What does it mean to build a successful academic career when your passion is teaching, not grant capture? Associate Professor Amanda White OAM has spent two decades doing exactly that - navigating a research-dominant system while building a career that she's genuinely proud of. In this closing keynote, Amanda draws on her journey from PricewaterhouseCoopers to the UTS Business School to explore how education-focused academics can define their contribution on their own terms, demonstrate impact in ways that institutional structures actually recognise, and build careers that don't require apologising for caring about students. She'll leave you with practical suggestions for measuring and communicating educational impact, because "I'm a great teacher" is not enough, but it's also not nothing.

Word count: 150–300 words

What to include:

1. Context
2. Aim
3. Conceptual or theoretical approach
4. Project description (methods, etc.) or Intervention/practice description
5. Key findings and/or contribution

Example abstract

Concerns about academic integrity and the limitations of written assessment in AI-rich environments have prompted renewed interest in authentic, dialogic assessment approaches (Bearman et al., 2022; TEQSA, 2023). This presentation reports on a project investigating the implementation of an interactive oral assessment (IOA) in a third-year economics subject. The project examined the IOA’s effectiveness in assessing conceptual understanding and disciplinary reasoning. The study is informed by theories of authentic assessment and evaluative judgement, emphasising alignment with real-world practice and students’ capacity to demonstrate and justify knowledge (Boud & Falchikov, 2006; Tai et al., 2018). A mixed-methods design was employed, combining analysis of student performance data with survey responses and semi-structured interviews to capture both outcomes and student experiences. Preliminary findings indicate that IOAs enhance depth of understanding and provide more valid insights into student learning, while raising challenges related to anxiety, scalability, and assessor consistency. The project contributes an evidence-informed model for implementing IOAs in large, discipline-specific contexts.

Word count: 150–300 words

What to include:

1. Context/teaching challenge
2. Description of innovation or practice
3. Insights or observations
4. Key takeaways

Example abstract

Large undergraduate business courses often struggle to balance authentic assessment with scalability. At the same time, the increasing availability of generative AI tools has prompted renewed attention to assessment design that emphasises student reasoning and disciplinary thinking. This presentation showcases the introduction of interactive oral assessments in a third-year management subject at an Australian research-intensive university. Students complete a short recorded oral response explaining and applying course concepts to a case scenario. The activity was implemented using an asynchronous video platform integrated with the LMS. Early implementation highlighted several benefits, including increased visibility of student reasoning and greater opportunities for formative feedback. However, the approach also raised practical considerations related to student preparation, marking workload, and technological confidence. The session will share the design rationale, implementation process, and practical lessons learned. Participants will gain concrete strategies for introducing scalable oral assessment activities and for using short video responses to strengthen conceptual understanding in large classes.

Think Tank conversations are interactive, discussion-led sessions designed to explore a teaching and learning question, challenge, or emerging issue with participants.

Word count: up to 150 words

What to include:

1. Context/rationale
2. Topic
3. ‘Thought starter’ question(s)
4. Brief description of techniques you will use to encourage participant engagement in the discussion

Example Abstract

Across business education, many effective teaching ideas remain local rather than becoming embedded more widely. This Think Tank explores why some innovations travel across subjects, programs, and departments while others do not. It is designed for colleagues interested in dissemination, leadership, and sustainable educational change. Discussion will be guided by three questions: What helps teaching innovations gain traction beyond the original classroom? What institutional barriers most commonly slow adoption? What kinds of leadership, support, and visibility make diffusion more likely? The session will use a brief framing activity, table discussions, and a collective mapping of barriers and enablers. Participants will be invited to contribute examples from their own contexts and to identify practical actions that faculty and departments can take to support wider uptake of effective teaching practices.