Delivering an engaging student

experience through partnership

The HE and FE Show, London

Higher Education Academy

14 October 2015

• Partnership as a specific form

of student engagement:

process not product.

• Pedagogic rationale

• Focus on learning

relationships as well as

working arrangements

• Partnerships between staff

and students and amongst

students

• The exact form of

partnership is contextual 2

Engagement through partnership

From NUS/HEA (2010) Student Engagement Toolkit

• to empower students to take responsibility for their learning

• as a way of developing a sense of belonging, and making HE more

accessible and inclusive

• as an ethical responsibility to students and staff

• to align with personal teaching philosophy

• to challenge and resist consumerist models of higher education, and

offer a constructive alternative

• to re-invent the university

• to align with the purpose and values of higher education

• as a meaningful way of engaging with the measurement agenda

• to align with policy directives

3

The case for engagement through

partnership

4

Defining student engagement

Behavioural

perspective

•Student behaviour

•institutional practices

Psychological

perspective

•Cognitive

•Affective

•Relational

Socio-cultural perspective

• Social context

• Power

• Culture

• Discourse

Authenticity – the rationale for all parties to invest in partnership is meaningful and credible.

Honesty – all parties are honest about what they can contribute to partnership and about where the

boundaries of partnership lie.

Inclusivity – there is equality of opportunity and any barriers (structural or cultural) that prevent engagement

are challenged.

Reciprocity – all parties have an interest in, and stand to benefit from working and/or learning in partnership.

Empowerment – power is distributed appropriately and ways of working and learning promote healthy power

dynamics.

Trust – all parties take time to get to know one-another and can be confident they will be treated with respect

and fairness.

Courage – all parties are encouraged to critique and challenge practices, structures and approaches that

undermine partnership, and are enabled to take risks to develop new ways of working and learning.

Plurality – all parties recognise and value the unique talents, perspectives and experiences that individuals

contribute to partnership.

Responsibility – all parties share collective responsibility for the aims of the partnership, and individual

responsibility for the contribution they make.

6

Framework underpinned by

partnership values

7

Conceptual

Model

Learning teaching and

assessment

• Active and collaborative

learning

• Personalised learning

• Professional/practical

experiences

• Peer education

Examples:

• University of Lincoln – students

as producers

• University of Westminster –

Broad Vision

Subject-based research and

inquiry

• Embedding research and

inquiry based learning (e.g. PBL)

• Example – Student as Producer –

University of Lincoln

• ‘Boutique’ UG research

schemes

Examples:

• University of Sheffield – Think

Ahead: SURE

• Oxford Brookes University - Get

published

8

Learning, teaching and research

partnerships

Scholarship of teaching and

learning (SOTL)

• Exploration of how students

learn within their discipline.

• Institutional examples

• University of Exeter – Students

as Change Agents

• Birmingham City University –

Student Academic Partners

• National example

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/rd/projects/c

hange-agents-network

Curriculum design and

pedagogic consultancy

• Different understandings of

‘curriculum’

• University Portsmouth –

pedagogic consultancy

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/s

tudent-and-staff-partnership-

awards

• Arts University Bournemouth –

partnership in curriculum and

course design

9

Partnership in the enhancement of

learning and teaching

10

Conceptual

Model

1. Inclusivity and scale

• Boutique vs mainstream

• Who actually participates?

2. Power relationships

• Different kinds of power

• Dominance of hierarchical

relationships, resistance to

students becoming partners

• Navigating university structures

and practices

• Access to resources

3. Blurring identities

• Problematic labels

• Shifting roles

4. Terms of engagement

• Induction and outduction

• Peripheral/full community

membership

• Reward and recognition

11

Tensions and opportunities

Recently published ‘Pedagogies of

partnership’

(https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resou

rce/pedagogies-partnership-what-

works)

To be published in next few months

guidance and resources on the

ethical implications

But still need to explore disciplinary

approaches to partnership

Learning from ‘failures’

Impact

12

Areas being explored

Inspiring teaching, transforming learning

The Higher Education Academy (HEA) is the national body for learning

and teaching in higher education. We work with universities and other

higher education providers to bring about change in learning and

teaching. We do this to improve the experience that students have

while they are studying, and to support and develop those who teach

them. Our activities focus on rewarding and recognising excellence in

teaching, bringing together people and resources to research and share

best practice, and by helping to influence, shape and implement policy -

locally, nationally, and internationally.

www.heacademy.ac.uk

13

The Higher Education Academy

Bauman, H-D.L. & Murray, J.J. (2010). Deaf studies in the 21st Century. In M. Maschark and P.E. Spencer (Eds.) Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education (Vol. 2) (pp. 210-225). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bovill, C. (2015) Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: challenges and opportunities, https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engaging-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-

challenges-and-opportunities

Bovill, C. (2014) An investigation of co-created curricula within higher education in the UK, Ireland and the USA. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 51 (1) 15-25.

Bovill, C. (2013) What are students and staff co-creating? How our definitions of curriculum influence the nature of co-creation. Paper presentation. RAISE Conference, 12-13 September,

Nottingham.

Bovill, C., Aitken, G., Hutchison, J., Morrison, F., Roseweir, K., Scott, A. & Sotannde, S. (2010) Experiences of learning through collaborative evaluation from a Postgraduate Certificate

in Professional Education International Journal for Academic Development 15 (2) 143-154.

Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Millard, L. & Moore-Cherry, N. (forthcoming) Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching.

Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C. & Felten, P. (2014) Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: a guide for faculty. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Deeley, S. (2014) Summative co-assessment: a deep learning approach to enhancing employability skills and attributes. Active Learning in Higher Education 15 (1) 39-51.

Duah, F., and Croft, T. (2011) Students as Partners in Mathematics Design. CETL-MSOR Conference. https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-

jspui/bitstream/2134/9904/3/Duah_Croft_2011final.pdf

Gärdebo, J. & Wiggberg, M. (2012) (Eds) Students, the University’s unspent resource: revolutionising higher education through active student participation. Report No 12 Division for

Development of Teaching and Learning. Uppsala University.

Healey, M., Flint, A. & Harrington, K. (2014) Engagement through partnership: students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York: Higher Education Academy

Healey, M., Bovill, C. & Jenkins, A. (forthcoming) Students as partners in learning. In Lea, J. (Ed.) Enhancing learning and teaching in higher education: Engaging with the dimensions of

practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Ella R. Kahu (2013) Framing student engagement in higher education, Studies in Higher Education, 38:5, 758-773,

Mihans, R., Long, D. & Felten, P. (2008) Student-Faculty Collaboration in Course Design and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching

and Learning, http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl, 2, 2.

O’Neill, G. (ed.) (2011) A Practitioner’s Guide to Choice of Assessment Methods within a Module, Dublin: UCD Teaching and Learning.

http://www.ucd.ie/teaching/resources/assessment/howdoyouassessstudentlearning/

Johanna Vuori (2014) Student engagement: buzzword or fuzzword? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management Vol. 36, Iss. 5, 2014

14

References