QAA Scotland
FOCUS ON: Institution-led Review
19th January 2017
Students as researchers;
developing confidence and trust.
Libby Curtis
Gray’s School of Art, Robert Gordon University.
“There is a subtle, but extremely important, difference between
an institution that ‘listens’ to students and responds accordingly,
and an institution that gives students the opportunity to explore
areas that they believe to be significant to recommend solutions
and to bring about the required changes.
The concept of ‘listening to the student voice’ – implicitly if not
deliberately – supports the perspective of student as ‘consumer’,
whereas ‘students as change agents’ explicitly supports a view
of the student as ‘active collaborator’ and ‘co-producer’, with
the potential for transformation”
Dunne, E and Zandstra, R (2011) Students as change agents – new ways of engaging with learning
and teaching in higher education
National Student Survey Campaign (NSS) -
‘YOU SAID……..WE DID’
Partnership is discussed as:
a process of engagement and not a product or outcome
It is a ‘a way of doing things’
Potential tensions:
Value of the creative process giving unexpected outcomes and
an institutions need to achieve specific metrics
Healey, Flint and Harrington (2014), Engagement through partnership: students as partners in
learning and teaching in higher education.
Building TRUST through partnership approaches
Open dialogue, shared projects, staff and students working together
on common goals, transparency for all involved, shared learning.
“underpinning art and design education is an expectation that
students will take their own creative development of the subject.
They are expected to experiment and explore, producing
diverse responses to projects, not right answers”
Shreeve, Sims, and Trowler (2010). A kind of exchange’: learning from art and design teaching.
Signature pedagogies - (Shulman 2005),
• Characterised as ‘pervasive, routine, and habitual’ in their
subject context .
• Art & Design pedagogies were seen within this context by
Shreeve, Sims, and Trowler
Continuous critical and reflective dialogue develops attitudes
and skills for approaching work that has no defined outcome;
the ‘uncertainty’ of outcome being a relevant characteristic
that tutoring staff facilitate.
Representation / Consultation
• quality assurance
• formality and process
School Academic Boards
• mechanisms for consultation and reporting
• institutional control
Course Panels
• often unconnected or lacks an overview
• reactive not always proactive
• staff ownership
Staff Student Liaison
Staff member
Student
STUDENT PARTNERS – altering the dynamic
Throughout the duration of the work students were placed in varying roles.
These were as participant and collaborator, researcher and co-designer,
making decisions alongside staff.
Shared ownership; informs planning ; collaborative outputs
Staff and Student
Personal Professional
Assessment & Feedback
Expectations
Development
Shared ownership; informs planning ; collaborative outputs
Staff member
Student
PPD
Personal
Professional
Development
• STAFF / STUDENT CHARTER – How can we enhance our expectations of
one another ?
• ASSESSMENT & FEEDBACK REVIEW – How can we enhance the assessment
and feedback experience ?
• PPD – How can we improve critical reflection in relation to students
professional skills ?
EMPHASIS ON THE STUDENT VOICE
Representation
And Consultation
STUDENTS AS EVALUATORS OF THEIR HE
EXPERIENCE (THE STUDENT VOICE)
STUDENTS AS PARTICIPANTS IN DECISIONMAKING PROCESSES Students engage in
Students offer feedback, views and opinions and
are listened to on an institutional basis, in order
to build an evidence-base as a basis for
enhancement and change. Decisions for action
tend to be taken at subject and/or institutional
level.
institutional decision- making, in order to
influence enhancement and change. Decisions
for action tend to be taken collaboratively with
staff and students.
EMPHASIS ON THE
UNIVERSITY AS
DRIVER
EMPHASIS ON
THE
STUDENT AS
DRIVER
Integrating
students into
educational
change
STUDENTS AS PARTNERS, CO- CREATORS
AND EXPERTS Students are collaborative
partners in curriculum provision and
professional development, in order to enhance
staff and student learning. Decisions for action
tend to be taken at subject and/or institutional
level.
STUDENTS AS AGENTS FOR CHANGE
Students are collaborative partners in pedagogic
knowledge acquisition and professional
development, with the purpose of bringing about
change. Decisions for action tend to be promoted
by students and engaged with at subject and/or
institutional level.
EMPHASIS ON THE STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
A theoretical model for students as change agents (Dunne and Zandstra 2011)
Trust:
Developed through project work benefitting the work and
learning of both student and staff member.
Developed through informal working and open ended
discussion positively embracing new outcomes rather than
expected outputs.
Developed through dialogue that values every person’s input.
Developed through recognising publicly every person’s
contribution.
Developed through consistent and transparent communication
of process.
Developed through student mentoring and experiential learning
of working collaboratively prior to critical events such as ILR.
STUDENT PARTNERS
sparqs
• Student Partnerships in Quality Scotland
• Publicly funded to work with all universities and
colleges
• www.sparqs.ac.uk
sparqs vision:
Students are able to make a positive
difference to the educational experience in
Scotland’s colleges and universities and
benefit from this, helping shape the nature of
learning and contributing to the success of
Scotland’s tertiary education sector.
I L S R PROCESS
3D DESIGN
COMMUNICATION DESIGN
FASHION & TEXTILES
COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
PAINTING
CONTEMPORARY ART PRACTICE
OUTPUTS
STUDENT PARTNERS
Institution-Led Subject Review
• student reflective analysis facilitated by sparqs
• students responsibility to determine research process
• student responsibility to consult with peers
• reflective output determined by student teams
sparqs
Reviews are a key interface for student
engagement:
•
•
Students as reviewers
Students as reviewees
“Engaging students in Institution-led Review
A practice guide for universities and students’ associations”
‘places value on a creative process that may result in
unexpected outcomes’
• The ILSR process itself demands consultation with students
regarding their learning experience, and most often this is led,
facilitated, and defined by staff.
• In this respect the School did not ‘consult’ with its students, it
empowered the students to be research-led and driven by their
own agenda allowing them to communicate with the School in
their chosen format
• the student expectations following on from the two projects
indicate that an appetite for working collaboratively with staff
to both develop enhancement activities and address
challenges, will be core to students studies.
REFERENCES
• Dunne, E., & Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as change
agents – new ways of engaging with learning and teaching
in higher education, University of Exeter/ESCalate/Higher
Education Academy Publication, 1-17. Retrieved 4th June,
2016, from http://www.escalate.ac.uk/8064
• Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement
through partnership: students as partners in learning and
teaching in higher education, Higher Education Academy, 711. Retrieved 4th June, 2016, from
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engagement-throughpartnership-students-partners-learning-and-teachinghigher-education
• Shreeve, L., Sims, E., & Trowler, P. (2010). ‘A kind of
exchange’: learning from art and design teaching. Higher
Education Research & Development, 29(2), 125-138.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07294360903384269