The spark of collaboration: connecting expertise for institutional impact

In our three-part series, ‘Beyond boundaries: Collaboration for systemic change in higher education’, we explore how academics and professional staff at UNSW are reimagining partnerships from everyday interactions to broader institutional change. In our previous blog, we reflected on our authentic and relational partnerships. 

In this second blog, we widen the frame to examine educational innovation at UNSW, where many initiatives appear polished and seamless, much like the Sydney New Year’s Eve fireworks. With fireworks, we see the spectacle in the sky, but what remains unseen is the orchestration that determines whether sparks flare briefly or illuminate the skyline. Educational innovation follows a similar pattern. Beyond visible achievements, we ask what sustains these initiatives once the initial spark fades. 

The challenge beneath the spark 

UNSW’s Dr May Lim (Engineering), with A/Prof. Silas Taylor (Medicine and Health) and Nexus colleagues from Arts, Design & Architecture and the Business School, explored how oral assessment could better embed disciplinary thinking and real-world communication. While its pedagogical value was clear, scaling it across disciplines revealed broader complexities, including workload, moderation, reliability, accreditation requirements, and system readiness (i.e., institutional processes such as timetabling and recording were not designed for oral formats). Embedding oral assessment sustainably within the institutional ecosystem required more than redesigning a task. 

A parallel complexity emerged in the Universal Design for Learning (UDL3.0) Guild, led by Nexus Educational Developer Mariana Rodriguez. The Guild brought together academics and professional staff to strengthen inclusive curriculum design. Although institutional commitment to equity and inclusion was clear, embedding UDL consistently across disciplines proved uneven. Competing priorities, staff’s limited time and differing interpretations of UDL principles were among the initial challenges. 

In both initiatives, the intent was strong, but alignment between aspiration and implementation was not easy to achieve. Without coordination, sparks would remain isolated efforts. 

What sustains the spark? 

Fireworks succeed because sparks are sequenced and connected.  

Although the Oral Assessment initiative and the UDL Guild address different priorities, they share similar structural challenges. Both require translation across disciplinary cultures. Both navigate tensions between aspiration and feasibility. Both depend on connected expertise rather than individual effort. In the oral assessment work, the team has created dedicated space and legitimacy for academics and professional colleagues to co-design through consultation. Professional expertise in systems and policy is essential in moving from an idea to something operational. Disciplinary academics work alongside digital specialists, governance experts and educational developers to translate intent into scalable models and practical guidance. This aligns with Dawson’s (2017) argument that educational developers can act as levers for institutional change when collaboration is structured and visible. 

Similarly, the UDL Guild functions as a coordinated forum fostering boundary-crossing collaboration: an interactional space for colleagues to intersect productively across roles (Veles et al., 2023). By bringing academic, professional staff and leadership perspectives into the same conversation, a shared identification of inclusive design has been possible, while acknowledging unevenness honestly and strengthening coherence. Building shared language and collective capability has been chosen over isolated examples of good practice. 

In both cases, structured collaboration has reframed the problem. Oral assessment is now part of a broader institutional response. Inclusive design has shifted from compliance to coordinated practice.  

From spark to institutional momentum 

Across these Nexus initiatives, a clear pattern emerges.  

First, purpose precedes solution. Each effort began with a shared educational question grounded in systematic inquiry into student learning (Felten et al., 2007).  

Second, complexity is acknowledged rather than minimised. Scalability, workload, equity and system constraints are treated as integral to the design.  

Third, collaboration is intentionally supported. The Nexus Program has created the conditions for innovation by providing time, legitimacy and cross-faculty connection. Expertise operates in concert rather than in parallel, with ongoing coordination and refinement. 

Both oral assessment and inclusive design resonate with the UNSW Strategy: Progress for All, particularly Pillar 1, seeking to empower learners and strengthen educational impact across the broader education community. When orchestration aligns people, systems, and strategy, educational development gains traction as it shifts from classroom-level adjustments to program influence at an institutional level (Gibbs, 2013).  

The sparks illuminate more than a single initiative. They begin to lighten the broader institutional landscape. 

Which collaboration has most shaped your practice this year? Who helped you navigate complexity, and what changed as a result? 

In our next post, ‘The ripple effect: embedding collaboration as institutional capability’, we explore what it takes to ensure these sparks become part of how we work at UNSW.