EditorialThe second issue of volume three of the Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice (JUTLP) contains five papers on what I hope you will find is an appealing range of topics. Our first paper from Smith et. al provides an overview of the modes of subject delivery in use in Australian universities. The paper reports on the findings of a research project which was funded by the now defunct Australian Universities Teaching Committee. It is significant to note the reported dominance of face-to-face instruction and traditional teaching methods in their results. This provides an interesting lead-in to the next paper regarding student attendance at lectures. Massingham and Herrington's paper, which may be daunting to some due to its length, is highly readable and provides some valuable insights into the ongoing discussion about the role of lectures. This paper examines the link between student absenteeism and performance. If you haven't read Phillips' related paper from a previous issue of JUTLP (Volume 2, Issue 1, 2005), perhaps now is the time to do so. Fitch and Surma provide us with another paper on the challenges of international education. Although looking specifically at public relations education, their paper offers insights for anyone involved in teaching a subject to both local and international students. They highlight a potential positive in the internationalisation of the student cohort in using it to construct student experiences across a range of social and political contexts. At the same time they also warn of difficulties posed by institutional constraints, be they organisational or political. Our fourth paper from O'Regan takes us into another exploration of plagiarism, this time in relation to plagiarism policy and its attempts sometimes to simplify this complex area. We publish this particular paper, in part, as a challenge to researchers: to investigate the different discipline areas and the issues associated with 'common knowledge'. We look forward to further papers that pick up on this theme. Finally, we present a paper from Penman and White about a peer-mentoring program that they have implemented for regional nursing students. They have termed their mentoring model as the 'pop-up' model, where the relationship between the mentee and mentor exists in the background, popping up for short periods and for specific purposes at times when the mentees are challenged by the demands of their studies. The paper talks about the practicalities of setting up the program and provides an initial evaluation of the benefits to both parties. As always, your comments and submissions are encouraged. We trust that you will find articles of interest to you in this issue.
Helen Carter
|