Widening the Methodological Lens on the Investigation of Diversity in the Transition to Higher Education: A Discussion

This discussion addresses the methodological approaches used in the special issue on student transitions and diversity. We provide an overview of how the different papers contribute to methodological development in the field, in particular by their use of advanced multi-factor analyses and accounting for diversity in student transitions at several levels. The discussion touches upon challenges concerning (a) the distinction of analytical levels, (b) different conceptualisations and operationalisations of diversity and (c) the types of data collection methodologies. We conclude by discussing future steps to widen the methodological lens in transition research

The Conundrum of Low Achievement and Feedback for Learning

The literature on improving student engagement with assessment and feedback has a tendency to treat all students as if they are the same. Students with lower levels of attainment are generally underrepresented within empirical studies and their feedback behaviours are less well understood. The recent drive to improve student assessment and feedback literacy and the move from ‘feedback’ being information about a task to being a process of understanding and using performance information is a larger conceptual leap for some students than others. In this paper, we consider issues surrounding the transition to new modes of feedback, focusing on what is needed for those who find study difficult and persistently are disappointed by their levels of attainment, to benefit from and take advantage of our feedback pedagogies. We examine literature advocating strategies such as increasing agency, using praise, developing feedback literacy and cultivating a growth mind-set. We argue that students who underachieve may benefit from strong relationships with educators and peers; exposure to feedback rich, low stakes environments, which permit repeated integrations of practice and feedback and building feedback literacy through peer assessment activities

Productive feedback practices in higher education. Investigating social and epistemic relations in two undergraduate courses

Feedback on student work has become a central research topic in the field of higher education. Many see the use of feedback as a promising pedagogical strategy to foster the students’ skills in making competent judgements about the quality of their performances, and to encourage students to engage actively with the knowledge of their disciplines. Despite this increasing attention, many aspects of feedback are still not fully understood. Recent developments in the research literature have brought forward the argument that the limited understanding of feedback is related to the problematic view of feedback as a simple transmission of knowledge from teachers to students. Instead, it has been argued that we need to shift our attention more to the processual and relational aspects of feedback. This thesis addresses this challenge by conceptualizing and studying feedback from a sociocultural perspective. The notion of productive feedback practices is proposed to refer to the ways in which course participants (i.e. teachers and students) generate, make meaning of, and act upon information about the quality of student performances. These practices incorporate, and are shaped by, the social and epistemic relations between different elements in the course environment. Such elements include the actions of course participants, components of the course design, and the resources available in the knowledge domain. How these elements come together shapes the ways in which feedback opportunities are generated and how concrete feedback encounters are enacted. In line with this conceptual stance, this thesis explores empirically (1) how feedback practices in higher education are constituted by social and epistemic relations in the course environment, and (2) how configurations of social and epistemic relations can facilitate productive feedback practices. These questions are investigated in the context of two case studies at two different Norwegian higher education institutions: a course in biology and a course in software engineering. The empirical work is presented in three articles that use qualitative research methodology to investigate the feedback practices in the two courses

Strategic Responses to the German Excellence Initiative. A case study of Berlin Humboldt University

This master thesis examines the strategic responses of Berlin Humboldt University to the German policy instrument Excellence Initiative. Using document analysis and qualitative interviews, it investigates which changes have been taking place within the university and whether they can be interpreted as strategic responses to the policy instrument. Furthermore, it addresses the question to what extent the changes have been triggered by the institutional leadership and in which way they are being influenced by institutional forces. The analysis is based on Oliver s (1991) typology of strategic responses and characterization of environmental pressures. The findings indicate that several organizational changes took place that can be considered strategic responses to the Excellence Initiative. A large part of the strategic behavior was deliberately triggered by the institutional leadership but several changes also emerged from within the institution. This means the university can be considered a strategic actor that is able to act strategically within the boundaries of its institutional norms

Unpacking the feedback process: an analysis of undergraduate students’ interactional meaningmaking of feedback comments

In light of a growing emphasis on student-centred learning approaches, feedback is viewed as an activity that has potential to facilitate higher education students’ explorations of knowledge contents and practices. However, research shows that feedback does not always lead to the expected student engagement. This qualitative study proposes a feedback conceptualization informed by sociocultural notions, in which students co-construct meaning from the teacher’s feedback comments through interaction over time, with each other, the teacher, and relevant resources. Based on an in-depth analysis of undergraduate biology students’ discussions of feedback comments, we found that the feedback process takes the form of a meaning-making trajectory students move along by orienting towards and elaborating on both task-specific and general-knowledge content. Thereby, we contribute to a better understanding of what constitutes feedback processes viewed from an interactional perspective and generate knowledge on how to tailor our feedback practices to better address the students’ needs. This is a Submitted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Studies in Higher Education on 08 Aug 2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/03075079.2017.135924

Evolution of a portfolio-based design in ecology: a three-year design cycle

Abstract Portfolio-based designs are among the most popular student-centered approaches in higher education. While the pedagogical literature typically provides generic advice on ideal portfolio-based designs, there is little empirical data on how such designs are developed over time and what design decisions teachers take in response to challenges in practice. This article provides an empirical account of a three-year design cycle of a portfolio-based ecology course at a Norwegian university. It investigates how the design changed over the years and how these changes related to the challenges the teacher met during the enactment of the course. To that end, a thematic analysis of course plans, evaluations, and interviews with the designing teacher was conducted. The findings show how the teacher introduced, removed, and (re-)configured different course components in order to address challenges related to the limited coherence between portfolio items and organized class meetings, and students’ limited engagement with the disciplinary knowledge. Thereby, the course design gradually evolved from a portfolio-based design towards a hybrid design combining portfolio, traditional exam and team-based learning. This study illustrates that portfolio-based designs have great potential but no guarantee to support students in active engagement with knowledge; and that teachers need to actively maintain their student-centered focus in their designs by responding flexibly to the emerging challenges

Evolution of a portfolio-based design in ecology: a three-year design cycle

Portfolio-based designs are among the most popular student-centered approaches in higher education. While the pedagogical literature typically provides generic advice on ideal portfolio-based designs, there is little empirical data on how such designs are developed over time and what design decisions teachers take in response to challenges in practice. This article provides an empirical account of a three-year design cycle of a portfolio-based ecology course at a Norwegian university. It investigates how the design changed over the years and how these changes related to the challenges the teacher met during the enactment of the course. To that end, a thematic analysis of course plans, evaluations, and interviews with the designing teacher was conducted. The findings show how the teacher introduced, removed, and (re-)configured different course components in order to address challenges related to the limited coherence between portfolio items and organized class meetings, and students’ limited engagement with the disciplinary knowledge. Thereby, the course design gradually evolved from a portfolio-based design towards a hybrid design combining portfolio, traditional exam and team-based learning. This study illustrates that portfolio-based designs have great potential but no guarantee to support students in active engagement with knowledge; and that teachers need to actively maintain their student-centered focus in their designs by responding flexibly to the emerging challenges

How do signature pedagogies get their signatures? The role of assessment and professional artefacts in preparing students for their professions

Signature pedagogies are widely used in professional education to prepare students for the complex and unpredictable nature of professional work. We argue that assessment moments involving professional artefacts contribute to the evaluation and formation of professional knowledge, skills and moral understandings – and thus to the signature of the pedagogy. The ‘authenticity’ these professional artefacts add to assessment is of particular relevance for understanding the pedagogic signature. Drawing on interviews from a professional study programme in dental hygiene, we employ sociocultural theories to analyse how different assessment moments are used to evaluate and develop students’ competences of working with professional artefacts: dental radiographs. The findings show how the use of professional artefacts in three different assessment moments requires students to engage deeply with the epistemic, practical and moral dimensions of their profession. Our study contributes both empirical and conceptual insights to the field’s understanding of the inner workings of signature pedagogies

Designing for productive feedback: an analysis of two undergraduate courses in biology and engineering

In the wake of a growing emphasis on students taking a more central role in shaping their own learning, it has become increasingly important that course designs cater for productive feedback. This study explores how feedback opportunities were incorporated into two course designs that in different ways aimed at engaging students actively in knowledge construction, and what might have contributed to making feedback in those contexts productive. A thematic analysis of course documents and interviews with teachers and students reveals that both courses included productive feedback opportunities. These were generated by arranging task and responsibilities in such ways that students could make use of feedback in their immediate work and their future learning. Our findings suggest that planning for productive feedback entails more than generating good feedback comments. Instead, teachers should view feedback as integral to their course designs and consider the practices of their disciplines during the planning process