Challenging the Status Quo to Embed Partnership

This year I have been analysing my PhD research data and have been delighted to have opportunities to share, discuss, and receive feedback on my initial findings. In particular, I began 2017 by leading the workshop 'Exploring Power: Democratisation of Knowledge through Co-production' a conference on co-production at the University of Glasgow and I presented 'Co-creation of the Curriculum: The Juicy Challenges and Clear Benefits' at the TSEP conference in London (see my Publications and Presentations page for further details).

Presenting at these conferences helped me reflect more about some of the initial research findings relating to the challenges and benefits of co-creation of the curriculum in higher education. This informed my work on a research article for the Journal of Educational Innovation, Partnership and Change with the theme of Embedding the Culture of Engagement.

I'm thrilled that my work on the research article 'Co-Creation of the Curriculum: Challenging the Status Quo to Embed Partnership' for this special issue has now been published. The abstract is below, and I hope you enjoy reading it. I look forward to any continued discussions about it via Twitter or email!

Many individuals in the higher education sector claim that co-creation of the curriculum is an innovative process of student engagement in which students and staff members become partners in curriculum development. This research analyses rare instances of co-creation of the curriculum in the Scottish higher education sector to understand individuals’ different conceptualisations of this collaborative teaching and learning practice. The researcher interviewed ten academic members of staff and ten students who participated in co-creation of the curriculum in Scotland to analyse their perspectives of the benefits as well as the challenges of this form of active student engagement. Staff and students participating in co-creation of the curriculum encounter such challenges as staff and students taking on different responsibilities, increased time and effort involved and institutional inertia as they challenge the status quo. This paper will explore how individuals have overcome these challenges to embed partnership and achieve strong benefits of co-creation of the curriculum, including shared ownership and the engagement of both students and staff in the learning community and their increased satisfaction and professional development resulting from working in partnership.

Read the full article.

Educational and International Thematic Connections

With my new role at Edinburgh University, I've been enjoying hosting a study visit of twenty Chinese headteachers. We began the visit on Monday with sessions at Moray House to show them the long history of teacher education there, followed by a Scottish welcome dinner hosted at the City Chambers to celebrate strong partnerships between Scotland and China.

After great sessions yesterday at Moray House on the Scottish policy context and teacher professionalism and standards, theory was really brought into practice today during a fantastic visit to Dunbar Grammar School today. It was also my first visit to a Scottish high school, so I was quite interested in the visit and any thematic connections with my higher education research. The Headteacher gave an overview of his growing school community, the curriculum, and their School improvement plan. He highlighted student choice in the curriculum (which is much greater at this high school compared to elsewhere) and the breadth of subjects including health and wellbeing, computing, business, and home economics. Furthermore, the Headteacher emphasised the importance of not only teachers' and parents' voices but also pupils' voices contributing to the revised curriculum and the school improvement plan. It was great to hear the Headteacher speaking about the importance of student voice and student engagement.

The Chinese Headteachers really enjoyed the tour of the school, bringing it to life as they saw cooking classes, science, art, and PE. They even were able to see a social studies  class where students were being taught to think for themselves and articulate what they would do if they were President Trump with regards to building a wall with Mexico. The Headteacher emphasised of course that students were not being influenced in what to think (and could lose their job for this) and instead were learning how to think critically and substantiate their arguments with research they could do on their mobile phones in class.

We were all impressed to see the fantastic inclusive education support provided by the Pupil Support Workers both inside and outside the school including mindfulnesss sessions, trips to the beach, hiking, gardening, working on a farm, outdoor cooking, and building relations with local elderly residents (for which they won a national award for partnership).

The Chinese Headteachers were also very interested to hear about the support provided to newly qualified teachers by both the school and the local authority. They saw how new teachers needed to meet General Teaching Council Standards for Registration, and keep up their standards through continuing professional learning. They were particularly interested in performance management of staff who did not meet the standards, which is an important issue that can arise across all education contexts internationally. In looking at the similarities and differences between secondary and higher education, I was reflecting on how universities offer the PG Certificate in Academic Practice to new lecturers and opportunities for academic staff to earn Higher Education Academy Fellowship, but they do not tend to have strong performance management processes for staff who do not excel in teaching.

Last but not least, we enjoyed learning about and seeing the various technology used in the high school. This included EdBuzz Google resources, email for submission of homework, collaborative areas where teachers could share resources, the Pupil Record System, students' digital portfolios of their progression records to document their learning, Kahoot online quizzes which  students could complete using smartphones, and ShowMyHomework to document homework for students and their parents. They also were able to learn about student voice including the prefect system, student council, and surveys. They saw student feedback forms (including questions on enjoyment of learning, academic challenge, and the quality of feedback provided by teachers) and learn how they are used as one way to monitor and support teacher performance.

It was a fantastic visit and it was especially interesting to focus on themes of student voice in the Scottish education system, student curricular choice, technology in the classroom, and inclusion. There are such interesting connections between these themes in secondary education which carry on into higher education. It was also fascinating to explore sometimes tricky issues such as smartphone use in the classroom, dealing with student behaviour issues, and processes for teacher performance management which are not often spoken about in higher education.

Connecting with Other Junior Researchers - JURE

This week I have enjoyed the fantastic opportunity to participate in the JURE conference for Junior Researchers of EARLI (European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction) in Tampere, Finland! It was a great experience to meet, network with, and learn from PhD colleagues in education from all across the world whilst also being the only student at the conference representing the University of Edinburgh.

JURE provided a great programme of academic and social activities to help early career researchers get to know each other and exchange ideas. On Saturday, I enjoyed taking part in the JURE walking tour of Tampere, starting at the City Hall, progressing through the historic market, and passing local Schools. It was really interesting to hear about the Finnish outdoor nurseries where children stay outdoors all day long, as well as the early language-learning at primary schools. The tour then headed up the nearby hill through a beautiful forest to the highest part of the city where you can see views over the two lakes (on either side of the city) and also enjoy the quaint café which is known for the best doughnuts in the city. They were indeed delicious! We finished the day at a local restaurant later in the evening where it was great to meet others who had been arriving throughout the day ahead of the conference.

After many months of preparations for JURE from submitting my abstract last autumn, my article last winter, and my peer review last spring, it was fantastic to present my paper during a higher education strand of sessions. I introduced models of student/staff partnerships and my emerging model of the variables of co-creation of the curriculum, as well as my initial findings of staff and students’ perceptions of the benefits of participating in co-creation of the curriculum projects at Scottish universities. The paper was well received, with interesting questions to delve more into the nature of the co-creation projects, selection of student participants, how ‘success’ was measured, the nature of student/staff dialogue, and any correlations with student achievement. Presenting also led to great conversations with a PhD student from Spain who researches co-creation of grading rubrics in universities and with a student from Canada who wants to start similar research on co-creation of the curriculum.

Throughout the conference, I really enjoyed participating in a variety of sessions. The roundtable discussions were a particularly interesting format, with PhD students presenting only a five-minute overview of their project plans and leading a discussion to receive feedback from others and brainstorm solutions to any issues they were wrestling with. I really liked this more interactive format that promoted collaboration amongst early career researchers. I feel that other conferences and also University departments could benefit from offering such sessions to promote more discussion and shared problem-solving amongst new researchers to help them with planning their research design or wrestling with difficult questions during the analysis.

The other presentations which most interested me focused on student motivation, agency, critical thinking skills, and academic achievement. A particularly interesting presentation was testing various flipped classroom models to promote students’ systematic creativity, inventive thinking, and satisfaction with a Finnish engineering course. The researcher found that the transition to blended learning can be difficult for both students and staff members, since the increased or different workload model can negatively affect attitudes and participation. Another very interesting presentation was on different online learning designs and how they affect different levels of student engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates; unfortunately, there were no conclusive results from the analysis of the fifty-five different learning designs. It seemed that the majority of participants were conducting quantitative, positivist studies into the psychology of education, and I was surprised how few other participants used qualitative methods or other research methodologies. Since the UK model of PhD study focuses on conducting research and writing one, cumulative thesis, I was also surprised that the majority of other participants (mostly PhD students from continental European or Scandinavian countries) were participating in a PhD by publication model.

Learning how much other PhD colleagues were publishing, I was especially motivated to participate in the Writing for International Scholarly Journals workshop at the conference which was led by an editor in chief and a representative from a large publisher. It was extremely beneficial that they provided so many tangible tips for writing strong journal articles that will be accepted into good journals, and they were also extremely accessible by answering many questions about the process. I also participated in an introduction to meta-analysis workshop on how to conduct statistical analysis of a large collection of results from individual studies – I was not familiar with this and it was a good opportunity to push myself to learn about this new area at JURE whilst there was the opportunity.

I was thrilled to participate in the JURE conference, meet other junior researchers from around the world, present my research, and learn more about the Finnish culture and education system which is world-renounced. It was beneficial to learn from the various presentations, workshops, and discussions over the past few days to help me reflect more on my PhD student journey, and it was wonderful to be supported by the Principal’s Go Abroad Fund from the University of Edinburgh to support me in this great opportunity. It was an educational trip but also fun to explore Tampere and Helsinki, as well as the Finnish food!

Teaching Award Research: What does Teaching Excellence Look Like to Students?

This work was later published in a research article in Teaching in Higher Education - learn more.

At Edinburgh University Students’ Association, I am proud to coordinate the longest-running student-led Teaching Awards in the UK. These Teaching Awards are an extremely valuable part of the Students’ Association’s work in partnership with the University of Edinburgh to reinforce our positive partnership. I work with the Students’ Association Marketing team and School Offices to promote the Teaching Awards, normally receiving 2,000 - 3,000 student nominations annually for teachers, tutors, supervisors and support staff. I also organise the prestigious awards ceremony for shortlisted university staff each year. In addition, my team sends each of the University’s twenty Schools a report including a list of all nominees and the anonymised student nomination comments for their School. However, staff did not previously have the time to engage well with these long reports.

Therefore, I initiated a research project analysing the extensive qualitative data collected through the student-led Teaching Awards nominations in order to understand student perceptions of excellence in teaching and student support. After gaining a small grant from the University of Edinburgh Principal’s Teaching Award Scheme (PTAS), I hired a postgraduate student as a research assistant who analysed all of the 2,926 Teaching Awards nominations collected during the 2014-15 academic year. Four key themes were identified:  1) concerted, visible effort; 2) charisma, personality and engaging teaching;   3) breaking down student-teacher barriers and fostering student engagement; 4) consistency, predictability and stability of support.

The Research Assistant, Vice-President Academic Affairs, and I worked together to produce and disseminate the research report 'What Does Good Teaching Look Like to Students?', which was launched on 1 December 2016 and is publicly available on our website. The report discusses the nuances of the four key themes that were identified in the research, and it shares examples of best practice activities digestible way to highlight practices that surfaced in the close reading of the students’ Teaching Awards nominations. By sharing research findings in a digestible way, it is hoped that staff will incorporate more of these engaging teaching methods and partnership work with students into their work. Especially with the introduction of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) and a stronger reliance on quantitative data to demonstrate teaching excellence, this initiative shows the importance of understanding the nuances within the vast qualitative data from student-led Teaching Awards to identify student perceptions of teaching excellence and consequently enhance the student experience.

Student-led Teaching Awards generally demonstrate the partnership between Edinburgh University Students’ Association and the University of Edinburgh to recognise and reward excellent teaching and student support. In particular, this project demonstrated a strong partnership since the University’s small grant funded the research assistant position and allowed the Students’ Association to progress this work. University staff were keen to learn about the research findings and disseminate the best practices in teaching and student support that we identified through this project.

The project has been extremely well received at the University of Edinburgh and beyond. The report was launched online on 1 December, 2016 and at a launch event attended by 60 University staff. In semesters 1 and 2 of this academic year, we disseminated the research findings in presentations at the Institute for Academic Development’s Course Organiser Network, Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice courses for new academic staff, Moray House Graduate School of Education seminar series, and the University’s Gearing Up conference. This summer, I have shared our work beyond the University at the Quality Assurance Agency Scotland’s Enhancement Themes conference and the Higher Education Academy’s annual conference.

It has been exciting to receive a very positive reception to this project, leading to other interesting projects. Within the University of Edinburgh, we have started having more conversations about the Teaching Awards recommendations provided at the end of the report concerning academic community for students and staff, including students as partners in pedagogical discussions, being aware of staff workload and reasonable expectations for them, support for postgraduate tutors and personal tutors, and implications of potential student biases in nominating women staff and staff from diverse backgrounds. Furthermore, I am now involved in supporting another PTAS project led by the Medical School on best practices of dialogue and presentation of feedback to students, extending our previous project and analysing samples of anonymised feedback given by markers whom students have recognised for their outstanding feedback.

Beyond Edinburgh University Students’ Association, it is also exciting to see how many other student unions which already run student-led Teaching Awards are interested in conducting similar research projects to analyse the themes within teaching and student support highlighted by students in their nomination comments. In particular, colleagues at the University of Stirling Students’ Union and at the Manchester Met Students’ Union look like they will be taking forward similar projects this year. It is great that there is interest in conducting similar qualitative research like ours. We do recognise that this can be very time-intensive and resource-intensive, and we don’t have the capacity to analyse the trends across all of each year’s nomination comments. However, we have been able to use the themes identified from the research in the nomination forms to give students the opportunity to self-code up to three key reasons why they are submitting their nomination for the best teachers at the University. It has been really helpful having this additional, quantitative follow-up data. We hope other unions that might not have the capacity to do a full, qualitative analysis may at least be able to take more of this light-touch approach.

This research project and its dissemination have been a creative, enjoyable way for me to go beyond the provision of the Teaching Awards project to support learning and teaching by analysing and sharing the thematic trends in the nomination comments by understanding student perceptions of how they learn best and how they evaluate effective teaching. This research helped me to better understand and respect individual learners’ stories about the obstacles and struggles that they have personally overcome during their academic study with the support of staff, as well as the themes arising from the data from our diverse student bodies and learning communities across the university.

I have especially enjoyed that the Teaching Awards research project has connected my role at the students’ association with my PhD research into teaching excellence and innovative practices of student engagement, including student/staff partnerships. It has helped me to take an evidence-informed approach by engaging more with higher education theory, literature, and practices around teaching excellence as I have shared the work widely across the University of Edinburgh and at other conferences. I also worked to engage deeply with the teaching excellence literature when writing an academic journal article on this research which I submitted for review in May 2017, and I hope it can be published in due course. Stay tuned!

By conducting these presentations and in particularly by facilitating workshops (for instance my presentation and workshop slides from the HEA conference) that help participants (and myself) explore further the student perceptions of teaching excellence, I have been able to look at the wider implications of this research. Student welfare, struggles with ill mental health, and resilience are some interesting areas that have been raised by this research. However, the resulting issues of sometimes time-consuming student support have knock-on effects for staff members’ welfare and what students should reasonably expect from staff. The workshop that I facilitated at the HEA conference in particular resulted in fascinating discussions about students’ expectations, and how they would reasonably change between Year 1 and Year 4, as well as subsequent postgraduate study at university. It would be interesting to look closer at the data to see if there are any thematic trends in student perceptions of teaching excellence stemming from different demographics such as year of study, subject of study, and home/international students. This project generally has been very exciting and interesting intellectually to engage more with staff by sharing the research, and hopefully it will have a positive implication on quality enhancement by sharing tangible teaching and student practices that students have recognised, and rewarded.

This later work was published in a research article in Teaching in Higher Education.

Reflections on the 2017 Enhancement Themes Conference

This week Quality Assurance Agency Scotland is running its Enhancement Themes conference, which is a great opportunity to meet staff and student union colleagues from across the Scottish sector and also international visitors from farther afield. I have attended the conference the last two years (see my reflections on last year's conference) and this year have only been able to attend the first two days of the conference but wanted to share my reflections on the presentations and discussions thus far.

The conference got off to a great start with a keynote address by Peter Felten from Elon University who I know through his great work on student/staff partnerships in developing the curriculum as well as his related work on transformational learning and student success in university. Peter warned against moves from the private sector to ‘unbundle’ higher education to focus solely on developing students’ competencies and skills in a consumer-focused, marketised manner. He highlighted how underserved students fare worst in unbundled, unstructured education (and succeed with structure and community and clear pathways to goals) so those with high social capital are more likely to succeed in an unbundled higher education environment. Peter then focused on his recent work on The Undergraduate Experience which focuses on six key areas: learning, relationships, expectations, alignment, improvement/enhancement, and leadership. By working in partnership with students to motivate them to put in meaningful time and effort on their studies, show them staff have confidence in their abilities, and allow students to practice in a safe community, students will learn how to navigate the complex world we live in today. Peter’s talk inspired the audience and also offered tangible and practical examples to help educators help students in active learning within vibrant academic communities. He used a great analogy of how a relay race team may have fantastic individual competitors, but they may lose the race because of their failure to pass off the baton between themselves; similarly, in higher education we can have silos of excellent practice but the key to success is the integration and coherence of the student experience. I really enjoyed Peter’s keynote, and one of the best parallel sessions was the discussion with Peter of the themes he had raised and the strategies to overcome challenges that we face in different higher education institutions to embed a culture of student/staff partnerships, whether it be through having lunch with students, hiring students as our research assistants, or normalizing office hours in rocking chairs in common areas.

As in other recent years at the Enhancement Themes Conference, it was a great time to learn about innovative initiatives to help students transition into, through, or out of their degree. It was great to hear about Edinburgh Napier Students’ Association’s dissertation conference of talks and workshops for fourth years before starting their dissertation, as well as a University of Glasgow research conference for fourth-year students to present their dissertation work. This gave me lots of food for thought when thinking about developing a Rep Conference for current or previous student representatives to share their work and past successes as well as talks and workshops to help Reps develop their skills and become more motivated in their role.

I also enjoyed learning about Glasgow School of Art’s interactive game ‘How to Fail Your Research Degree’ to help postgrad students think through all of the pieces of their research degree. It was great to reflect on how I could turn something like our Class Rep training into an interactive game following this model to help Class Reps with experiential learning, problem-solving, and understanding the dependencies between different stakeholders in the student representation system. This may also be a fun way to make training more interesting, practical, and rewarding for Reps to work through scenarios and develop confidence in dealing with them, but it could take quite some time to develop (especially if it were to be online!).

I really enjoyed presenting at the conference as well. I tried out the petcha kutcha format with my colleague to present on Measuring Impact in Student Representation: Incentives, Recognition, and Reward. It was a very quick six minutes flying through twenty slides (with only twenty seconds each), but we were able to summarise and share our work on HEAR recognition, Open Badges, the Edinburgh Award for Representing Students, and the Impact Awards for student leaders. By moving to a multi-faceted reward and recognition structure which focuses on the Reps’ active engagement with the role, we could share our work at the Students’ Association to incentivise students towards recording and sharing their impact in the role, rather than simply rewarding them simply for signing up. I was also able to present on the Teaching Awards research project ‘What Does Good Teaching Look Like to Students?’ (see the full report) which was fantastic to share in this venue. The research highlights the themes of student perceptions of excellent teaching and student support. Since we have shared the work quite a lot across the University of Edinburgh, it was great to share it with colleagues across the sector and to receive the feedback ‘Great work… Student-defined excellence is absolutely leading the conversation in Scotland’ showing how students and Students’ Associations have so much to contribute to discussions around teaching excellence.  

Although it was not a particular focus of the conference, I enjoyed the discussions in sessions and on the twitter wall which emerged around students as partners. Peter Felten suggested that staff can have more conversations about the qualities of the best students they have taught, Megan Brown highlighted how many staff nominate student leaders in the Impact Awards, and Matt Adie and Amy Eberlin highlighted (like I did in my talk) the importance of students recognizing excellent staff. Mushtak Al-Atabi emphasised the importance of seeing others not as ‘the other’ but as a resource and expressing gratitude for others (which is correlated with happiness). He argued that this will help us to work together with emotional intelligence and cognitive intelligence to build bridges and solve some of the massive global challenges we’re facing today. Dragan Gasevic discussed digital skill development and awareness for both students and staff, and how learning analytics data can help both students and staff. It can help students achieve their potential and staff to improve their teaching practices to better reach and engage students, and how it is important to involve different stakeholders in these discussions (including students!). NUS Scotland President Vonnie Sandlan urged university staff to work with their student representatives and student unions to improve the student experience. It was also great to hear Sally Mapstone mention an example of students and staff working together in a liberation of the curriculum project and say: ‘We ask our students to go out of their comfort zones and to challenge themselves, and we must ask ourselves [as staff] to do the same.’ That was really powerful for me to hear, and is key to the positive, open mindset of working with students as partners.

The Enhancement Themes international conference is always big and rapid-fire, with large sessions and then six parallel breakout sessions running at the same time. Today discussions will focus on wrapping up the theme of transitions and announcing the next Enhancement Theme, but I had wished that there had been fewer keynote addresses and more time for discussion-based sessions or workshops to reflect on what we as a sector have learnt from the theme of transitions, take stock of how far we’ve come in the last three years, and also not beat around the bush about what other work there is yet to do in this area. The Twitter discussions also highlighted some bubbling areas of contention or worry, such as how much time enhancement activities and partnership work takes both staff and students albeit to great success in the end. There were other questions around what expectations are for student engagement (engagement for giving feedback bribed by pizza for example, versus reciprocal partnership work throughout a project and a transparent sharing of outcomes). Someone also tweeted how student/staff partnership is not a new concept and we’ve been talking about it in Scotland for many years, yet there still seem to be barriers in fully embedding it in learning and teaching (beyond involvement of Sabbatical Officers). I hope my PhD research will help to understand the benefits and challenges of partnership work in co-creation of the curriculum, but it would have been a great time to discuss some of these deeper issues at this conference to wrap up the theme of transitions. That said, it was a very enjoyable conference to network, celebrate some of the great working taking place across the sector, and provide some food for thought.

sparqs Conference 2017

Yesterday I participated in the Student Partnerships in Quality Scotland (sparqs) conference, which was a great day of meeting students and staff to hear about their work in student engagement, particularly in quality assurance and enhancement processes. I had previously attended the sparqs 2015 conference, and I had loved the focus on co-creation of the curriculum and student/staff partnerships during fascinating talks and innovative workshops. Two of these workshops were particularly memorable for me to this day, one led by University of Lincoln where we used Legos to build collaborative environments for partnership work. The second was led by South Lanarkshire College, New College Lanarkshire, and Glasgow Caledonian University where we used helium balloons and weights to symbolise how to overcome challenges of student delivery of staff development sessions in practice. These were particularly fun workshops, and they helped me learn about great partnership work taking place across the UK.

This year’s sparqs conference had a really interesting international dimension. Shirley-Anne Somerville MSP kicked off the day with an interesting speech on how Scotland leads the way internationally in including students in quality processes, and it was good to hear her speak about how student/staff partnerships in Scottish universities and colleges are key to the wider success of the country. This was followed by Adam Gajek, Executive Committee Member of the European Students’ Union. It was helpful to hear him speak about how student engagement in quality enhancement processes helps democratise education within universities and colleges (which should model democracy for the wider society), and it also helps students to develop the skills and attributes to excel as active citizens in democratic societies. These are also themes that are arising in my research on the effect of co-creation of the curriculum in the Scottish higher education sector, so it was great to see these synergies. Adam also spoke about the threats to democracy in higher and further education as being the commercialisation of education and also students’ lack of participation. In my research on student engagement, it is also increasingly clear that not only students have the responsibility to engage but also university staff and university policies more widely need to take responsibility for facilitating students’ participation and engagement.

In the afternoon of the conference, it was fantastic presenting with two students who have been contributing to my research as Student Consultants. We presented the findings from our student focus groups to show Class Reps’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of engaging in co-creation of the curriculum, as well as enablers to facilitate partnership practices more widely in universities. We also reflected on our own experience of co-producing research together (see my additional reflections in my previous post). They did a fantastic job with the presentation, and it was a great experience for us all working together on this research so presenting it was a great culmination of our project.

See a copy of our presentation of 'Co-Creation of Research on Co-Creation of the Curriculum'.

Our presentation was followed by two other great presentations from the University of Glasgow about co-creation and student/staff partnerships. The first highlighted a great project in which students co-created chemistry lab films to help future students prepare for labs and better understand how to complete laboratory procedures. These students were adding what they felt was missing from the curriculum and increasing other students’ confidence before going into the labs. It was great to see the positive impact of this project with the next year’s cohort receiving higher average marks (and especially seeing how the lowest mark jumped from 41% to 61%!). Not only did the co-creation experience help other students, but it was wonderful to see how the project helped the student co-creators to develop skills including teamwork, communication, public speaking, creativity, critical thinking, and digital skills. I was very impressed by their presentation, and it was also great to hear about the Press Start student-led journal allowing students across disciplines to be involved in writing, reviewing, editing, and publishing their work about gaming studies. I hope more students interested in gaming are able to get involved in the future so this project continues to grow.

In the last conference session, I really enjoyed going to the session on international perspectives on student engagement and quality assurance. Especially since I had studied abroad as an undergrad at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand, it was interesting to learn about their different tertiary and higher education sector and the challenges they faced including the how policies had reduced the number of student representatives and their inclusion on committees, the strong consumer model of education, and how recently membership of student unions had become voluntary and weakened the ability of student unions to make an impact. I hope that student representation can overcome these challenges to improve engagement with quality processes in New Zealand in the future. It was also interesting hearing more about the EU-funded project Enhancing Student Participation in Quality Assurance (ESPAQ) in Armenia, especially since I am really looking forward to visiting Armenia in a few weeks to contribute to this project! I’m looking forward to sharing more about this experience in the coming weeks.

The 2017 sparqs conference was a really interesting and varied one, and it was great to conclude it with the sparqs awards. I was delighted that our Teaching Awards research project on student perceptions of teaching excellence was shortlisted for the award recognising the best Scottish partnership initiative between a University and a Students’ Association. Sadly, we did not win but it was fantastic that Edinburgh University’s Project Myopia was runner-up for the best student-led project to promote equality and diversity! Well done to them – it was fantastic to see these students’ co-creation of the curriculum project being recognised for its impact in liberating and diversifying the curriculum.

Reflections on Co-Researching Co-Creation of the Curriculum

In my application for Innovative Initiative Grant funding for a project researching student and staff perceptions of co-creation of the curriculum, I felt an innovative aspect of this project could be involving students as research consultants. Their role was to contribute the student perspective to analysis of the student focus group data, and to help co-lead the focus groups for academic members of staff. Therefore, I would be able to experience an element of co-creation within my research on this subject, so it was particularly relevant and topical. I was delighted to receive the small grant which would enable me to compensate the Student Consultants a bit for their work. This project was also accepted to be presented at the Student Partnerships in Quality Scotland (sparqs) conference in March 2017, so another great opportunity arose at that conference for the students to co-present the work together with me.

I wasn’t nervous before leading the student focus groups with student representatives since this was not too dissimilar to other events I run at the Students’ Association to contribute to student representatives’ training and skills development. This time, though, I was excited to share my own work and the area of student/staff partnerships in co-creating the curriculum with them since I wanted to share this interest and I thought many would be interested in this idea. What I was nervous about ahead of the focus groups was in how to present the Student Consultant opportunity. What if no one was interested?

Risk is a theme that has been arising in my qualitative data from interviews I previously conducted with both staff and students who have participated in co-creation of the curriculum. Staff felt a sense of risk that students would not engage with their work, and another sense of risk in not knowing the direction of their collaborative work to develop an aspect of the curriculum together since this would depend on the ideas and consensus within the group. Furthermore, students can feel a sense of risk in taking more ownership over their learning, feeling more accountable to the learning community than in traditional courses, and not knowing what to expect from this non-traditional teaching. However, it was interesting for me to feel this sense of risk and nervousness myself while I wondered if any students would want to work with me on the project. If they didn’t, then a core aspect of my ‘innovative’ project would not work and it would no longer be very novel. Therefore, I put in quite some time into designing a handout to promote the role and getting the wording right so it was clear yet hopefully enticing and not over-promising anything or asking too much of the students.  

Luckily for me, I had five students email me to express their interest in the two Student Consultant roles. It was a difficult decision because all of the student focus group participants had provided valuable contributions, and especially these students. Two students in particular wrote about how much they had enjoyed the project, what they could contribute to it, and what skills and experience they felt they could gain by participating – I offered them the roles but it was difficult turning the other students down.

We have now met once to co-analyse the focus group data, after finally finding a time we could all meet. We had all read through the transcripts of the two focus groups (about 20 pages each!) and the students had been very conscientious in their preparations and notes about their reflections which led to a valuable discussion. We had very similar interpretations of the data relating to students’ aims in higher education, students’ views of effective teaching, and their perspectives on student engagement. All of us had been surprised that the first focus group (which neither of them had been a part of) had been a bit negative about the idea of co-creation of the curriculum. Several participants in that focus group had complained about the heavy workload of preparing ahead of a flipped classroom experience, they felt there was no benefit in attending if they did not have time to prepare adequately, and even when they had prepared some of these students had felt that the discussion was too ‘out of the box’. Both the Student Consultants and I were surprised that these participants had previously spoken about the need for students to take responsibility for their learning experience; furthermore, they had voiced the view that effective teachers should adapt to students’ interests and act on students’ feedback to improve the course as it takes place. Therefore, we felt it was contradictory that these participants had highlighted many challenges to co-creation of the curriculum when, in other parts of the discussion, it seemed that they would have benefited from and enjoyed experiencing co-creation of the curriculum. By contrast, the second student focus group (which both Student Consultants had been part of) was generally very positive about the opportunities that co-creation present.

We are still analysing the focus group data, and we are preparing for leading the two focus groups with staff on 10 and 13 March. One of the Student Consultants has volunteered to create the short PowerPoint sharing the general consensus from the student focus groups, which will be presented after the staff share their perspectives so that we can discuss the comparison. My first gut reaction was to think ‘What if the presentation isn’t good?’ but immediately I felt that it would be ok since part of the process of co-creation is letting go of ownership over the direction of the project. From what I hear from staff who have done this, often the students go above and beyond the staff members’ expectations and produce exceptionally high-quality work when they’re given this opportunity. If they don’t, then we can have a productive discussion and give each other feedback to improve the presentation, but I’m confident I’ll be pleasantly surprised by the output. We’ll see!

Update: read more about our presentation and experiences at the sparqs conference.

The Power of Co-Production: Transforming Ourselves and Our Society

Today was a thought-provoking day attending and presenting at the conference 'Co-Production, Research and Youth and Community Work'. Dave Beck’s conference introduction started the day rightly linking co-production to social justice and community development that decrease inequalities and effect positive change in civically engaged democracies. Co-production helps to develop shared ownership as opposed to chasing extrinsic motivations and targets for their own sake. It was good to start the day with these themes which would re-emerge in numerous presentations and workshops. In particular, this fit well with the opening presentation from Young Edinburgh Action’s young people and staff. I was particularly struck by how they said they created ‘safe spaces, and brave spaces’ for young people to participate in co-production and have a positive impact on their community. 

As I have found in my emerging research, community development, trust and respect are key to developing and working effectively within safe spaces; at the same time, co-production challenges traditional power hierarchies and stereotypes about what young people are capable of, so co-production also needs to be ‘brave spaces’ that challenge the status quo and think creatively to tackle challenges in the classroom or community, and beyond in the wider society. Preparations for my workshop helped me articulate my initial analysis of some of my data from staff and students who have participated in co-creation of the curriculum, and I was glad that it led to fruitful discussions of the democratisation of knowledge, sharing power amongst a collective, and developing power within individuals.

Other presentations brought this out for me by discussing how co-production is fundamentally a developmental process of empowerment. Within safe spaces, people can bravely experiment and learn creatively from challenge whilst developing personally and professionally as individuals and whilst developing society’s capacity to confront some of the most difficult challenges of today’s uncertain world, such as inequality. By developing personal agency and empowerment, we can learn to understand ourselves better by demonstrating reflexivity and transparency. By working in partnership with others in co-production projects, it can be an emancipatory, transformative and holistic process that is rooted in individuals’ personal stories and in real life. Although co-production is ‘messy’, challenging, and involves risk, it was helpful to see that others agreed that its transformative power often outweighs these challenges since it has the ability to change ourselves and our society for the better.