How can we confidently judge the extent to which student voice in higher education has been genuinely amplified? A proposal for a new evaluation framework

This article aims to contribute to the development of frameworks for evaluating student voice projects in higher education by offering a critically evaluative account of two student voice projects. Although both projects had been underpinned by the principles of participatory (inclusive) research, one appeared to be more successful than the other in engaging students in a productive or meaningful way. In order to confirm and explain these perceived differences, this paper draws on both student voice and participatory research literature to identify two potentially useful evaluation criteria: reach and fitness for purpose. These criteria are applied to three project factors: aims and assumptions, processes and outcomes to produce an amplitude framework for evaluating student voice in higher education. It is argued that this framework has the potential to enable a rich account of the relative successes and failures of student voice initiatives in higher education

Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design and curricula: implications for academic developers

Within higher education, students’ voices are frequently overlooked in the design of teaching approaches, courses and curricula. In this paper we outline the theoretical background to arguments for including students as partners in pedagogical planning processes. We present examples where students have worked collaboratively in design processes along with the beneficial outcomes of these examples. Finally we focus on some of the implications and opportunities for academic developers of proposing collaborative approaches to pedagogical planning

Cultivating student-staff partnerships through research and practice

No abstract available

Students and academics working in partnership to embed cultural competence as a graduate quality

Since 2014, the University of Sydney has been experimenting with a new initiative motivated by the research on “students as partners”. In 2014, six students were selected as Ambassadors of the Sydney Teaching Colloquium (STC)-the University’s annual learning and teaching conference-as undergraduate researchers. In that year, the focus was on assessment standards

Translating Learners, Researchers, and Qualitative Approaches through Investigations of Students’ Experiences in School

This article uses the conceptual framework offered by ‘translation’ to argue for transforming students into authorities and agents in research on educational practice. Drawing on various definitions of translation and highlighting the influence of recent feminist perspectives on translation studies, the article presents two cases that illustrate how learners can be translated into co-researchers of educational experiences, researchers translated into partners with students in making meaning through the research process, and qualitative research’s approaches and modes of presenting findings translated into new versions of those processes and products

Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching: overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity in student-staff partnerships

Against a backdrop of rising interest in students becoming partners in learning and teaching in higher education, this paper begins by exploring the relationships between student engagement, co-creation and student-staff partnership before providing a typology of the roles students can assume in working collaboratively with staff. Acknowledging that co-creating learning and teaching is not straightforward, a set of examples from higher education institutions in Europe and North America illustrates some important challenges that can arise during co-creation. These examples also provide the basis for suggestions regarding how such challenges might be resolved or re-envisaged as opportunities for more meaningful collaboration. The challenges are presented under three headings: resistance to co-creation; navigating institutional structures, practices and norms; and establishing an inclusive co-creation approach. The paper concludes by highlighting the importance of transparency within co-creation approaches and of changing mindsets about the potential opportunities and institutional benefits of staff and students co-creating learning and teaching. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

Student participation in the design of learning and teaching: Disentangling the terminology and approaches

Background: Students are ever more involved in the design of educational practices, which is reflected in the growing body of literature about approaches to student participation. Similarities and differences between these approaches often remain vague since the terms are used interchangeably. This confusing and fragmented body of literature hampers our understanding the process and outcomes of student participation and choosing the most suitable approach for it. Method: We identified the three most frequently used terms related to the design of learning and teaching–design-based research (DBR), participatory design (PD), and co-creation–and disentangled the terminology by focusing on relevant definitions, aims, involvement of students, outcomes, and related terminology. Results: Differences between the approaches to student participation can be found in the degree to which students are the central actors and the degree to which the design is informed by educational theory. Conclusion: It is important to align the level of student participation with the purpose of the approach

Participatory instructional redesign by students and teachers in secondary education: effects on perceptions of instruction

Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2011). Participatory instructional redesign by students and teachers in secondary education: effects on perceptions of instruction. Instructional Science, 39(5), 737–762.Students’ perceptions of instruction are important because they direct the learning of students. The fact that teachers have only limited knowledge of these perceptions is likely to threaten the effectiveness of learning, because congruence between interpretations of an instructional intervention is necesarry for its optimal use. This study examines participatory design as a strategy for taking student perceptions into account in instructional re/design. Participatory design meetings of groups of teachers and seven co-designing students in a secondary education setting identified changes to improve the regular education process. The results on changes in student perceptions, perceived-desired discrepancy, and teacher-student disagreement showed some improvement for the co-designers but, unexpectedly, limited or even negative effects for the non-co-designing students. Possible causes are discussed. Participatory design seems to have potential for improving education, but further research is needed

Changing the culture of assessment: the dominance of the summative assessment paradigm

Background Despite growing evidence of the benefits of including assessment for learning strategies within programmes of assessment, practical implementation of these approaches is often problematical. Organisational culture change is often hindered by personal and collective beliefs which encourage adherence to the existing organisational paradigm. We aimed to explore how these beliefs influenced proposals to redesign a summative assessment culture in order to improve students’ use of assessment-related feedback. Methods Using the principles of participatory design, a mixed group comprising medical students, clinical teachers and senior faculty members was challenged to develop radical solutions to improve the use of post-assessment feedback. Follow-up interviews were conducted with individual members of the group to explore their personal beliefs about the proposed redesign. Data were analysed using a socio-cultural lens. Results Proposed changes were dominated by a shared belief in the primacy of the summative assessment paradigm, which prevented radical redesign solutions from being accepted by group members. Participants’ prior assessment experiences strongly influenced proposals for change. As participants had largely only experienced a summative assessment culture, they found it difficult to conceptualise radical change in the assessment culture. Although all group members participated, students were less successful at persuading the group to adopt their ideas. Faculty members and clinical teachers often used indirect techniques to close down discussions. The strength of individual beliefs became more apparent in the follow-up interviews. Conclusions Naïve epistemologies and prior personal experiences were influential in the assessment redesign but were usually not expressed explicitly in a group setting, perhaps because of cultural conventions of politeness. In order to successfully implement a change in assessment culture, firmly-held intuitive beliefs about summative assessment will need to be clearly understood as a first step