 |
| Tom Worthington's certificate of completion for the Accessibility Fundamentals course from Intopia, 18 May 2026 |
The Sydney Olympics web accessibility case is mentioned in the course. As it happens I was one of the expert witnesses presenting evidence in the case. Not due to my expertise, but I was free, had a suit, & no conflict of interest. ;-)
The Beijing Olympic committee then invited me over to talk about it.
 |
| ANU College of Systems & Society Showcase, Photo by Tom Worthington CC-BY 21 October 2025 |
He argues that policy effectiveness depends less on the volume of expenditure and more on the coherence of the system surrounding it.
Greetings from the inaugural IDEATE Summit at the Australian National University. The Vice Chancellor opened proceedings with a St Crispin's Day type speech. She talked passionately about the difficulties of opening university up to a more diverse range of students and staff. As a first in family university student from a low SES background, with limited literacy, I have a direct interest in this as well as having studied the topic as an educator (ironically I typed "optic" rather than topic, before the spell checker intervened).
The Summit is intended to be an annual event for leaders from in computer science and engineering teaching to work on more inclusion and more ralivant skills for graduates:
"understanding the current state of diversity in university technology courses;
sharing lessons learned and putting success stories into context for initiatives across universities; and
collaborating on ways to overcome barriers to inclusive learning, or to recruiting greater diversity among students and staff." From: IDEATE Summit, 2025
My approach to inclusion at university is to provide online and blended options. As well as making access easier, the limitation of online learning design requires a more structured, more explicit approach which I found helped me as a student. Also I would like to see more students start in the Vocational Education Training (VET) sector, before transitioning to university. We also need to explicitly teach and test soft skills: how to give a presentation, organise a team ...
ps: One of the presenters said they had to "reset the North Star" of their organisation. I had to look this up, as I am from the southern hemisphere.
 |
| Image generated by Google Gemini, for a pod based interplanetary transport system |
Greetings from the AI Colab at the Australian National University in Canberra, where I am taking part in "From red tape to algorithm: Reimagining the public service in an AI age". I am not exactly sure what the event or the AI Colab are, but as it is being hosted in the ANU College of Systems and Society, near my office, I thought I would come along. When I registered I though this was by the ASD-ANU Co-Lab, but apparently it is another collab. Last week I was at an event on AI and ACT Government.
We were give the exercise to image a future service based on three randomly chosen cards. My team came up with pod based interplanetary travel. I asked Google Gemni for an image and presentation and it came up with the appended description and image.
After another warm up exercise, we got on to actually talking about public service. In particular, in Australia we have three levels of government (in Canberra just two). I argue there is in effect a fourth level for many people, the cluster housing management where they live (I live in an apartment building which has two levels of management, for parks, energy, and waste disposal).
One obvious, and for me overriding, point for me on AI and government is that the people who do it need to be trained in how to do AI. Some of the teams and interns aI am teaching are studying AI and implement projects using it for government. ?".
At the end of the event I asked "What is the AI Colab?". Several people tried to explain it, without success. I found a website, but it still is not clear. I suggest a plain English description is needed.
Here is a presentation outline for a pod-based interplanetary travel system, styled with a "NASA punk" aesthetic. This style combines the optimistic, analog-heavy feel of 1970s and 80s space exploration with a grittier, more lived-in, and often retro-futuristic edge. Think a mix of *Alien* and the Apollo program.
---
"## **Title Slide:**
**Title:** Project: Peregrine - A New Era of Interplanetary Travel
**Subtitle:** The Pod-Based System for Human Exploration
**Image:** A stylized, high-contrast image. On the left, a detailed drawing of a modular "Peregrine" pod, with visible welds, rivets, and a faint glow from its propulsion system. On the right, a silhouette of a massive, retro-futuristic "mother ship" in deep space. The background is a mix of star fields and faint, blueprint-like lines.
**Aesthetic:** NASA logo in a slightly distressed font, analog dials and gauges in the corners, text in a classic, bold, sans-serif font like Helvetica or similar.
---
## **Slide 2: The Challenge**
**Title:** The Interplanetary Problem
**Image:** A grainy, slightly distorted photo of a classic rocket launch (like the Saturn V), with a faded red filter over it. Overlayed text reads: "Long-Duration Missions. High Cost. Limited Flexibility."
**Bullet Points:**
* **Long Transit Times:** Current propulsion methods make journeys to Mars and beyond measured in years, not months.
* **High Development Costs:** Each new mission requires a bespoke, single-use vehicle, driving up costs and limiting mission frequency.
* **Crew Burnout:** Confinement in a single vessel for years on end leads to psychological and physiological stress.
* **Lack of Redundancy:** A single catastrophic failure can doom an entire mission.
**Aesthetic:** Blueprint-style diagrams of existing spacecraft, annotated with problem descriptions. "CLASSIFIED" or "INTERNAL USE ONLY" stamps in the corner.
---
## **Slide 3: Our Solution - Project Peregrine**
**Title:** A Paradigm Shift: Modularity & Reusability
**Image:** A clean, exploded-view diagram of the Peregrine system. It shows a central "mothership" or "hub," with multiple individual "pods" docking with it. Each pod is labeled with its function (Crew, Cargo, Science, Habitation).
**Bullet Points:**
* **Modular "Pod" System:** The core of our design. Individual, self-contained units for specific functions.
* **The *Aethel* Mother Ship:** A reusable, nuclear-thermal propulsion (NTP) vessel designed to transport pods between planetary orbits.
* **Efficient Mass Transport:** The pods are designed to be launched individually from Earth via conventional rockets or space elevators, then assembled in orbit.
* **Mission Flexibility:** The same system can be reconfigured for a Mars mission, an asteroid mining operation, or a deep-space science probe by simply swapping out pods.
**Aesthetic:** The diagram should look like a cross between an engineering schematic and a piece of concept art. Hand-written annotations, faded paper textures, and faint grid lines.
---
## **Slide 4: The Peregrine Pods**
**Title:** Anatomy of a Pod
**Image:** A detailed, cutaway view of a single "Crew Pod." The interior is visible, showing a small living space, a bunk, a control panel with chunky buttons and toggle switches, and a small porthole. The aesthetic is cramped but functional, with visible wiring and exposed pipes.
**Bullet Points:**
* **Crew Pods:** Accommodate 2-4 astronauts. Equipped with life support, individual bunks, and personal communication terminals. Designed for comfort and psychological separation.
* **Habitat Pods:** Larger pods with communal spaces, exercise equipment, a medical bay, and hydroponics for fresh food.
* **Science Pods:** Dedicated labs with specialized equipment for astrophysics, geology, or biology experiments.
* **Cargo Pods:** Simple, robust containers for equipment, supplies, and rover parts.
**Aesthetic:** The diagram should be highly detailed, almost photorealistic, but with a grainy, analog quality. Text labels should look like they were typed on a typewriter.
---
## **Slide 5: The Journey (Phase 1)**
**Title:** From Earth to Orbit
**Image:** A cinematic, slightly overexposed photo showing a series of Peregrine pods being launched into low-Earth orbit (LEO). They look like industrial, chunky capsules. The Earth is a beautiful blue orb in the background.
**Narrative:**
1. **Launch:** Individual pods are launched from Earth using existing launch infrastructure. This distributes the massive weight and logistical burden.
2. **Orbital Assembly:** The pods are then docked with a pre-positioned *Aethel* mother ship in LEO. Crew pods are the last to arrive, ensuring a shorter total time in space for the crew before the main journey.
3. **Final Checks:** Systems are checked and re-checked by automated probes and the crew. Final trajectory is calculated.
**Aesthetic:** The images should be evocative and slightly cinematic. Faded colors, visible lens flare, and a sense of scale and ambition.
---
## **Slide 6: The Journey (Phase 2)**
**Title:** The Interplanetary Transit
**Image:** A high-resolution, artistic rendering of the *Aethel* mother ship in deep space. The NTP engines are glowing with a faint, blue-green light. It is a massive, complex structure with many pods attached. The image captures the loneliness and vastness of space.
**Narrative:**
1. **Nuclear-Thermal Propulsion (NTP):** The *Aethel* uses its powerful, efficient NTP system to accelerate the entire assembly. This provides a much faster transit time than chemical rockets.
2. **Crew Comfort:** During the journey, the crew can move between different pods, reducing the feeling of confinement. They have access to a larger hab pod and can conduct research in the science pods.
3. **Redundancy:** In case of a major system failure on one pod, the crew can evacuate to another, or the affected pod can be jettisoned.
**Aesthetic:** The image should be beautiful and awe-inspiring, but with a sense of the gritty, industrial nature of the machine. Visible heat vents, solar panels that look slightly weathered, and the distinct, analog feel of the Peregrine design.
---
## **Slide 7: Arrival & Mission Deployment**
**Title:** Separation and Landing
**Image:** A diorama-like image showing a single, streamlined Peregrine pod detaching from the *Aethel* in orbit around Mars. Below, on the Martian surface, another landing pod is deployed, its retro-thrusters firing. The Martian landscape is red and dusty.
**Narrative:**
1. **Orbital Detachment:** Upon arrival, individual pods are detached from the *Aethel* and placed into the target planet's orbit.
2. **Surface Landing:** Specialized landing pods (with built-in heat shields and retro-thrusters) are used to transport crew and cargo to the surface.
3. **The *Aethel*'s Role:** The mother ship remains in orbit, acting as a command and control hub, a resupply depot, and a reusable "bus" for the return journey.
**Aesthetic:** The image should have a sense of action and purpose. The colors are muted and realistic. A small, stylized NASA logo can be seen on the side of one of the pods.
---
## **Slide 8: The Return Journey**
**Title:** Reassembly and Return
**Image:** A final cinematic shot showing the *Aethel* mother ship, now with fewer pods attached, accelerating away from Mars. The image is a reverse of the journey to Mars, with the home planet as a distant, beckoning point of light.
**Narrative:**
1. **Return to Orbit:** Crew and cargo are transported back to the *Aethel* in orbit.
2. **Pod Recovery:** The *Aethel* can recover some of the pods, or they can be left behind to form the basis of a permanent colony.
3. **The Return:** The *Aethel* begins its return journey to Earth, carrying the crew and mission-critical samples.
**Aesthetic:** A final, poignant image that evokes a sense of both accomplishment and the long, hard road ahead. The visual style remains consistent with the previous slides.
---
## **Slide 9: Why Peregrine?**
**Title:** The Future is Modular
**Image:** A split-screen image. On the left, a schematic of a traditional, monolithic rocket. On the right, a schematic of the Peregrine system, showing its modularity and interconnectedness. Text boxes highlight the advantages.
**Advantages:**
* **Cost-Effective:** Reusable *Aethel* mother ship dramatically reduces per-mission cost.
* **Scalable:** Missions can be scaled up or down by adding or removing pods.
* **Safer:** Multiple redundant systems and the ability to jettison failed pods.
* **Faster:** NTP system shortens transit times, reducing crew exposure to radiation and psychological stress.
* **Sustainable:** The system forms the basis for a permanent, interplanetary logistics network.
**Aesthetic:** Bold, impactful text. The schematics are clean and easy to understand. The overall tone is one of confident, optimistic progress.
---
## **Final Slide:**
**Title:** Project: Peregrine
**Subtitle:** The Next Step for Humanity.
**Image:** A striking, stylized logo for "Project Peregrine," looking like a cross between a NASA mission patch and a company emblem. Below it, the tagline: "Build. Explore. Return. Repeat."
**Contact Information:**
* Confidential NASA/Internal Use Only
* Date: July 28, 2025
**Aesthetic:** The final slide should feel like a powerful and memorable conclusion. A bold, simple design with a strong, optimistic message."
I am assisting with two sessions at the symposium: "Learning Systems: Canvas for WIL, Virtuous Loop", and "Accreditation requirements & Ungrading WIL". The "Virtuous Loop" is something some of my colleagues tell me they know about, so I will leave that to them.
ePortfolios
This then raises the question of what other tools we can use to help the student with WIL. Given I am writing this during an ePortfolios Australia session, the most obvious is an ePortfolio. Canvas has an ePortfolio tool called "Folio". However, this is unlikely to have adequate versioning features to be usable. To be of use, we need to know when the student added what to their portfolio, including every edit, for "show your work". Also we need to track the contributions of individual students in group projects, where they are assembling a jointly developed document. It is likely we will need to use tools like GitHub for this purpose. That will require training for non-computing students, unused to the concepts inherent in such tools.
Bodies such as the Australian Computer Society and Engineers Australia, accredit university courses. Common requirements of accreditation is for the student to have some group, work and project experience. I mentor interns who work individually at a real workplace and tutor group project students who work on a real project for a real client. In both cases there is scaffolding of the experience, to make it into a course. There are a few lectures, but the emphasis is on meeting with a mentor/tutor regularly. There are also assessed tasks to complete. These tasks are designed to be relevant to real world experience. Typically the students start by negotiating what they are going to do and submit a statement of work document, agreed with the client, for assessment. Also they typically end with a reflective work on what they did and learned from the experience. In between there are progress reports. In the case of internships, the assessor relies on reports from the client, as it is not feasible for them to assess the actual work the student does. In the case of group projects, the assessor may have more access to the work product, but even ... oops time is up ...
At this point, as per the PARE process, we stopped writing and had a few minutes discussion. I shared this document, up to this point. We discussed how to collect notes on what we had been doing for future use. This is very relevant to a discussion of how students document and provide evidence of, what they did in WIL. For assessment purposes we need that evidence, but it can't be too burdensome, for the student, their client, or the assessors. Ideally the evidence is captured as a byproduct of the WIL. This happens reasonably naturally for computer project students, who use online tools common in industry for software development. These tools timestamp every contribution by every team member, and provide statistics on their overall contribution.
Grading WIL
Some WIL is not integrated. The student is required to undertake a set amount of work experience. A supervisor attests the student did the work. There is no detailed analysis of what they did, or how well. At the other extreme, a program like Techlauncher has assessors examining what each student does every week, and in more detail at checkpoints through the year.
Typically in vocational education, students are assessed on a pass/fail (Competent/Not yet competent) basis. Even if there is a numerical grading, this is reduced to pass/fail at the end of the unit of study. The logic behind this is that the student is being assessed as being able to do a job. In some industries this is a legal requirement: no ticket, no job. In contrast a university student is typically graded numerically on a 100 point scale, which is then reduced to a 4 to 7 level grade. The student's grades are aggregated to give a Grade Point Average on a 4 or 7 point scale.
The course results and GPAs may be used internally as a requirement for students to progress in their program, or to apply for advanced study, but are of little or no value to outside employers. Given that WIL doesn't involve they type of learning of a typical academic course, they use of 100 point or even 7 point scale for assessment seem very artificial. The purpose of the exercise is not for the student to be excellent at working in a workplace, they can't be expected to achieve that ... opps time is up again.
Having written about the topic stream of consciousness style, it is time to try to make some short, hopefully helpful, comments on WIL:
LMS for Scaffolding
A learning management system is useful for providing structure for WIL. The unfamiliar and fragmented nature of WIL can be confusing for both students and staff. The LMS can provide a step by step checklist of who needs to do what, when, & a catalog of the tools and guides they need.
Not Too Integrated
An LMS is not designed for WIL. A useful approach is to use the LMS to tell the student what they need to do, then have them go off and do it with specialised tools, but bring the evidence of what they did back to the LMS for assessment, and feedback.
Most of the evidence of learning outcomes can achieved work products, rather than specially created academic artifacts. As an example, the client or supervisor can be asked to rate the student's performance. The work plans and output can be directly assessed. The tools used to record the student's work can be used to verify they were actually doing the work. As an example, tools such as GitHub record each time each team member contributed to the repository, timestamped.
Accreditation requirements & Ungrading WIL
