BackgroundPrior to 1999 students entering our MBBS course were selected on academic performance alone. We have now evaluated the impact on the demographics of subsequent cohorts of our standard entry students (those entering directly from high school) of the addition to the selection process of an aptitude test (UMAT), a highly structured interview and a rural incentive program.MethodsStudents entering from 1985 to 1998, selected on academic performance alone (N = 1402), were compared to those from 1999 to 2011, selected on the basis of a combination of academic performance, interview score, and UMAT score together with the progressive introduction of a rural special entry pathway (N = 1437).ResultsMales decreased from 57% to 45% of the cohort, students of NE or SE Asian origin decreased from 30% to 13%, students born in Oceania increased from 52% to 69%, students of rural origin from 5% to 21% and those from independent high schools from 56% to 66%. The proportion of students from high schools with relative socio-educational disadvantage remained unchanged at approximately 10%. The changes reflect in part increasing numbers of female and independent high school applicants and the increasing rural quota. However, they were also associated with higher interview scores in females vs males and lower interview scores in those of NE and SE Asian origin compared to those born in Oceania or the UK. Total UMAT scores were unrelated to gender or region of origin.ConclusionsThe revised selection processes had no impact on student representation from schools with relative socio-educational disadvantage. However, the introduction of special entry quotas for students of rural origin and a structured interview, but not an aptitude test, were associated with a change in gender balance and ethnicity of students in an Australian undergraduate MBBS course.
The complexity of principals work is often characterized in terms of dilemmas. In this paper three are identified. The autonomydilemma concerns providing strong and shared leadership. The efficiencydilemma concerns leading collaborative decision-making that is efficient. The accountabilitydilemma concerns empowering local decision-making while complying with external requirements. These are explored using data from a standards framework for school principals in a large restructuring system. Judgements on what mattersin principals’ work reveal the skills, knowledge and dispositions required for principals in restructuring schools, and judgements about levels of performance are shown by how wellparticular examples of principals work are rated using a Rasch analysis. This study found what matters is that principals care for and involve others, are strong, fair and open to alternatives, articulate long-term views and balance these conflicting qualities. But, when faced with the dilemmas of restructuring, principals favour strong leadership over shared leadership, efficiency rather than collaboration, and accountability to central requirements over shared local decision-making.
In this paper, we describe part of an Australian national research project that aimed to find out how well prepared beginning teachers are to teach literacy. A majority of beginning teachers participating in a series of national surveys and focus group meetings were confident about their personal literacy skills, their conceptual understandings of literacy, their understanding of curriculum documents and assessment strategies and their broad preparation to teach. Fewer beginning teachers were confident about their capacity to teach specific aspects of literacy such as viewing, spelling, grammar and phonics, or about their capacity to meet the challenges of student diversity. Senior staff working with beginning teachers were generally sceptical about the quality of teacher preparation for teaching literacy and were less confident than the beginning teachers about personal literacy skills. We discuss these findings in relation to the relative importance placed on particular substantive and structural issues by the study participants and in terms of previous findings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.