Increasing demands on academic work have resulted in many academics working long hours and expressing dissatisfaction with their working life. These concerns have led to a number of faculties and universities adopting workload allocation models to improve satisfaction and better manage workloads. This paper reports on a study which examined the workload models in use across a large Australian university. Analysis revealed that the various models could be categorised into three types. The pros, cons and impacts of these three categories of model were compared from both a management and staff perspective. The study found that while models of all types can lay the foundation for equitable distribution of workload, some categories of model can have unintended consequences with negative effects on the work culture and hence staff satisfaction.

No abstract

No abstract

Most studies into lecturers' written feedback focus on the types of feedback found to be effective when students have the opportunity to act on that feedback, revise their written assignment and improve the mark they receive. But often students do not have this opportunity. Typically, they receive a mark and feedback on an assignment that they will never be able to rework and resubmit. This can leave students unsure about what to do with the feedback they receive. This paper reports on the use of high impact written feedback from lecturers that significantly improved student outcomes and grades from one assessment task to the next. It examines a range of factors which together make feedback in this context effective including: assessment design, use of grading standards and tutor training. These findings from a very large unit have significant implications for teaching staff who want to use feedback to feed forward and make a real difference to their students' learning.

The move toward recognizing teaching academics has resulted in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) gaining a greater prominence within the academy, particularly through the academic promotions system. With several Australian universities now providing opportunities for teaching staff who do not engage in research to be promoted, it is important that the teaching criteria for promotion are demonstrably of equal value to promotion based on research. However, examination of the definitions of SoTL reveals not only their variation, but also their limitations in terms of academic promotion. This paper examines the institutional concepts underlying promotion and compares these to definitions of SoTL. It argues for a broadening of the SOTL concept to meet the underlying institutional expectations of reward and recognition through promotion.