Transitioning to Students as Partners, Producers,
Collaborators and Co-creators. Are We Serious?
Dr Neil G. McPherson
Dr Gordon Heggie
University of the West of Scotland
ABSTRACT: Across the higher education sector, there is a growing commitment to support
student transition by engaging students as partners, producers, collaborators and co-creators.
It is argued that students in these roles are involved more closely with academic project and,
as a result, are more engaged and able to understand and articulate their learning experience.
This paper considers and evaluates the impact of a learning in partnership methodology
implemented through a pilot project undertaken at the University of the West of Scotland.
Using the existing literature in the field to to provide context and to map the intervention, and
drawing on empirical evidence collated across the life of the project, the paper uses the
student voice to provide evidence that engaging students in these roles stimulates a powerful
and transitional learning experience, motivating learner agency and engagement.
1 Introduction
Student engagement is a contested concept and one that is open to a variety of
interpretations. Important in the conceptualisation of engagement is the distinction between
‘engaging students’ and ‘students engaging’. While the former focuses on enabling and
encouraging engagement through the creation of structured opportunities for learning, the
latter, while not reducible to a single definition, emphasises the importance of engagement
as an active process, a process of agency, “located within the being of the individual”
(Bryson, 2014a, p19). This understanding of student engagement can be identified in a
number of projects and interventions that locate the student in the role of partner, producer,
collaborator and co-creator. Using key literature surrounding these to provide background
and context, this paper examines and evaluates the impact on engagement of a learning in
partnership methodology designed and introduced to support student engagement on a BA
Social Science programme at the University of the West of Scotland (UWS). Drawing on
empirical data collated from learner feedback on a pilot module where students were
engaged in curriculum development and research-based learning, the paper outlines and
evaluates the impact and potential of a learning in partnership methodology to support
student engagement through the embedding of active, collaborative and co-creative
learning, and the location of students as producers of knowledge. It highlights some of the
opportunities and challenges around engaging students as active agents in their and others’
learning, addressing the following question: Can engaging students as partners, producers,
collaborators and co-creators support student engagement and learner transitions?
2 Background context & rationale
The internalisation of the developing metaphor of ‘students as consumers’, central to the
neoliberal discourse around contemporary higher education, delimits learning and impacts
negatively on active student engagement. Conceptualising higher education as a field where
knowledge is consumed rather than produced by students supports passive engagement. In
this environment, students are decentred and their role in the production of learning ‘deemphasised’ (see McCulloch, 2009; Neary, 2010a). The perspective of student as consumer
of learning foregrounds the binary relationships between teaching and learning and research
and teaching, where a hierarchical barrier is firmly located between teacher and student (see
eg, Brew 2006; Lambert, 2009; Taylor & Wilding, 2009). This maintains higher education
within what Barr and Tagg (1995) referred to as the ‘instruction paradigm’, where student
agency is subdued and subordinated and the student located as deferential to the work of
the academic ‘expert’. Moreover, neoliberal hegemony is manifest in the view that students
exercise power through passivity in their demand for a passive learning experience that
meets their needs, where the educator’s role is to provide a service that supports this end.
This view is articulated by Boden and Epstein (2006, p227):
the neoliberal university is discursively framed as a place where students-asconsumers rule curriculum content and styles of pedagogy...reinforc[ing] students’
own self-identification as consumers of education and academics’ identifications as
producers of consumer (that is teaching and learning) services
Any attempt to encourage and support active student engagement must counter the
challenges presented by the ideology of student as consumer. This requires a
reconfiguration of higher education. It requires the disruption of teaching/learning,
research/teaching and staff/student hierarchies and the reconnection of these relations in
educational spaces in which students are located as active agents in the production of
learning.
The potential of this disruption and reconnection of research and teaching and
teacher/student relations can be seen in a number of projects that have challenged
contemporary relations in higher education. In these projects, students have been
conceptualised and located as ‘producers’ (Neary and Winn, 2009), as ‘collaborators’ (Taylor
and Wilding, 2009) and as ‘co-creators’ (Bovill, Bulley and Morss, 2011). In the research
undertaken around this work, there is evidence that designing and supporting learning
environments where students are positioned as producers, collaborators and co-creators
empowers them to take ownership of their learning experience, to become partners in
learning and teaching and to act as active agents of change across the landscape of higher
education (see, eg Cook-Sather, Bovill and Felten, 2014; Dunne and Zandstra, 2011;
Healey, 2014; Healey, Flint and Harrington, 2014; Kay, Dunne and Hutchison, 2010).
Moreover, it is recognised that where students straddle the boundaries of teaching and
research in their undergraduate learning experience, and engage in activities that explicitly
align with the wider academic work of the university, they become more engaged as active
learners, developing research ‘mindedness’ and graduate attributes that prepare them for an
uncertain and ‘supercomplex’ future beyond the university (see eg, Barnett, 2000; Barr and
Tagg, 1995; Boyer, 1990; Boyer Commission, 1999; Brew, 2006, 2010; Healey and Jenkins,
2009; Hodge et al., 2008; Lambert, 2009; Land and Gordon, 2008; Levy et al., 2011). It was
against this backdrop that the learning in partnership methodology and model and a
research-based module outlined and evaluated below were conceived.
2
3 Researching the Social World: re-positioning students as
partners, producers, collaborators and co-creators
As part of a wider project to position students as partners in learning and research within the
School of Social Sciences at UWS, it was decided that a pilot project would be undertaken to
develop a signature learning in partnership methodology. A newly approved module on the
BA Social Science programme, ‘Researching the Social World B (RSWB)’, was identified as
an appropriate vehicle for the pilot. Grounded conceptually using Boyer’s (1990) ‘scholarship
of engagement’, the RSWB module sought to reconnect teaching and research through the
introduction of inclusive and participatory pedagogies, the integration of negotiated learning,
and the positioning of students as active researchers and co-producers. A key focus in its
initial design, informed by the work of, for example, Brew (2006), Lambert (2009), and Levy
et al. (2011) was to challenge the ‘dysfunctional’ relationship between teaching and research
and to enhance student learning through active engagement in research and inquiry. There
was a commitment to create a learning environment where research and teaching were
integrated and no longer kept at what Brew (2006) refers to as ‘arms length’, where staff and
students were encouraged to work collaboratively. Influenced by the work of Neary (2010b),
further emphasis was placed on engaging students as producers of knowledge, building and
working in collaborative learner communities characterised by learner diversity, communities
where respectful and constructive criticism and disagreement is welcomed, encouraged and
embraced. The central importance of unsettling and destabilising power relations and of
creating inclusive knowledge-building communities where students could work
collaboratively with peers and staff was recognised. Research has shown that this approach
has a positive impact on student self-identity and engagement (see eg, Brew, 2006; CookSather et al., 2014; Thomas, 2012). Moreover, it was recognised that dialogic learning
environments characterised by respectful collaboration and open-ended learning
opportunities, motivate and engage learners (see eg, Bovill, 2014; Hodge et al., 2008).
Reflecting this, a commitment was made to engaging students as active partners at all
stages in the development, operation and evaluation of the pilot module and the learning
experience.
3.1 Setting up
The first stage in the development of the pilot involved engaging students in a reflection on
their learning experience on the BA Social Science programme to that point and to discuss
the opportunities and potential of a learning in partnership methodology. A series of focus
groups were carried out with students at the end of the ‘Researching the Social World A’
(RSWA) module, a first trimester research methods module, and sibling to RSWB. A central
focus of these focus groups was to consider ways in which the knowledge of research
methods developed on the RSWA module could be put into practice on RSWB in a way that
encouraged open-ended learning, where students were learning in what Hodge et al. (2008)
refer to as ‘discovery mode’, as researchers and producers of knowledge. The focus groups
also considered how the learning process and environment could be structured in a way that
embedded and exploited the potential of learning in partnership, engaging students not
merely as ‘pedagogic consultants’ in the design and development of the module (see
Healey, Flint and Harrington, 2014) but as pedagogic partners in the operationalisation and
running of the module. Building on the emergent dialogue, the focus groups discussed ways
in which learning could be democratised and how learning communities, and partnership
learning activities could be designed into the module framework in a way that enabled and
encouraged staff/student and student/student partnership activity and positioned students as
full participating agents, responsible for the production of their learning. It was clear that
3
students welcomed the opportunity to engage in this dialogic process and were,
unsurprisingly, comfortable in articulating their conceptual understanding of active learning
and supportive learning environments.
To support the design, development and implementation of the pilot module, a staff/student
coordination group was formed. This group participated in the Higher Education Academy’s
‘Students as Partners in the Curriculum’ change programme. The work of the group around
the change programme was shared with all students as part of the on-going dialogue and
communication strategy, and extended through the development and evaluation phases of
the pilot. The evaluation and communication strategy and structure developed and
coordinated around the pilot was extensive, with feedback collated at all stages of the
project.
3.2 The learning landscape
To support the implementation
of the learning in partnership
methodology, a learning in
partnership model was
developed to support staff and
students in mapping activity
across the module. This
model went through a series
of developments, with the
refined version emerging from
the triangulation of the central
tenets and emphases of the
literature highlighted above
and the experiences of the
pilot project (this model can be
seen in Fig.1).
Fig.1: learning in partnership
Using the learning in
partnership model, the
steering group worked with
students undertaking RSWB
to design the learning landscape. This was revisited at each stage of the module, with
collective agreement sought on, for example, the structure of lectures (which were largely
removed from the programme of activities, with those remaining cut to 20-30 minutes and
taking the shape of orientation sessions), the development of the formative and summative
assessment framework, the negotiation of the form and platform of assessment, and the
development of assessment rubrics for summative assessment. Synchronous and
asynchronous communication channels were maintained across each key stage and the
wider pilot to mitigate confusion, misinformation and to support the development of a
pedagogy of trust. This was supported by the implementation of a Learner
Ambassador/Champion framework, which acted as a positive conduit for communication
across all groups involved the pilot. The Learner Ambassador, a student partner on the HEA
change programme, coordinated the Champions group in facilitating dialogue and the
communication of information across the pilot, particularly around the use of the Xerte
technology (an interactive technology that supports the development of learning objects),
which had been introduced to support the showcasing of research work undertaken on the
module. It is worth noting that the Champion group was made up of three students
4
undertaking the RSWB module and three students from Level 8 (Yr2). The rationale for
engaging students from the level below was to embed a framework for the sustainable
development of the module and to support communication of the pilot and learning in
partnership methodology across the student body to support future transition. As part of the
learning on the module, students engaged in the interrogation and evaluation of secondary
data sets before engaging in self-defined, open-ended group research projects, the results of
which were displayed using the Xerte learning technology.
4 Outcomes and experiences
As Bryson (2014b, p240) highlights, one of the key challenges for those who seek to engage
collaborative learning partnerships is that the outcomes cannot be fully predicted. The cocreative aspect of partnership learning is disruptive and can take learning along
unpredictable pathways. The coordination group understood that there were obvious and
unseen risks in transition and that the learning experiences might not map directly on to the
intended outcomes. This was particularly significant as students were being asked to reorient towards the end of their undergraduate journey:
There becomes an over-reliance on traditional methods that makes for a shock when
the...change over is made
For some people getting to 3rd year and all of a sudden having less guidance is a
shock and they are unable to cope with it
To support understanding of this shift, Healey and Jenkins’ (2009) research/teaching nexus
was introduced as a focal point of discussions around the form of learning experience.
Reflecting on this model, students recognised their primary location as ’audience’, and the
central emphasis placed on the delivery of knowledge. This is captured in students’
feedback, where they referred to the ‘classical’ and ‘traditional’ approach to teaching and
learning, and recognised transmission, reproduction and compliance in their learning
journey:
I had grown somewhat familiar with the usual format of a lecturer telling the class
information that should be noted down for future use in essays and exams
When I started the course there was no collaboration between the student and
lecturer when it came to assessment, seminar and lecture layouts, we were just told
what to do and when to meet
One of the first challenges on the RSWB module was to engage with the shift in learner
identity. As Bovill (2014, p22) observes, familiarity with “accepted teaching and learning
norms which may be difficult to deviate from without experiencing discomfort”. While
students highlighted the transmissive and reproductive limitations of their previous learning,
the disruption of this learning environment was unsettling. Students reported the experience
of the pedagogic shift as initially ‘shocking’ and ‘unnerving’:
At first...it was intimidating and scary as we had never experienced this style before
and had a thought of not really knowing what to do
From the outset of this new course I was apprehensive as to be honest it looked a bit
daunting. When the lecturers spoke about this 'new way of learning' truthfully I felt as
if I was going to be part of an experiment and many questions went through my mind
5
At first I was nervous as we were told to build a Xerte and had no guidance as to the
content of this. Being told what was expected of students eg in essays etc was the
norm
The development team recognised that introducing inclusive and participatory pedagogies
and seeking to build collaborative learning communities is challenging for both staff and
students and can be, as Healey et al. (2014, p21) highlight, “difficult and destabilising,
effortful and provocative”. However, with initial priming support and encouragement from
staff, students negotiated their concerns and uncertainty and began to embrace the learning
possibilities and opportunities afforded by the new environment, building new learning
relationships:
…after some reassurance that there would be help at hand when needed I felt more
confident...working in the labs, finding out our own information, working more
independently but with help still there actually made me feel as if I was learning
more...group work has been very beneficial as not only have I been taught by
lecturers but also from my other members of the group. this would not have been
possible without the lecturers encouragement
[The] assessment was largely stressful for me and I found it hard to grasp at first, but
with communicating this to the members of my group, we were able to discuss the
assessment and then attack it in a manner that we had all agreed upon
At first, it was found to be challenging with no clear direction taking place within the
group and having to cope with the group having to decide things for themselves
without being ‘led by the hand’. However, as the module went on, it became clear
that inquiry based learning is in fact helpful, especially with building the confidence of
the group members by allowing them to be able to work on coursework...and to have
the confidence within to know that the group can chose what to do and that it would
still be right.
As the module developed, students ‘grew into’ their roles as partners, producers,
collaborators and co-creators. As their learning identities began to shift, they started to
recognise themselves in these roles:
There is a clear transition that has definitely taken place...From originally sitting
within a lecture hall only taking notes (essentially being the consumer), to growing
within myself to start taking a strong part within lectures and workshops
At the beginning I was a passive student and through the interaction within group
seminars I eventually became a willing and enthusiastic participant. I now feel that I
am an active producer and am responsible for my own learning and can think
independently and make decisions for myself and where I want to take my learning
and knowledge
Throughout this module there was a lot of collaborating with other peers, not only
those who were in my group but with other members of the class and the lecturers.
This enabled not only us as a group but as individuals to visualise different ways and
hear different ideas on how best to approach our assessments
Students also recognised the potential articulation of the transferable skills and
competencies developed through active research and learning in partnership:
6
Sometimes in learning I have wondered if what we are learning at that particular time
will ever have to be used again outside the learning establishment. Through this
module I have been able to easily see myself using the skills learned in employment
on a daily basis, we have learned to: be able to collaborate together as groups,
communicate, critically think, by not just accepting what is in front of us and be more
creative through the use of Xerete [sic], all things that are going to be useful in future
employment
…we were able to edit, change and include a range of materials such as pictures,
graphs and videos in order to enhance the point we were trying to make about
attitudes towards inequality. I think this freedom allowed all students to develop their
creativity which is a great graduate quality...The creativity aspect has made it more
possible for students to move slightly beyond their comfort zone with tasks and
experience new ways of producing work
Employers are looking for a different type of graduate with more practiced skills and
this module has allowed me to see that I do possess these skills at present and with
future work next year and in my postgraduate year these skills can continue to grow
Beyond these reflections, students were also able to recognise and articulate a deeper and
developed understanding of the reconfiguration of the learning in partnership project located
at the centre of the pilot module:
I feel that the relationship between the student and the lecturer is changing, there is
more of a shift in knowledge and this is beneficial to both the student and lecturer. It
is almost like a partnership, after all it is our learning experience
The approach taken in the module proves that through putting trust and faith in the
abilities of students, and creating an environment for them to grow as autonomous
learners, allows for a huge deal of personal and academic development. Students
are typically stifled by the traditional lecturer/student relationship, this approach
greatly enhance my experience of education
It was imperative that students and lecturers worked together to make RSWB a
success, this empowered students to take control of their own learning experience
but also showed me the importance of collaboration within education
This new approach also meant that rather than re-hashing and regurgitating the
theories of other academics, we were able to actively test these from data and
evidence that we had gathered - producing knowledge rather than consuming it,
which fostered a more critical attitude towards accepted wisdom
5 Reflections and conclusions
The paper asked the question: Can engaging students as partners, producers, collaborators
and co-creators support student engagement and learner transitions?
The student voice should answer in the first instance:
I feel that it is an immensely useful form of teaching, as it allows the students to
actually engage with the content of the module and have a say in the way that it will
ultimately affect their final outcomes
7
I consider myself a creative person and find great enjoyment in tasks when I am
allowed to utilise my creativity so this motivated me to further engage in the class
This module made sure as students we were engaging with the material we were
given. We made our own choices of what we wanted to learn and this was something
I found to be very appealing
I thoroughly enjoyed this module and its forms of assessment, it was a more fun way
to engage in the process and enabled students to showcase their different abilities
through our coursework
I found this method extremely engaging, interesting and fun
For all involved in the project, the experience was transformative. The challenges and risk
around the development of a learning environment where students were located as partners
in learning, and where they were enabled and encouraged to adopt the roles of producers,
collaborators and co-creators, and challenge embedded learning hierarchies, were clear at
the inception of the project. However, working in open, committed and equitable partnerships
at all stages mitigated these challenges and risks and formed a strong learning in
partnership bond across the learning community. The disruption of ‘traditional’ relationships
and learning, teaching and assessment practice was welcomed. Students embraced
uncertainty, individually and collectively, and engaged in a deep negotiation of their learning
environment and experience. They navigated authentic academic spaces and experiences
and embraced the transition to active partners in learning and research.
In response to the question posed, the evidence presented certainly endorses the view that
engaging students as partners, producers, collaborators and co-creators supports student
engagement and learner transitions. What must be asked now is, how can the positive
transitions evident across the learning in partnership project, and the wider projects and
interventions highlighted, be exploited and extended to shift the sector project of student
engagement, via the development of learner agency, from one of ‘engaging students’ to one
of ‘students engaging’.
References
Barnett, R (2000) Realizing the University in an age of supercomplexity, Ballmoor:
SHRE/OUP
Barr, RB and Tagg, J (1995) From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm For
Undergraduate Education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, vol 27 no 6,
pp 13-25
Boden, R and Epstein, D (2006) Managing the research imagination? Globalisation and
research in higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, vol 4 no 2, pp
223-236
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, vol 51 no
1, pp 15-25
Bovill, C Bulley, C and Morss, K (2011) Engaging and empowering first year students
through curriculum design: perspectives from the literature. Teaching in Higher
Education Research & Development, vol 16 no 2, pp 197-209
Boyer Commission (1999) Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America's
research universities, Stony Brook: State University of New York
Boyer, EL (1990) Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate., Princeton:
8
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
Brew, A (2006) Research and Teaching: Beyond the Divide, London: Palgrave
Brew, A (2010) Teaching and Research: New relationships and their implications for inquirybased teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research &
Development, vol 22 no 1, pp 3-18
Bryson, C (2014a) Clarifying the concept of student engagement, in Bryson, C. (2014)
Understanding and developing student engagement. pp 1-22 London: Routledge
Bryson, C (2014b) Reflections, and considerations about the future of student engagement,
in Bryson, C (ed) Understanding and developing student engagement. pp 231-240
London: Routledge
Cook-Sather, A Bovill, C and Felten, P (2014) Engaging Students as Partners in Learning
and Teaching: A Guide for Faculty, Oxford: John Wiley & Sons
Dunne, E and Roos, Z (2011) Students as change agents: New ways of engaging with
learning and teaching in Higher Education, Bristol: ESCalate
Healey, M (2014) Students as Change Agents in Learning and Teaching in Higher
Education, Live document. Available at:
http://www.mickhealey.co.uk/?wpdmact=process&did=Ny5ob3RsaW5r (last
accessed 1 May 2015)
Healey, M Flint, A and Harrington, K (2014) Engagement through partnership: students as
partners in learning and teaching in higher education, York: Higher Education
Academy
Healey, M and Jenkins, A (2009) Developing undergraduate research and inquiry, York:
HEA
Hodge, D Haynes, C Lepore, P Pasquesi, K and Hirsh, M (2008) From inquiry to discovery:
developing the student as scholar in a networked world. Learning Through Enquiry
Alliance (LTEA) Conference 2008. University of Sheffield.
Kay, J Dunne, E and Hitchinson, J (2010) Rethinking the values of higher education students as change agents?, Gloucester: QAA
Lambert, C (2009) Pedagogies of participation in higher education: a case for researchbased learning. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, vol 17 no 3, pp 295-309
Land, R and Gordon, G (2008) Research-Teaching Linkages: enhancing graduate attributes,
Sector-Wide Discussions Volume 1, Glasgow: QAA
Levy, P Little, S Mckinney, P Nibbs, A and Wood, J (2011) The Sheffield Companion to
Inquiry-based Learning, Sheffield: The University of Sheffield
McCulloch, A (2009) The student as co‐producer: learning from public administration about
the student–university relationship. Studies in Higher Education, vol 34 no 2, pp 171183
Neary, M (2010a) Student as Producer: A Pedagogy for the Avant-Garde; or, how do
revolutionary teachers teach? Learning Exchange, vol 1 no 1
http://studentasproducer.lincoln.ac.uk/files/2014/03/15-72-1-pb-1.pdf (last accessed 1
May 2015)
Neary, M (2010b) Student as Producer: Research-engaged teaching and learning at the
University of Lincoln, Lincoln: University of Lincoln
Neary, M and Winn, J (2009) The student as producer: reinventing the student experience in
higher education., in Bell, L., Stevenson, H. & Neary, N. (2009) The future of higher
education: policy, pedagogy and the student experience. pp 192–210 London:
Continuum
Taylor, P and Wilding, D (2009) Rethinking the values of higher education - the student as
collaborator and producer? Unddergraduate research as a case study, Gloucester:
QAA
Thomas, L (2012) Building student engagement and belonging at a time of change in higher
education. , London: Paul Hamlyn Foundation
9