Background Artwork
Background Artwork
A Fee-Free Uni Ready educator is speaking whilst standing in a classroom in front of two large screens containing course content.

Teaching In Practice

Pedagogy: Dialogical and Student Centred  

As discussed in this guide under Enabling Principles for Equity and Inclusion, FFUR offerings draw on ‘Enabling’ pedagogies which focus on approaches that value students’ diverse existing knowledges, voices and contributions (Bennett, et al., 2018). This diversity is recognised and sought after for enriching the development of both learning and knowledge in higher education.

Dialogical Approaches
Student-Centred Approaches
Care-full and Supportive Approaches
Background Artwork
Background Artwork

Education shouldn’t be something that is separate from the people that you’re working with. If students can see themselves in their content, they’re more likely to engage. And what that also does is allows them the safe space to begin to tell their stories and their experiences so we can take new knowledge and join it to what they already know. And with that, we get higher levels of learning at a quicker rate than what students are used to.

Treesa
FFUR Educator

Some students can be quite hesitant, especially in week one, it’s very daunting. And again, coming from particular diverse backgrounds and equity backgrounds might not want to speak up. So, I just sort of go around, have a little chat, try and make us more human, and bring in that social connectedness with the students and myself.

Zoë
FFUR Educator

Increasing Equity and Success 

Student experiences and barriers vary widely across Australia – and so FFUR pathways must also continue to grow and innovate to meet these diverse needs.

FIND OUT MORE

Both-ways + Path+ways

Ober (2009) explains that learning should be conceptualised as a shared journey among students, families, peers, Elders and staff who exchange knowledge through discussion, debate, and reflection, both in and beyond the classroom. This is particularly important for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander learners.

In framing a pedagogical approach that integrates traditional Indigenous Australian knowledges with Western academic positions and contexts, Ober devised the both-ways approach (2009). Underpinned by the values of respect, tolerance, and diversity (Batchelor Institute, 2007, as cited in Ober, 2009), the both-ways approach incorporates such dialogical and student-centred pedagogies, while focusing on strengthening Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander student identity, building academic capability and fostering belonging through relational, culturally responsive approaches to curriculum and teaching (Fredericks et al., 2015; Ober, 2009).

Fredericks et al. (2015) build on Ober’s both-ways (2009), and Cajete’s (1994) work on pathways in Indigenous education, and explains that student success emerges when a well-structured Path, such as the curriculum and institutional landscape, are woven together with the learner’s Way (including their personal journey, responsibilities, identity, and aspirations). Drawing on the work of Cajete (1994), in Fredericks et al.’s (2015) model, which they call path+ways, the student is central to a transformation process that aligns program design and the learning environment with the personal.

Both-ways and path+ways concepts are often applied together, as they thread the wider systemic elements of both Indigenous and Western knowledges together with the personal (Fredericks et al., 2015) to create culturally enriching and responsive approaches to educational design and delivery.

Read the Path+Ways Report here

Both-ways and Path+ways as student-centred pedagogy in FFUR

The Shared Learning Journey

The classroom is a relational learning space in which expertise is distributed and co-constructed across community and university (Ober, 2009).

Student-Centred Learning Anchored in Lived Realities

Both-ways directs educators to begin from students’ lived experiences and issues, and move “from the known to the unknown” (Ober, 2009, p. 39), using existing knowledge as the springboard to disciplinary concepts. In FFUR settings, this translates into assessment and teaching sequences that foreground real-world problems, value multilingual and multimodal expression, and scaffold academic discourse without erasing voice (Ober, 2009; Fredericks et al., 2015).

Strengthening Indigenous Identity through Curriculum

Curriculum that includes Indigenous languages, histories, and local protocols affirms identity and increases a sense of place and belonging; students link this affirmation to self-acceptance and persistence (Fredericks et al., 2015; Ober, 2009; Cajete, 1994). Strengthening identity is therefore not an adjunct to academic development; it is constitutive of it within both-ways pedagogy (Ober, 2009).

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Spaces of Knowing and Learning

This section outlines additional information on embedding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledges and approaches into FFUR curriculum.

FIND OUT MORE

Curriculum Design

FFUR curriculum re-engages people with education, preparing them for success in future university study by providing “the opportunity for non-traditional students to learn skills to navigate the academic conventions and expectations of higher education and transition successfully into undergraduate study” (Syme et al., 2021b, cited in Davis et al., 2023a, p. 42). It is a participatory and holistic curriculum, developing the whole student – a curriculum where who teaches and how it is taught is as important as what is intended to be learnt (Relf et al., 2017, O’Rourke et al., 2019).

It is important to recognise that FFUR curriculum design differs from first year curriculum design and Year 12 curriculum design (Kift, 2009; Relf et al., 2017). FFUR curriculum has a transition and preparatory focus on developing both content knowledge and academic skills for successful engagement with undergraduate content. It is student-centred, scaffolded, has relevance to real-life examples and experiences and is designed to develop students’ confidence and capability to undertake university study (Burke et al., 2016; Davis et al., 2023a; Davis et al., 2023b; Lisciandro et al., 2023; Relf et al., 2017). It should offer learning activities based on students’ interests and experiences, embed academic literacies and critical analysis into discipline-based courses (Bennett et al., 2018, p.13) and explicitly teach the rules, values, knowledge and academic skills necessary for successful undergraduate study (Relf et al., 2017).

FFUR curriculum can be considered to be comprised of four separate yet integrated parts. Evaluation of the alignment between these four parts should occur regularly to ensure courses continue to serve the needs of both students, educators and institutions. Relevant experienced and enacted curriculum are required to develop student confidence to succeed in their higher education studies.  

The Intended Curriculum

The course and unit content and learning outcomes.

The Experienced Curriculum

What the students say they have learnt.

The Enacted Curriculum

How the curriculum is taught by FFUR educators.

The Hidden Curriculum

The explicit teaching of the values and norms of higher education building navigational capacity for students.

FFUR Curriculum Design Principles

The following principles, derived from project consultation and cross-institutional studies in the field, act as a guide to inform providers on the development of their FFUR courses. Rather than a rigid national curriculum (which limits providers from tailoring offerings to local contexts, students and needs) these curriculum principles highlight key approaches and important considerations, building on the Enabling Principles and pedagogical approaches covered in earlier sections.

Preparation for university study

The main aim of FFUR courses is to prepare students for success in their desired undergraduate studies. This includes offering units that develop students’ academic skills alongside discipline-specific content. The level of effort and volume of content should be carefully designed to reflect the foundational and developmental nature of FFUR offerings.

In addition, FFUR units/courses help students not only develop academic skills but also understand and navigate the culture of university study by fostering digital literacy, introducing available support services, and clarifying academic expectations. To achieve this, FFUR offerings must provide authentic, scaffolded learning experiences, aligned with the types of assessments and expectations students will encounter in undergraduate degrees.

Student-centred and holistic approach

FFUR curriculum design adopts a participatory and holistic approach that supports the development of the whole student. Who teaches and how the curriculum is enacted is as important as what is intended to be learned (Relf et al., 2017).

To achieve this, FFUR course curriculum design should include embedded or wrap-around support that enables students to develop their learning identity (Relf et al., 2017).

“My approach to teaching? Number one: way more important than my knowledge of the content, is being inclusive to everyone.” (Dave, FFUR Educator, UON)

Explicitness

FFUR course documentation should explicitly detail the alignment between course and unit learning outcomes and assessments (Davis et al., 2023a; Davis et al., 2023b; O’Rourke et al., 2019; Relf et al., 2017).

Educators should explicitly model and teach university and discipline-specific expectations, providing students with opportunities to practice and receive feedback of their progress. This includes unpacking discipline-specific terminology, values, and norms to ensure clarity and understanding.

Establishing inclusive and respectful learning communities

FFUR curriculum design should incorporate multiple means of representation, expression, and engagement, reflecting Universal Design for Learning principles. Teaching should be dialogical, relational, and responsive, creating spaces where students and educators learn together and co-construct knowledge (Carter & Sallis, 2019).

These principles reflect a shared understanding of the importance of developing curricula based upon “care-full” pedagogic practices that foster inclusive and brave learning spaces. These are spaces where the values and norms of higher education can be explicitly taught, providing epistemic access to powerful knowledge (Motta & Bennett, 2018; Shay, 2015; Young & Muller, 2013).

Fostering transformative experiences

FFUR curricula provides transformative educational and life experiences that respectfully challenge students’ beliefs about education, knowledge and their own capability for study (Relf et al., 2017).

Through reflective and critical thinking activities, FFUR courses help students develop an image of themselves as successful learners (Relf et al., 2017).

While unit/course structure may vary across institutions, best practice reflects a shared recognition that FFUR units/courses provide students with cultural and academic resources that extend beyond university (Millman & McNamara, 2018).

FFUR Course Outcomes

FFUR course outcomes are separate and distinct from undergraduate degree outcomes and reflect the developmental and transitional nature of FFUR courses. They should emphasise academic literacies skills and discipline-specific knowledge, aligning with NAEEA Common Learning Outcomes (NAEEA, 2019a) and other relevant FFUR elements. Outcomes should address the assumed knowledge requirements of undergraduate degrees and aim to bridge gaps for students entering from diverse educational backgrounds.

FFUR Unit Curriculum

The knowledge included in FFUR units should align with their preparatory purpose. Content volume, level, and pacing should reflect foundational level learning outcomes — developing students without overwhelming them — while balancing essential knowledge acquisition with opportunities for deeper engagement. Activities should connect to students’ interests and experiences to foster relevance and motivation (Bennett et al., 2018). Rather than covering many concepts superficially, a focused exploration of a small number of key ideas provides a stronger base for future learning and skill development.

The ‘Enabling’ Heart

Enabling principles for equity and inclusion are focused on clearly valuing the diversity and difference of all people across our communities, particularly Indigenous perspectives.

FIND OUT MORE

Development of Academic Literacies

Approaches to teaching academic literacy in FFUR units/courses are informed by key theoretical perspectives (Lea & Street, 1998, 2006; Wingate, 2015; Burke, 2012) that question the effectiveness of traditional ‘remedial’ models.

Traditional literacy instruction tends to treat academic skills as isolated techniques, delivered through decontextualised remedial support such as language workshops or study skills classes (Burke, 2012). This focus tends towards individual students who need additional help to overcome their literacy ‘barrier’ to higher education.

In contrast, FFUR offerings acknowledge the diverse backgrounds and experiences that shape students’ academic literacy development (Baker & Irwin, 2015). While they emphasise core skills— reading, writing, speaking, critical thinking, academic integrity, and digital literacy — they also advocate for the contextualisation of these skills within the broader social, cultural, political, and historical context of academia (Murtic, 2024). These approaches draw on pedagogies and assessments that value the “funds of knowledge” students bring from their own lives (Moll et al., 1992).

FFUR offerings that teach academic literacies recognise that drawing on students’ own experiences and aspirations helps them develop an ‘authorial voice’ (Burke, 2012). Academic literacy is not simply about developing skills but is integrated into disciplinespecific contexts in inclusive ways that recognise the strengths of diverse student populations (Wingate, 2015; Wingate, 2011), diverse ways that academic literacies can be constructed, and the diverse disciplinary contexts in which they formed.

From this context, we can derive a set of key best practice principles.

Key Academic Literacy Principles

Central, not peripheral, business

Academic literacies should sit at the heart of curricula, not as a ‘bolt on’ or as divorced from ‘content’ (Baker and Irwin, 2015).

Clear literacies outcomes should be entwined with disciplinary based learning outcomes and explicitly discussed with students. This includes explicit discussion of literacy content in learning materials (e.g., weekly videos, pages, or dedicated resources), opportunities for student reflection, and application of literacy concepts in disciplinary assessments. Rubrics and feedback should assess both disciplinary knowledge and academic literacies, with teaching staff modelling these literacies throughout materials.

Taught within disciplinary context

Academic literacies are most effective when taught alongside disciplinary content and skills. This is because academic literacies are discipline-specific and form part of the process of becoming familiar with the norms and practices of a particular academic community. In this sense, they are not separate from disciplinary knowledge but an integral part of it. Teaching academic literacies as generic ‘study skills’ or in isolation from disciplinary contexts is far less effective (Wingate, 2011).

Curricula and assessment should therefore embed relevant literacies (and numeracies) — such as reading, writing, referencing, and critical thinking — within the text types, key concepts, and expectations of the discipline students are preparing to enter. While academic literacies are often associated with humanities and essay writing, it is important to recognise that academic numeracies and STEM literacies are equally essential, as are institutional and digital literacies.

Academic numeracies might involve applying mathematical reasoning, interpreting statistical data, or understanding units of measurement. STEM literacies could include using scientific reasoning in inquiry-based learning and writing discipline-specific texts such as laboratory reports.

For more specific examples on embedding academic literacies and numeracies into disciplinary contexts, see Fields of Education below.

Strengths-based and inclusive

Teaching academic literacies should adopt a strengths-based, inclusive approach. This means avoiding deficit language that frames students as lacking skills they must ‘acquire’ to succeed. Instead, following Motta and Bennett’s (2018) “care-full” epistemologies, academic literacy work values students’ existing knowledge and experiences, building on these rather than replacing them.

Lea and Street (1998, 2006) remind us that academic cultures have their own practices and ‘rules,’ which all learners must navigate through orientation, practice, and feedback. Recognising this helps students to consider what constitutes powerful knowledges in academia and understand academic literacies as socio-cultural, context-dependent practices—not fixed or immutable skills.

Inclusive strategies include peer learning, reflective activities, and opportunities to unpack and apply feedback. These dialogical approaches create spaces for students to explore academic literacies collaboratively and meaningfully.

Make academic practices explicit and scaffolded

Academic literacies teaching should make the ‘taken for granted’ assumptions of academic work clear and accessible. This includes understanding academic text types, reading and responding critically, and showing worked solutions—and understanding why these practices matter.

Tasks that build in depth learning and complexity, the use of models and exemplars, practice-feedback-practice cycles, and modelling academic language and conventions in teaching material and in the classroom are mechanisms that scaffold the explicit teaching of the ‘hidden’ components of academic literacies provision (Baker & Irwin, 2015).

Fostering transformative experiences

FFUR curricula provides transformative educational and life experiences that respectfully challenge students’ beliefs about education, knowledge and their own capability for study (Relf et al., 2017).  

Through reflective and critical thinking activities, FFUR courses help students develop an image of themselves as successful learners (Relf et al., 2017). 

While course structure may vary across institutions, best practice reflects a shared recognition that FFUR courses provide students with cultural and academic resources that extend beyond university (Millman & McNamara, 2018). 

Access, flexibility, and equity

Academic literacies provision must be accessible, flexible and equitable in a way that acknowledges the diverse realities and competing commitments in students’ lives. Offering learning opportunities in multiple modes and formats, at different times and as an embedded component of the curriculum, helps remove barriers to student learning.

This might include formal instruction during class time and within teaching material, asynchronous resources, and informal spaces such as drop-ins. Without such provision, variability between courses risks perpetuating inequities rather than reducing them (Baker & Irwin, 2015; Davis et al, 2024).

Build staff capacity and collaboration

Teaching staff do not necessarily have a background in academic literacies provision, which is its own specialised educational strand. Effective provision therefore requires collaboration between literacy specialists and discipline experts, and/or ongoing professional development. Building a shared culture and consistent practices across teaching teams strengthens the integration of academic literacies into curriculum (Baker & Irwin, 2015).

Recognise academic literacies as relational, emotional, and cultural

Academic literacies are not neutral; they are shaped by ideology and contested norms, such as what counts as ‘good’ writing (Wingate, 2011). They are not simply technical skills but represent epistemologies: ways of thinking that inform academic practices (Wingate, 2011; Lea & Street, 1998).

Because of this, academic literacies teaching should encourage critical engagement with the very literacies students are expected to learn. This helps students understand that these practices are ideological rather than fixed or value-free. Such criticality also supports metacognition, enabling students to reflect on how academic literacies influence identity formation — sometimes creating tension or discomfort as new academic identities emerge (Wingate, 2011; Lea & Street, 1998, 2006).

Academic literacies acquisition is closely tied to belonging and confidence within academia, yet it can also disrupt existing identities. For FFUR cohorts, this process often carries emotional weight, particularly for students with prior negative educational experiences. Feelings such as imposter syndrome, fear, or anxiety — expressed in terms like ‘maths anxiety’ or sentiments like “I can’t write”— are common.

Understanding and responding to these emotions requires relationally responsive pedagogy. Building trust, acknowledging emotional challenges, and creating supportive spaces are essential for helping students navigate the ideological and identity-based dimensions of academic literacies (Wingate, 2015; Lea & Street, 1998, 2006).

Academic Literacy Achievement Level Descriptions

Academic Literacies are embedded within a range of courses, whether offered as stand-alone FFUR units or within other discipline-based FFUR units, including for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander pathways units. They are designed to provide in-depth knowledge and skills to equip students with the levels of complexity of understanding required for entry into undergraduate study. Academic Literacies instruction aims to engage students in the processes and practices of reading, writing, and speaking in the higher education context. Academic Literacies units aim to develop students’ thinking and critical reasoning, as expressed within the types of written language forms included at a commencing undergraduate level.

The following proposed achievement level descriptions (proposed as minimum standards in the Report on Policy Settings) provide an understanding of the typical performance of students in academic literacies to facilitate a shared knowledge across the country of the achievements of students who have completed FFUR offerings.

Students who complete these units are typically adept in:

  • A range of academic writing skills and practices, including those involved in the production of different text types important at the introductory undergraduate level.
  • Analysis and implementation of the principles of academic integrity and their application.
  • Critical reading aimed at developing student capacity for deeper understanding of a variety of texts, with scaffolded introduction to academic text types.
  • Research skills and effective use of evidence from scholarly literature to support an argument, including referencing.
  • Digital Literacies, including effectively navigating digital systems, platforms and tools.
  • Understanding of, and effective, ethical use of artificial intelligence tools
  • Effective communication for a range of audiences and purposes, including oral presentations.
  • Critical thinking.

Upon completion, students should:

  1. Apply the technique of critical reading to a variety of texts.
  2. Demonstrate academic skills of close analysis.
  3. Demonstrate the ability to source, critically analyse and evaluate information in support of an argument.
  4. Demonstrate the required depth and breadth of knowledge of the conventions of conveying information in an academic context through a range of relevant written reports, essays or other relevant methods.
  5. Demonstrate membership in an academic community by adhering to the principles of academic integrity and referencing.

For more information on the recommended design and rigour of FFUR unit types (e.g. Sciences, Health, Humanities and Social Sciences) including minimum achievement standards for Numeracy (as proposed in the FFUR Framework in the Report on Policy Settings), see Fields of Education below.

Assessment Approaches

Goode et al (2025) have provided the first scoping review of assessment in FFUR courses in Australia. From their scoping review Goode et al were able to clarify a range of primary and secondary design principles that were core to good practice in assessment in these courses. Goode et al note that despite assessment being key to how FFUR courses enact pedagogies into practice, a lack of literature exists about assessment in this sector and that “a clear need exists for more robust articulations of the philosophical and conceptual ideas underpinning approaches to assessment in enabling education, alongside examples of how this translates into specific assessment practices and student outcomes” (p. 12). The impetus for such research is even greater in a contemporary context where GenAI challenges traditional assessment design and prompts examination of how students can best demonstrate their acquisition of learning outcomes.

See GenerativeAI in Equity Education for more

The assessment design principles identified in their scoping review (pp. 8-10) are:

Core Design Principles
Secondary Design Principles
Peripheral

Ultimately, assessment in FFUR education should differ from assessment in undergraduate study because the cohorts, purpose and context of learning differ. FFUR cohorts are more likely to be returning to study from a hiatus, balancing study with a range of other forms of labour and be from backgrounds with prior educational disadvantage or educational marginalisation. As a result, assessment is more likely to emphasise flexibility, scaffolding, relationality, academic literacies development as part of disciplinary content and anchor assessment within the context of the whole person, rather than in grading outcomes alone.   

FFUR Assessment Design Principles

Expanding on sources like Goode et al., 2025; Stone, 2017; ACODE benchmarks (Sankey et al., 2024) and ‘Enabling’ pedagogy scholarships, there are recommended principles of best practice in assessment design in FFUR courses:

Human-centred and relational 

Assessments are not just a mechanism to measure content knowledge; assessments have a profound impact on how students see themselves and transition, not just into an undergraduate discipline, but into new understandings of themselves and their capabilities (see, for example, Moaloney and Jankowski, 2023). Human-centred and relational assessment also recognises that conditions for completing assessment are not always ideal; assessments require equitable, accessible and flexible design that reflect the actual lived reality of student’s lives.  

Iterative and scaffolded

Assessments build in depth, complexity and weighting over time, giving students the opportunity to practice formal responses in lower-stakes conditions first. This reduces the emotional risks, allows for early wins and allows educators to identify where students may need additional support or interventions.

Authentic and discipline aligned

Assessment should reflect the practices, epistemologies, and text types of their discipline, to prepare students for their undergraduate pathway and to assess literacies in context, rather than as generic ‘study skills’. Students should understand the purpose of the assessment and how it relates to them and their transitions into, through and out of a FFUR course.

Academic integrity is approached educatively, as an academic literacy

Academic integrity as an academic literacy should be embedded holistically and transparently within teaching and assessment practices (Fudge, et al, 2022).  Detection methods for academic integrity breaches have become more sophisticated; a proactive and educative approach to academic integrity is essential for teaching students why academic integrity must be upheld, and how to do so. At the same time, educators should provide scaffolded, flexible curricula and examine assessment approaches  to minimise misconduct opportunities.  

Background Artwork
Background Artwork

Being taught by Treesa was really powerful and impactful for me because she brought a lot of her Indigenous voice to a lot of the discussions we had.

Levi
FFUR Student

One of the things I’ve learned is never to assume things. You’ve got to really peel back everything, imagine starting from the beginning and going, well, what if I didn’t understand that?

Dave
FFUR Educator
The Fee-Free Uni Ready Best Practice Guide cover image.

Fee Free Uni Ready Pathways: Developing Stronger, More Equitable Universities and Communities

This comprehensive Best Practice Guide is designed to guide higher education practitioners in the design and delivery of high-quality FFUR courses through best practice. Prepared by the University of Newcastle in collaboration with higher education institutions and educational experts across Australia, this guide provides evidence based recommendations developed in line with current and contemporary research. Filled with practical, real world advice and implementable processes, this guide is useful for all higher education providers, whether they are in the process of designing FFUR courses or have offered them in the past.
pdf • 46.11MB Download the Best Practice Guide

Fields of Education

Principles of equity and inclusion underpin the design and delivery of FFUR courses; best practice is achieved through the implementation of FFUR pedagogies, “care-full” curriculum design and assessment, and embedding of academic literacies. This next section brings these principles together into six key categories to provide practical examples of how these can be applied to different fields of education within FFUR units:  

  1. Student-Centredand Inclusive Pedagogy   
  2. Skills-Focused and Scaffolded Learning  
  3. Feedback and Assessment for Growth   
  4. Real-World Relevance and Application 
  5. Reflective and Responsive Teaching   
  6. Structural Support andAccessibility  

While FFUR courses share these core principles, disciplinary content shapes unique contexts, and how these principles are enacted within teaching and learning spaces. Drawing from literature outlined in the chapters above, and decades of collective experience of academics teaching in FFUR courses, the following provides recommendations for best practice in curriculum and unit design and pedagogical approaches.

Fields of Education

Sciences & Health Sciences & Health See recommendations for best practice in unit design and pedagogical approaches when teaching in the science discipline in FFUR courses. Mathematics, Information & Technology Mathematics, Information & Technology See recommendations for best practice in unit design and pedagogical approaches when teaching in the maths discipline in FFUR courses. Humanities, Education & Social Science Humanities, Education & Social Science See recommendations for best practice in unit design and pedagogical approaches when teaching in the humanities discipline in FFUR courses.
Background Artwork