19 research outputs found
Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Agriculture
No full textTina Botwright Acuña, Amanda Able, Jo-Anne Kelder, Phoebe Bobbi, Yann Guisard, Bill Bellotti, Glenn McDonald, Richard Doyle, Paul Wormell and Holger Meink
Agriculture: Integrative learning and a new network of agricultural educators
No full textThe core sciences that contribute to agriculture include biology, mathematics, chemistry and physics but our students must integrate and learn to apply their knowledge to agricultural problems in the context of any social, environmental or economic constraints. As such, the Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) for Agriculture, although aligned with the TLOs for Science, also capture the contribution of other disciplines and emphasise transferable and applied skills that will allow graduates to contribute to a successful career in a wide range of roles (please see www.agltas.edu.au). This professional focus is often reflected within the activities and assessment tasks set by teachers. The recently published Good Practice Guide for the Agriculture TLOs highlights student-led inquiry and experiential learning, especially work integrated learning (WIL), in the Agriculture discipline. Currently, there is no forum for our discipline to discuss good teaching practice and the challenges facing agricultural educators. We are therefore establishing a national network to encourage the scholarship of learning and teaching for agricultural educators. The purpose of this workshop is two-fold:
1) To share and discuss examples of activities and assessment that develop integrative, multi-disciplinary knowledge and ability of students to solve complex problems; and;
2) To discuss the nature and purpose of the agriculture network.
Academics from other disciplines who have an interest in multidisciplinary teaching are welcome to join the workshop.
For more information, please contact either Tina Botwright Acuña ([email protected]) or Amanda Able ([email protected]).
Dr Tina Botwright Acuña is a senior Lecturer and coordinator of the undergraduate agriculture degrees at the University of Tasmania. Tina successfully led the OLT-funded ‘A consensus approach to defining standards for learning outcomes and informing curricula design for Agriculture (AgLTAS)’ (see www.agltas.edu.au) and co-edited Good Practice Guide: Threshold Learning Outcomes for Agriculture. Tina was a Science and Mathematics Network of Australian University Educators (SaMnet) Scholar from 2011 to 2012. She was awarded a Vice Chancellor’s Citation for Outstanding Contribution to Student Learning in 2014 by the University of Tasmania for leadership in assessment practice that enhances student learning outcomes and the development of national academic learning and teaching standards to inform curriculum design.
Professor Amanda Able was a member of the AgLTAS project team and co-edited Good Practice Guide: Threshold Learning Outcomes for Agriculture. Amanda is the Associate Dean (Curriculum) for the Faculty of Sciences at the University of Adelaide and teaches into the Agricultural Sciences and related disciplines. Her educational research is currently exploring the efficacy of small group discovery and WIL in the development of research skills and integrative knowledge. Amanda was awarded the Executive Dean's Excellence in Teaching Award in 2005, and the Australian Society of Plant Scientists Teaching Award in 2009. As the Molecular Plant Breeding CRC Education Program Leader (2003-2008), Amanda also led the team that developed the secondary school educational program Get into Genes (awarded the CRC Excellence and Innovation in Education Award in 2006)
Editorial
No full textWe are delighted to welcome you to Hobart for the first-ever Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (ACSME) being held in Tasmania!
The conference is being held in person and online with a very topical theme: The changing climate of science education.
The theme alludes to the rapidly changing environment in which educators from all STEM disciplines operate, with the disruption caused by the pandemic exacerbated by rapid technological change. While this has provided many benefits, there are also new challenges including academic integrity, equity and the rise of generative artificial intelligence and its impact on our students and teaching practices. The theme also alludes to the role of STEM educators in building knowledge and capacity about climate change and sustainability more broadly.
The conference theme resonated with the organising committee, given that the University of Tasmania had been named number one in the world in 2022 – recently for the second year in a row - in the Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Rankings for Sustainable Development Goal number 13: Climate Action.
Some of the actions that propelled the University of Tasmania to the top spot for Climate Action include our certified carbon-neutral status, focus on sustainability education, achieving full divestment from fossil fuels and world-class research on climate action.
Hosting ACSME in Tasmania has also provided a fantastic opportunity to launch the refreshed Threshold Learning Outcomes for Science at the university that is home to the Science Discipline Scholars, Emerita Professor Susan Jones, and Emeritus Professor Brian Yates.
I thank the organising committee for their commitment and enthusiasm, including Susan Jones, Johnny Fei, Jo-Anne Kelder, Stuart Corney, Susan Turland and Ryan Brunton. A special thanks to Fiona Taylor, who has organised much of the behind-the-scenes logistics that a good conference relies on with help from Tracy Kostiuk. Joanne Castelli had such a great time chairing the program for the 2022 conference that she came back and helped our small team with the first cut of the program, for which we are grateful.
I would also like to thank Susan Howitt from the ACDS for her support and advice to ensure continuity in the conference organisation. We are grateful to Ana Lopes for managing the reviewing process and the production of the proceedings, and to Glenda Key for providing us all with highly professional executive support.
If you have time, I encourage you to enjoy the spectacular environs, friendly people and delicious food and beverages from this very special island of Tasmania while you are here – or at least plan to come back!
Professor Tina Botwright Acuña
Conference Chair
The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education 202
Cold temperature under aerobic conditions increases spikelet sterility in rice (Oryza sativa L.)
No full textAerobic rice production (well-watered, non-flooded) has been proposed to improve water productivity. However, little research has been conducted on the effect aerobic conditions have on cold induced spikelet sterility. Two glasshouse experiments were conducted to examine the interaction between genotypes and water availability under cold temperatures. In each experiment, four genotypes were grown under aerobic and flooded conditions and half of all plants were exposed to cold temperatures (15/21°C) for a minimum of 14 days during the late booting stage. Water use was measured weekly until harvest and spikelet sterility was determined on the main stem panicle. Pollen number, anther size and stigma size were quantified. Under warm conditions, reductions in water use in aerobic conditions ranged from 58 to 85% compared to flooded (26L plant-1). When plants were exposed to cold temperatures, flooded conditions (34-48%) resulted in a significantly lower sterility than aerobic (70-80%). The genotypic effect in the cold treatment was significant in both experiments and sterility ranged between 36-78%. The lack of a significant interaction in both experiments indicates the mechanism for cold tolerance may be similar for flooded and aerobic conditions. Within the cold treatment, spikelet sterility was negatively correlated with the % viable pollen (r=-0.51*) and mean area of viable pollen (r=-0.60*) which reaffirms that the failure of the pollen grains is the leading cause for cold induced spikelet sterility at the late booting stage
Predicting heading date and frost impact in wheat across Australia
No full textSpring radiant frosts occurring when wheat is in reproductive developmental stages can result in catastrophic yield lost for producers. In wheat, heading time is the main determinant to minimize frost risks and to adapt new frost-tolerant cultivars to target population environments. Gene-based phenology models provide robust tools to predict heading times based on alleles of VRN and PPD genes, and have been widely validated across Australian wheatbelt for most of commercial wheat cultivars. A field experiment was conducted at Gatton in 2014 to calibrate the gene-based model for newly released cultivars. The results indicated that one field experiment including extended photoperiod and pre-vernalization treatments can be used to parameterize new cultivars and allow accurate prediction of heading time across all Australian environments using our gene-based model. Across Australia, we found that yield could be improved by up to 20% on average if frost tolerant lines were available. The yield increase resulted from (1) reduced frost damage and (2) the ability to use earlier sowing dates. Simulations suggest that a small reduction in the threshold temperatures, equivalent to frost tolerance of 1°C lower than current cultivars, would have a large effect in the west of Australia. In the east, frost tolerance to lower temperatures (~−4°C) would be required to maximise the yield advantage
Use of genotype × environment interactions to understand rooting depth and the ability of wheat to penetrate hard soils
No full textConstraints to achieving high potential yield of wheat in a temperate, high-rainfall environment in south-eastern Australia
No full text
Average wheat yields in the high-rainfall zone (HRZ) of southern Australia are predicted to be around 10 t ha–1, yet most regions fall short through a lack of locally adapted cultivars or abiotic stress that constrains yield. Wheat yields in Tasmania can be variable but have exceeded this potential yield in some field trials and have thus approached that of other traditionally high-yielding HRZ environments such as northern Europe. A contributing factor to high wheat yields in Tasmania is the cool-temperate climate, which tends not to have extremes in temperature (cold, heat) as may be experienced in HRZ environments elsewhere. Hence an understanding of crop growth, development and yield of wheat of locally adapted wheat cultivars in Tasmania may improve our understanding of the basis of yield formation in other HRZ in Australia. This was evaluated by conducting an analysis for adaptive response of grain yield in 10 wheat genotypes to a range of 14 environments that were favourable for wheat production or experienced constraints to growth. Crop growth and yield formation was then examined in detail for all or a subset of these genotypes in three field trials with contrasting environments, two of which included a time of sowing (TOS) treatment. Environment accounted for around 90% of the sum of squares (SS) in the multi-site analysis of yield. Six environment groups were identified using cluster analysis, two of which were clearly separated in response to frost at flowering or putative biotic stress, which constrained yield to 1.8 and 6.8 t ha–1, respectively. Waterlogging was also a significant abiotic stress in one of the TOS field trials. The late-flowering cultivar Tennant had the highest yield in the presence of waterlogging and by avoiding frost at flowering, although it suffered a yield penalty of 35 and 66%, respectively, compared with the average across environments. The highest-yielding genotypes averaged 8 t ha–1 across environments and included Alberic, the breeding line K37.18 and the new release Revenue. In the detailed experiments on crop growth and development, high grain yields of 10 t ha–1 in Mackellar appeared to be due to increased grains ear–1, resistance to barley yellow dwarf virus and possibly higher radiation-use efficiency, although the latter needs to be confirmed. There was little genotype × environment interaction for grain yield, hence wheat breeders can have a relatively high level of confidence that genetic material with high yield potential should rank consistently across Tasmanian environments. Results presented in the paper will be useful in developing management and breeding strategies to increase potential yield across the HRZ of southern Australia.
</jats:p
Good practice guide: Threshold learning outcomes for agriculture
No full textBackground
The Good Practice Guide: Threshold Learning Outcomes for Agriculture (the Good Practice Guide) builds on the national Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Agriculture (AgLTAS), which was developed through an extensive consultation process among academics, students and industry personnel across Australia.
The AgLTAS facilitates the implementation of academic standards by the agriculture discipline community and informs curriculum design. It describes the nature and extent of agriculture and provides five key Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) that describe what a pass-level graduate will know, understand and be able to do upon graduation from a bachelor-level degree in agriculture or a related discipline. The TLOs are: Understanding agriculture; Knowledge of agriculture; Inquiry and problem-solving; Communication; and Personal and professional responsibility (Botwright Acuña et al. 2014).
Aims
Having set the learning outcomes for agriculture, the next step was to demonstrate that students achieve the TLOs through assessment. The Good Practice Guide provides academics with strategies for teaching and case studies of aligned assessment for each TLO.
The Good Practice Guide is intended for use by academics who teach into undergraduate degrees (or related areas), including but not limited to: agribusiness, animal science, agricultural economics, horticulture, agriculture and agricultural science, viticulture and oenology, agricultural business management, agrifood systems and wine science.
Methodology
The authors of each chapter have modelled components of the Good Practice Guide on those used for each of the individual Good Practice Guides for Science and Law. However, all TLOs were combined into a single 143 pp guide as an acknowledgement of how the TLOs are often addressed in an integrated way.
Each TLO chapter contains the following:
1. a literature review related to the interpretation of the TLO hyperlinked with case studies of assessment practice
2. an annotated list of resources that may be useful in teaching specifically addressing that TLO
3. a summary of the key issues, outcomes synthesised from the literature review and future opportunities identified
4. case studies of assessment practice aligned to the TLO.
References are collated at the end of the Good Practice Guide. An electronic copy of the Guide is available at www.agltas.edu.au
Conclusions
A key distinguishing feature of agriculture is its multidisciplinary nature and the contribution of disciplines other than science, such as economics and the social sciences. The integration of these disciplines in the context of agriculture is important for student achievement of the TLOs.
Two common themes appear throughout the Good Practice Guide: 1) the interdisciplinary
nature of agriculture; and; 2) the emphasis on transferable and applied skills that will allow
graduates to contribute to the successful practice of agriculture in a wide range of roles. The
authors have also provided discussion to guide the interpretation of each overarching TLO.
Botwright Acuna, T. L., Able, A. J., Kelder, J., Bobbi, P., Guisard, Y., Bellotti, W., McDonald, G., Doyle, R., Wormell, P., & Meinke, H. (2014). Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Agriculture. Sydney, Australia: Office for Learning and Teaching.
Botwright Acuña, T. L., & Able, A. J. (Eds.) (2016). Good Practice Guide: Threshold Learning Outcomes for Agriculture. Sydney, Australia: Office for Learning and Teaching
Academic, industry and student perspectives on the inclusion of “vocational knowledge” in a ‘learning and teaching academic standards statement’ for agriculture
No full textThis paper reports on the perspective of industry stakeholders in a national project to develop a Learning and Teaching Academic Standards (LTAS) Statement for the Agriculture discipline. The AgLTAS Statement will be aligned with the Science LTAS Statement published in 2011 and comprise a discourse on the nature and extent of the Agriculture discipline and a set of Threshold Learning Outcome (TLO) statements specific to Agriculture. Agricultural research and teaching relies on strong links with industry due to the applied nature of the discipline. Without these links, sustainable and profitable practice change in agricultural systems cannot be achieved. A pilot project, in 2011-2012, with academic staff from three Australian universities identified vocational knowledge as a potential focus for a TLO. The AgLTAS project provides the opportunity to validate or refute this TLO by seeking input from a wider group of stakeholders, including industry. National consensus is being sought by a process of iterative consultation with academics, students and industry stakeholders and tested across four Australian universities. We have collected qualitative and quantitative data from industry participants who attended a series of workshops across most Australian States and Territories and through an online survey. Surprisingly, and contrary to the findings of the pilot project, industry representatives considered vocational knowledge of lesser importance to the need for students to attain highly developed problem solving and communication skills that can generate new opportunities and innovation in agriculture. Industry-specific (vocational) knowledge was generally regarded as attainable during on-the-job training after graduation. This finding prompts the question whether the AgLTAS Statement should be linked to professional accreditation that may be attained after graduation.Tina Botwright Acuna, Jo-Anne Kelder, Amanda J. Able, Yann Guisard, William D. Bellotti, Glenn McDonald, Richard Doyle, Paul Wormell, Holger Meink
Perennial O. sativa x O. rufipogon interspecific hybrids. I. Photosynthetic characteristics and their inheritance
No full text
