Live brief projects in higher education: a contextualized examination of student and staff perceptions of experiential learning

In a context that privileges the development of cognitive measurement, the aim of this research is to examine students’ and staff perceptions of an experiential project in higher education in conjunction with intended learning outcomes. Supported by staff, undergraduate students involved in the research worked in crossdisciplinary groups on a live brief, where an agreed outcome was produced for an external client. An interpretivist qualitative methodology brought together data from two sources: module descriptors and focus groups involving 47 student and staff participants who had taken part in the experiential live brief project. Module learning outcomes were analysed in terms of their alignment with domains from two different taxonomies: Anderson’s Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing (Anderson et al., 2001), also known as ‘Bloom’s’, and an alternative taxonomy, Atkinson’s Taxonomy Circles (Atkinson, 2013). Focus group transcripts were analysed using Contextual Text Coding (CTC). Juxtaposed, the results of analysis suggest a discrepancy between intended module learning outcomes and students’ and staff perceptions of value and learning. The affective domain is not represented in any of the intended learning outcomes, yet the analysis of the focus groups indicates that this is the greatest area of reported learning. As well as showing changes to values and attitudes, students and staff reported that they appreciated the authenticity of experiential learning to develop students’ soft skills, including teamwork. The unique contribution of the thesis is the juxtaposition of the perceptions of students and staff who have taken part in an experiential learning experience with intended learning outcomes. In doing so, the research has highlighted the shortcomings of traditionally formed learning outcomes in capturing learning that fits contemporary expectations of students’ development through higher education study. Findings support existing literature that experiential learning using live briefs, carefully implemented, affords rich opportunities for learning that students and staff see as valuable. Importantly, too, the development of a wider range of learning and skills aligns with the sector’s priorities if not the systems that underpin them. The type of learning and unpredictable nature of live briefs should also be considered in a sector where systems favour cognitive learning and metrics are important. Furthermore, the comprehensive consideration of core theory facilitated through the literature review, namely Bloom's Taxonomy as it is understood through the work of Anderson (2001) as a model to plan and design learning is shown to limit opportunities for learning that extends beyond the cognitive domain. This observations of other researchers who have noted examination grounds the shortcomings of Anderson et al.’s (2001) work

Live brief projects in higher education: a contextualized examination of student and staff perceptions of experiential learning

In a context that privileges the development of cognitive measurement, the aim of this research is to examine students’ and staff perceptions of an experiential project in higher education in conjunction with intended learning outcomes. Supported by staff, undergraduate students involved in the research worked in crossdisciplinary groups on a live brief, where an agreed outcome was produced for an external client. An interpretivist qualitative methodology brought together data from two sources: module descriptors and focus groups involving 47 student and staff participants who had taken part in the experiential live brief project. Module learning outcomes were analysed in terms of their alignment with domains from two different taxonomies: Anderson’s Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing (Anderson et al., 2001), also known as ‘Bloom’s’, and an alternative taxonomy, Atkinson’s Taxonomy Circles (Atkinson, 2013). Focus group transcripts were analysed using Contextual Text Coding (CTC). Juxtaposed, the results of analysis suggest a discrepancy between intended module learning outcomes and students’ and staff perceptions of value and learning. The affective domain is not represented in any of the intended learning outcomes, yet the analysis of the focus groups indicates that this is the greatest area of reported learning. As well as showing changes to values and attitudes, students and staff reported that they appreciated the authenticity of experiential learning to develop students’ soft skills, including teamwork. The unique contribution of the thesis is the juxtaposition of the perceptions of students and staff who have taken part in an experiential learning experience with intended learning outcomes. In doing so, the research has highlighted the shortcomings of traditionally formed learning outcomes in capturing learning that fits contemporary expectations of students’ development through higher education study. Findings support existing literature that experiential learning using live briefs, carefully implemented, affords rich opportunities for learning that students and staff see as valuable. Importantly, too, the development of a wider range of learning and skills aligns with the sector’s priorities if not the systems that underpin them. The type of learning and unpredictable nature of live briefs should also be considered in a sector where systems favour cognitive learning and metrics are important. Furthermore, the comprehensive consideration of core theory facilitated through the literature review, namely Bloom's Taxonomy as it is understood through the work of Anderson (2001) as a model to plan and design learning is shown to limit opportunities for learning that extends beyond the cognitive domain. This observations of other researchers who have noted examination grounds the shortcomings of Anderson et al.’s (2001) work

Assessment and learning gain: are we measuring what's important to students?

This presentation presents findings from a research project on using live brief assessment with L5 and L6 students. Unsurprisingly, students seem to welcome the authentic experiences and related opportunities for learning and development that these types of assessments offer. It does raise the question, however, of what exactly, we are measuring with our assessments- and what is important to students. Findings suggest a disparity between the learning of subject-specific content articulated in module learning outcomes and the perceived learning of soft skills, such as communication and team work, reported by students. The students achieved the content-related learning outcomes and, as such, the live brief approach could be said to be effective. At the same time, learning reported by the students in focus groups remained largely unrecognized by the summative assessment. These findings raise a red flag on how learning gain is measured institutionally and within the sector: innovative and authentic pedagogical practice requires considerable staff time. If ‘safer’, less pedagogically intensive strategies achieve similar results in terms of achieving outcomes, there is a risk that these will be preferred on the basis of expediency (Gordon & McKenna, 2018)

Metrification of learning as a risk factor to innovative practice

Students welcome the multidimensional learning afforded by innovative teaching and assessment. However, the increasing reliance on metrics to evidence teaching excellence may present a risk to innovation in learning and teaching (Gordon and McKenna, 2018). Research examining the benefits of multi-disciplinary live brief assessment at L5/6 suggests that the development of soft skills, for example, is largely unrecognised by formal institutional metrics. At a time when there is increasing pressure on teaching academics to produce measurable results, resource-heavy innovative practice may be side-lined in favour of less resource-intensive approaches that provide similar metric-friendly outcomes

Gypsies, Travellers, and Roma in UK Higher Education: A View from Inside the Academy

Written from the unique perspective of a Romany Gypsy graduate (Smith) with the support of academic colleagues (Greenfields/Rochon), this chapter draws on a Gypsy Roma Traveller GRT learner journey from the point of starting as a mature student with caring responsibilities to the present day as a postgraduate student and early career researcher. Thus, the narrative is able to foreground the voice and personal experience of a GRT author as well as initial findings from ongoing research pertaining to the higher education experiences of Gypsy Roma and Traveller (GRT) students. The dialectic between intentionality and outcome in the higher education (HE) sector is explored, highlighting the significant challenges faced by the GRT community in engaging with HE, such as the place and value of education, and the gendered expectations of community members. It is suggested that ongoing work with HE featuring partnership with the GRT community and beyond, including Showmen and Boaters (GRTSB), may offer a positive opportunity to guide change, and in doing so become 'the change we wish to see'. In particular, it is proposed that universities commit to a good practice pledge that involves monitoring GTRSB student and staff numbers; building a supportive and welcoming culture for GTRSB students; outreach and engagement to local GTRSB communities; and inclusion celebration and commemoration of GTRSB cultures and communities. The document available through this institutional repository is the Author Manuscript (i.e. the post-peer review, pre-publication version)

Traversing digital-creative perspectives: preparing design and technology students for interdisciplinary work.

The project aim, as stated in the original proposal, was “‘to develop and evaluate a novel collaborative approach using inter-disciplinary curricula to enhance work-readiness of computing and creative advertising undergraduates. The project vehicle is a live brief for the university Computing and Art & Design departments to work with Wycombe District Council to develop a mobile and location-sensitive “Heritage Trail App” to interpret significant sites in High Wycombe”. The overall aim of the project has remained unchanged. However, as a result of the success of the first cycle of project work (undertaken in the 2016-17 academic year), the university was approached by Buckinghamshire County Council and offered an opportunity for a further client partnership to develop a ‘web-app’ to support the delivery of the ‘Safe Places Scheme’, an initiative to provide locations where vulnerable people may seek support when they are out and about in the community. This also allowed the project team to develop and validate the approach with a new student subject and a different year group during the second and final cycle of project work (undertaken in 2017-18). This time final year BSc Computing students worked in partnership with second year BA students reading Graphic Arts, Graphic Design and Illustration. The underpinning project objectives and their mapping to the original themes of ‘Call A’ are also unchanged and are as follows: (1) Align computing and design curricula to develop vocationally relevant collaborative skills. Maps to ‘develop[ing] curriculum innovations from interdisciplinary research, interdisciplinary professional practice …’ (2) Evaluate learning gain arising from an innovative approach to authentically represent interdisciplinary and collaborative digital-creative environments. Maps to ‘respond to employer demands for advanced skills or knowledge’. 5 (3) Analyse engagement metrics to: a) predict/reflect progress in learning and collaboration; b) flag need for supportive interventions; c) use for self-directed learning. Maps to ‘develop use of learner analytics for particular pedagogic purposes’

A thematic analysis of factors influencing recruitment to maternal and perinatal trials

Background: Recruitment of eligible participants remains one of the biggest challenges to successful completion of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Only one third of trials recruit on time, often requiring a lengthy extension to the recruitment period. We identified factors influencing recruitment success and potentially effective recruitment strategies. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1966 to December Week 2, 2006, the Cochrane Library Methodology Register in December 2006, and hand searched reference lists for studies of any design which focused on recruitment to maternal/perinatal trials, or if no studies of maternal or perinatal research could be identified, other areas of healthcare. Studies of nurses' and midwives' attitudes to research were included as none specifically about trials were located. We synthesised the data narratively, using a basic thematic analysis, with themes derived from the literature and after discussion between the authors. Results: Around half of the included papers (29/53) were specific to maternal and perinatal healthcare. Only one study was identified which focused on factors for maternal and perinatal clinicians and only seven studies considered recruitment strategies specific to perinatal research. Themes included: participant assessment of risk; recruitment process; participant understanding of research; patient characteristics; clinician attitudes to research and trials; protocol issues; and institutional or organisational issues. While no reliable evidence base for strategies to enhance recruitment was identified in any of the review studies, four maternal/perinatal primary studies suggest that specialised recruitment staff, mass mailings, physician referrals and strategies targeting minority women may increase recruitment. However these findings may only be applicable to the particular trials and settings studied. Conclusion: Although factors reported by both participants and clinicians which influence recruitment were quite consistent across the included studies, studies comparing different recruitment strategies were largely missing. Trials of different recruitment strategies could be embedded in large multicentre RCTs, with strategies tailored to the factors specific to the trial and institution.Rebecca L Tooher, Philippa F Middleton and Caroline A Crowthe