Search

When the National Benchmark Tests (NBTs) were first considered, it was suggested that the results would assess entry-level students' academic and quantitative literacy, and mathematical competence, assess the relationships between higher education entry-level requirements and school-level exit outcomes, provide a service to higher education institutions with regard to selection and placement, and assist with curriculum development, particularly in relation to foundation and augmented courses. We recognise there is a need for better communication of the findings arising from analysis of test data, in order to inform teaching and learning and thus attempt to narrow the gap between basic education outcomes and higher education requirements. Specifically, we focus on identification of mathematical errors made by those who have performed in the upper third of the cohort of test candidates. This information may help practitioners in basic and higher education. The NBTs became operational in 2009. Data have been systematically accumulated and analysed. Here, we provide some background to the data, discuss some of the issues relevant to mathematics, present some of the common errors and problems in conceptual understanding identified from data collected from Mathematics (MAT) tests in 2012 and 2013, and suggest how this could be used to inform mathematics teaching and learning. While teachers may anticipate some of these issues, it is important to note that the identified problems are exhibited by the top third of those who wrote the Mathematics NBTs. This group will constitute a large proportion of first-year students in mathematically demanding programmes. Our aim here is to raise awareness in higher education and at school level of the extent of the common errors and problems in conceptual understanding of mathematics. We cannot analyse all possible interventions that could be put in place to remediate the identified mathematical problems, but we do provide information that can inform choices when planning such interventions.

We describe the evolving learning design of a computer-based exercise called "Director's Cut" that challenges students to create their own video sequence from a set of clips we provide. The context is a film theory course where the community of educators have been interested in introducing practical exercises so students can, for example, experience how their choices influence which character the audience identifies with most strongly. This design process is presented within the theoretical frames of multimodality and production based learning, offering insights into how we balanced constraints and creativity as learning designers in the context of a South African university

In this paper we propose that learning in engineering involves taking on the discourse of an engineering community, which is intimately bound up with the identity of being a member of that community. This leads to the notion of discursive identity, which emphasises that students' identities are constituted through engaging in discourse. This view of learning implies that success in engineering studies needs to be defined with particular reference to the sorts of identities that students develop and how these relate to identities in the world of work. In order to achieve successful learning in engineering we need to recognise the multiple identities held by our students, provide an authentic range of engineering-related activities through which students can develop engineering identities and make more explicit key aspects of the discourse of engineering of which lecturers are tacitly aware. We include three vignettes to illustrate how some of the authors of this paper (from across three different institutions) have applied this perspective of learning in their teaching practice.

In this paper, we propose that learning in engineering involves taking on the discourse of an engineering community, which is intimately bound up with the identity of being a member of that community. This leads to the notion of discursive identity, which emphasises that students' identities are constituted through engaging in discourse. This view of learning implies that success in engineering studies needs to be defined with particular reference to the sorts of identities that students develop and how these relate to identities in the world of work. In order to achieve successful learning in engineering, we need to recognise the multiple identities held by our students, provide an authentic range of engineering-related activities through which students can develop engineering identities and make more explicit key aspects of the discourse of engineering of which lecturers are tacitly aware. We include three vignettes to illustrate how some of the authors of this paper (from across three different institutions) have applied this perspective of learning in their teaching practice.

There are concerns about mental health in academia globally, which is a direct consequence of an increase of a neoliberal entrepreneurial approach, one heightened during the time of the pandemic. This paper uses Skotnicki and Nielsen's categories of alienation and Fisher's work on capitalist realism to make sense of academic staff's responses to a survey on their experiences with Emergency Remote Teaching, collected in 2021 at a large research-intensive university in South Africa. The responses indicate that participants all experienced some form of alienation, though experienced and expressed differently. We suggest expanding Skotnicki and Nielsen's lens on agency and structure with what we found missing, an element of culture, to ask the question: "How can a university create and rebuild a sense of community and belonging to counter alienation?". We propose a concerted effort to build spaces for collective encounters to rediscover community, which may allow us to re-imagine a future for the academy beyond conflicting imperatives of responding to the need for socio-economic redress and delivering education as a public good, in times of austerity budgets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]