Advancing Scholarship and Research in Higher Education

Unless one has been hiding under a rock all this while, we would all have heard about the complexities, uncertainties and volatilities of our collective future. In fact, the VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) /BANI (brittle

Unless one has been hiding under a rock all this while, we would all have heard about the complexities, uncertainties and volatilities of our collective future. In fact, the VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) /BANI (brittle, anxious, nonlinear and incomprehensible) reality is no longer something we have the luxury of preparing for - it is here! In this current landscape, what challenges are we and our students already facing on a daily basis? What more will all of us continue to have to face up to as we step into the next decade? This talk is not about sounding alarm bells – it is an urgent call for action, for us as educators to intentionally reflect about this reality, and to actively invest in our students’ development beyond the academic – to support their growth as citizens and as leaders who will play key roles in community building in an increasingly complex, brittle, and nonlinear world. This is a call to all educators that we contribute to building capabilities in our youths, to inculcate relevant habits of mind, and to infuse a mindset that can shape a community that is agile, adaptable, and resilient. I believe that though the world may be complex and filled with uncertainties, if equipped with a growth mindset that is characterized by a spirit of persistent and continuous learning, our students will not only be successful “tomorrow’s learners”, they can also be capable changemakers in our community today. I am optimistic that such a possibility can be realized if all of us, as educators and institutions, focus on and invest in building capabilities in our student body.

Quantitative literacy (QL) is central to success in science and biomedical science degrees in higher education, yet students often report low confidence when applying quantitative skills in authentic contexts. Drawing on self‑efficacy

Quantitative literacy (QL) is central to success in science and biomedical science degrees in higher education, yet students often report low confidence when applying quantitative skills in authentic contexts. Drawing on self‑efficacy theory, this study examined the relationship between self‑reported confidence and actual performance on a 30‑item QL assessment administered to second‑year undergraduate students (n = 137) enrolled in a laboratory-based biochemistry subject at The University of Melbourne. Each item captured student performance and a 5‑point confidence rating across eight QL domains (simple arithmetic, scientific notation, stoichiometry, unit conversion, dilutions, statistical measurements, pH, graphical interpretation). Analyses combined descriptive statistics, correlation, repeated‑measures comparisons by domain, and relationships with item difficulty. Overall, confidence and performance were moderately correlated (r = 0.49, p < 0.001). Sixteen items—concentrated in statistical measurements, pH interpretation and graphical interpretation—showed significant item‑level confidence–performance correlations (ρ up to 0.52). Notably, more difficult items were associated with stronger calibration (confidence–performance alignment), while easier items tended to elicit over-confidence. The study findings emphasise the importance of contextualised QL instruction, integrating confidence judgements as a metacognitive scaffold, and deliberately using moderately challenging tasks to develop accurate self‑assessment and applied quantitative competence.

Professional accreditation standards are increasingly formalising digital practice competencies as graduate requirements. In parallel, institutional governance of generative artificial intelligence (genAI) remains pre-dominantly oriented

Professional accreditation standards are increasingly formalising digital practice competencies as graduate requirements. In parallel, institutional governance of generative artificial intelligence (genAI) remains pre-dominantly oriented towards risk management. This study examines the alignment between university policy and evolving professional standards across 35 Australian higher education providers offering Exercise and Sports Science Australia (ESSA) accredited courses. Through a systematic document analysis of publicly available policies and guidance materials, the research identifies two primary governance models: embedded integrity governance, which integrates genAI into existing misconduct frameworks, and standalone genAI policies providing detailed operational guidance. Results show that while all institutions permit conditional genAI use, the prevailing policy discourse is framed through risk management, disclosure, and misconduct prevention. Across the sample, only two (6%) of the 35 institutions included any language connecting genAI to professional practice or graduate capability, and none of these connections were discipline specific to exercise science or exercise physiology. This pattern suggests that during the regulatory transition, universities are prioritising assessment security over the integration of genAI as a core professional competency. These results provide a critical baseline for institutions as they prepare for the implementation of revised ESSA Exercise Physiology accreditation standards in January 2027. Future research directions include course-level investigation of how genAI competencies are integrated into curriculum design, graduate outcomes, and cross-disciplinary accreditation governance.