Higher Education finds itself at a pivotal moment in time where disruption and innovation converge, creating a dynamic landscape of possibilities. Accompanied by the traditional concerns of increasing accountability, decreasing budgets and diverse student populations educators are responding to unprecedented competition with rapidly evolving generative AI technologies with demonstratable capacity for both learning adaptively.  Collectively these challenge us to consider what constitutes good learning and teaching and more importantly cause us to question how do we know?

Three important imperatives compel those in higher education to address these two important intersecting questions. First, a thriving, dynamic economy is essentially a ‘knowledge economy’ with a robust pipeline of lifelong learners who can easily engage and re-engage with formal studies at any point in their personal or career pathways. (OECD 2023; Cheng et al. 2022; Morales et al. 2020). Beyond this transactional view of education, the provision of excellent learning environments builds nations and communities of people who can be better equipped to critique and interrogate ideas with a compassionate and ethical disposition, so vital in our information saturated world where the reliability of sources is questionable. Specifically, we want learners who have experienced transformative learning which empowers them with competencies inclusive of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values that enable them to have agency over their own futures (OECD, 2019; Evans et al. 2015; Evans et al. 2010). Most significantly, if we want an equitable and just world, we have a responsibility to ensure all students, irrespective of their cultural backgrounds, gender or levels poverty or age are given the best opportunities to engage with learning in higher education and then to retain them until course completion. Both international figures and Australian data support the view that participation in higher education is strongly correlated with positive outcomes later in life (OECD 2020; ABS 2023; Tomlison, 2017).

This demands that we investigate practices that work and set students up for success. The American Council of Education (ACUE) make the powerful claim that, “The techniques of effective college instruction are known” (2016 p. 6). This view is not universally maintained (Morales et al. 2022). It must be acknowledged that there are multiple and ever-increasing demands on academics’ time including publishing, research commitments, compliance training, regulatory obligations and often large class sizes and teaching loads. Furthermore, as a profession intentional, systematic professional development with a focus on pedagogy has not been a high priority but is often provided as an ‘add on’.  This is further muddied with promotion of a myriad of ‘effective’ pedagogical practices including: Case-based Learning through to Research-based learning, Service learning, Public Scholarship, Technology-enhanced learning, learning by making and doing to mention a few.  (Mintz, 2020). Beyond these typically better documented approaches, a new wave of scholars and thought leaders are proposing less well investigated approaches such as, ‘pedagogies using AI tools, metaverse for education, pedagogy of care in digitally mediated settings, entrepreneurial education, and relational pedagogies’ (Kuklska-Hulme et al., 2003). Although it is heartening to see continuint exploration in this space, it also demonstrates the confusion and lack of clarity about what methodologies are critical to attend to and which have a valid research basis.  

The literature review explored in this presentation synthesises key themes which have emerged from a small but well-respected research base of effective pedagogical practices in higher education and outlines implications of this for educators and policy makers. The conclusions aim to support academics in making sense of the complexity of learning and teaching and equip them not with simplistic formulas, but a menu of ‘high reliability’ options proven to improve the student learning experiences.

This paper is an exploration of the literature in preparation for a formal research proposal. Although there is ample research that is hosted in what works well within a particular discipline, less is available about which of these practices transcend disciplinary boundaries. At the time of writing, four key pieces of research were identified which met this requirement. In addition to this they were intentionally chosen as they drew on vastly different research methodology and consequently seemed to address different pieces of the puzzle about what practices are effective. Chickering and Gamson’s 7 Principles that help to improve undergraduate experience (1987) was identified. This highly regarded work draws on a synthesis of a literature base that was the best of its time. This research although highly reputable and often cited is over 37 years old. The question remained whether the principles were still relevant for our time. Ramsden’s (2003) drawing on mix of qualitative and quantitative research, adds another dimension, specifically drawing on student perception data. His findings emerged from conducting surveys and interviews, observations, document analysis and a literature review. This research highlighted what students perceived as important. While Bain’s (2004) work identifying what the ‘best college teachers do’ backward maps from the teaching methods, philosophies, and practices that set ‘exceptional’ educators apart and contributed to their effectiveness in the college classroom. His qualitive research methodology incorporated identification of 63 candidates who were perceived both by their colleagues and students as being ‘effective’. The findings that emerged were in response to drawing on a combination of interviews, case-studies, reflective practice, classroom observation and arte-fact collection. Finally, Smith and Biak’s (2023) meta-analysis resulted in a more contemporary collection of ‘high-impact practices’ and represent an increasingly more nuanced understanding of effective teaching approaches. The findings of the four sets of research were then coded to look for similarities and differences. Through examining quality learning and teaching through the four studies and their multiple lenses by drawing on the literature, the student experience, the academic practitioner story and a contemporary meta-analysis some strong and consistent themes emerged.

The implications of this work are as follows: 1. Looking at list of effective practices alone is not enough. It needs to be supported with sustained professional learning for academics. Not just during their early career stages but at regular intervals so that their Scholarship of learning and Teaching is maintained. This would enable practitioners to keep abreast of evolving understandings and support educators in making adaptations in their practice. 2. The findings strongly reinforce a bank of dominant, high leverage practices. These are often referred to as ‘high impact’, yet educators need support in unpacking each of these and contextualising them into their own discipline to be meaningful. This also means that if the discipline already has what Shulman (2005) refers to as a ‘signature pedagogy’, assisting them to make connections and develop understandings about how these practices are aligned. 3. ‘The final list’ of high impact practices initially seems to challenge a few time-honoured practices, upon closer inspection it appears they have not disappeared entirely but been subsumed by other categories. 4. The reality is that we can never be satisfied with a final, ‘best of list’, we must continue to investigate, interrogate, and review our current body of knowledge. It is only through this active, reflective process that we can ensure we are delivering our best for our students. Academics by nature, are natural learners. The act of research causes them to question, to verify data, theories, or propositions. They are seekers of truth, investigators, and deep thinkers. In terms of professional learning, a different content of pedagogy needed to be explored and privileged if we are to see the graduates who leave our institutions equipped to be self-regulating learners and future ready.

ACUE. (2018). Why Colleges and Universities Need to Invest in Quality Teaching. Retrieved from ACUE White Paper, American Council for Education. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2023, May). Education and Work, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.abs/gov.au Bain, K. (2004). What the Best College Teachers Do. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. Cheng, M., Adekola, O., Albia, J., & Cai, S (2022). Employability in higher education: A review of key stakeholders’ perspectives. Higher Education Evaluation and Development, (16)1, 16-31. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. Biochemical Education, 17(3). Evans, K., Guile, D., Harris, J., & Allan, H. (2010). Putting knowledge to work: A new approach. Nurse Education Today, 245–251. Evans, C. (2015) Situating Pedagogy. Southampton: University of Southampton. Kukulska-Hulme, A., Bossu, C., Charitonos, K., Coughlan, T., Deacon, A., Deane, N., ... Whitelock, D. (2023). Innovating Pedagogy 2023: Exploring new forms of teaching, learning and assessment to guide educators and policymakers. Open University Innovation Report, The Open University: University of Cape Town. Mintz, S. (2020, September 2). Pedagogy and Course Design Need to Change. Here’s How. Inside Higher Education. http://www.insiderhighered.com/ Morales, L., Coetzer J., & Barkoc, N. (2022) A Circular Pedagogy for Higher Education. European University of Technology Working Paper. OECD (2019) Education at a Glance 2019: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing. Paris. OECD (2020) Education at a Glance 2020: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris. OECD (2023) Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris 2023 Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge Falmer. Shulman (2005) Signature Pedagogies in the Professions, Daedulus Cambridge Mass Vol.134 (3), p.52-59. Smith, C. D., & Biak, C. (2021). High-Impact Teaching Practices in Higher Education: A Best Evidence Review. Studies in Higher Education, 46(8). Tomlinson, M. (2017) Introduction: Graduate Employability in Contet: Charting a Complex Contested and Multifacted Policy and Research Field. In M. Tomlinon & L. Holmes (Eds.), Graduate Employability in Context. Palgrave Macmillan.