Background/Context
The Universal Wellbeing Evaluation Tool(UWET)has emerged from an initially ‘use inspired’ programme of research designed to increase student engagement, achievement, and equity outcomes. Two Ako Aotearoa Best Practice Research Grants, one in 2008 (Scholfield, 2011), and another in 2018 (Fielden et.al., 2020a & b; Stevenson & Zagala, 2021), evaluated the effectiveness of wellbeing models being used to support higher education students in New Zealand. Subsequent theoretical investigations addressing deficiencies in the models investigated led to the creation of the Universal Wellbeing Model (UWM) (Stevenson, 2022b, Stevenson et.al., 2023). Another grounded theory investigation identified the 70 variables included in the UWM and underpinned development of the Universal Wellbeing Evaluation Tool (UWET) and subsequent first non confidential trial evaluating factors contributing to the success of the UWET being reported.
Description
The UWET was designed to a) evaluate individual Universal Wellbeing b) inform Pastoral Care/Wellbeing Practitioner practice and c) enable the measurement of cross organisational universal wellbeing in order to support leadership decision making.
Methods
Mixed methods have been employed during the investigation. Quantitative and qualitative methods included: the UWET, and structured interviews. Data gathered has been analysed using content analysis and Cronbach’s Alpha. The research question asked was:
i) What are the factors that contribute to success of the UWET?
Participants in the research were academics/pastoral care/ wellbeing practitioners, and higher education students.
Evidence
This investigation builds on previous quantitative, qualitative, and theoretical investigations related to the UWM and UWET. Findings have identified a range of factors contributing to the success of the UWET.
Contribution
During this interactive session the UWM and recent UWET Trial findings will be presented before participants are provided with an opportunity to experience responding to part of the UWET. Attendees can expect to be challenged with new knowledge, and practice implementation understandings.

Focus: This presentation details the outcomes of a study on Deakin University's response to the COVID-19 post-pandemic, focusing on the evolution of teaching, assessment, and examination practices and the factors influencing these changes (see Broadbent et al. 2023a; 2023b).

Background/Context: Prompted by the pandemic, educational institutions faced the challenge of rapidly adapting their teaching approaches (Hodges et al. 2020).

Description: The research explores the transition to online learning, innovative assessment practices, and shifts away from traditional examinations. It highlights how these changes, initially driven by necessity, have become integral to the University's post-pandemic teaching strategy.

Method(s): Using mixed methods, 67 academics were surveyed, and 21 were interviewed. Academics came from across the University, mostly level B and C academics, with an average teaching allocation of 52%. The majority had 10+ years of teaching experience. Participants compared pre-pandemic (2019) and post-pandemic (2022-2023) changes in their units, focusing on learning activities, assessment methods, and exams.

Evidence: The study reveals that 82% of academics retained at least one change in learning methods post-pandemic, with a notable increase in online learning formats. In assessments, 63% continued using new methods, and there was a significant shift in examination practices. The key to understanding these changes are organisational directives, the desire for innovation, reflective practices, and local leadership roles. These elements, alongside university-level policies and workload allocation, were instrumental in shaping the pandemic response and continue influencing post-pandemic academic practices.

Contribution: This research contributes to the field of educational strategy and leadership, illustrating how crisis-driven adaptations can lead to lasting improvements in teaching practices. It underscores the importance of flexibility and innovation in academic settings.

Engagement: We will do some think pair share activities on the institutional drivers of change they experienced in their own University and then compare the room discussion to what we found.

This showcase is focused on the onboarding experience of new academics at a large Australian university. The objectives of this study were to understand challenges experienced by new academics and develop recommendations to the senior leadership team (SLT) of a large Australian university on how to address these challenges. The findings include significant inconsistencies of onboarding processes across various faculties, schools, and discipline groups and the disconnect between the required time to undertake compulsory online training and the lack of clarify, especially on the role of subjects’ coordinators. Implications of this research are recommendations for improving job satisfaction and talent retention at universities.

Onboarding is related to assimilating newcomers to the organisational culture, values, procedures, and regulations (Frögéli, Jenner, & Gustavsson, 2023; Ibrahim et al., 2022). In higher education, academics must be aware of the 'home' institutions regulatory requirements and organisational policies and processes and receive realistic job expectations.

Data included 59 interviews and a survey administrated among new academics recruited in the last two years. 110 new academics responded to the survey which resulted in 20.14% response rate. Data was analysed according to the four inter-related elements of the Four C’s model (Bauer, 2010): compliance, clarification, culture, and connection.

Research identified tensions between the available training and lack of clarify on specific matters of academic roles and responsibilities. The novelty of this research is in highlighting the importance of conveyance of academic staff and the need of defining boundaries of the academic job.

The audience will be engaged in the discussion of tensions identified by this research at the three stages of onboarding: relocation and contract signing, arrival and 6-12 months on the job. Participants will reflect on either their experience as a new academic in their university or as a line manager, colleague, or mentor of new academics.