undergraduate students varies considerably and that there is a clear association between academic literacy skill level and study success (Kirkness, 2006). Literature suggests that initial development of academic literacy is best when integrated within course content rather than ‘bolted-on’ (Wingate, 2006). FoundEd carefully integrates academic literacy within assessment and weekly learning and tutorial activities.

Askell-Williams, H., Lawson, M. J., & Skrzypiec, G. (2012). Scaffolding cognitive and metacognitive strategy instruction in regular class lessons.Instructional Science, 40(2), 413-443.Bonnaro & Jones, 2007 Devlin, M., & McKay, J. (2014). Reframing'the problem': students from lowsocio-economic status backgrounds transitioning to university. Universities in Transition: Foregrounding Social Contexts of Knowledge in the First Year Experience, 97. Elmgren, M., Åkesson, E., Ho, F., Schmid, S., Parchmann, I., Aremo, N., ... & Towns, M. (2013). Best practices in the use of learning outcomes in chemistry education.Gale and Parker, 2014 Kift, S. M., Nelson, K. J., & Clarke, J. A. (2010). Transition pedagogy: a third generation approach to FYE: a case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), 1-20.Kirkness 2006 McTighe, J., & Thomas, R. (2003). Backward design for forward action. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 52-55.Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 280-312. Rolls, N., & Wignell, P. (2009). Communicating at University: Skills for Success. Charles Darwin University Press (CDU Press). Wingate, U. (2006). Doing away with ‘study skills’. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(4), 457-469.