Kusyj, B

Musgrave, J

Thomas, RW

English

Leeds Beckett Repository

ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 6: SUMMER 200942IntroductionVisiting speakers are used regularly by moduleleaders on vocational courses to enhance thestudent experience. Many of those involved wouldargue that inviting leading practitioners into theclassroom potentially adds value to universityprovision by being interesting, informative andrelevant in terms of prospective careers. There isanecdotal evidence, however, that practice variesand that students do not always gain as mucheducationally from the engagement of visitingspeakers as they might.This paper reports the findings of a Teaching QualityEnhancement Fund (TQEF) project that exploredcurrent practice and the perceived impact of suchpractice on students following one set of vocationalprogrammes: events management. Theseprogrammes are worthy of investigation becausethey contain distinctly applied elements as well asthe higher order academic skills associated with anyundergraduate study. The project started with asystematic review of existing literature on the use ofguest speakers as an aid to teaching and learning inhigher education. The paucity of material availablemade this a disappointing and somewhat frustratingexercise. Data for the project were gathered via asurvey of staff at the UK Centre for EventsManagement, interviews with 18 module tutors whowere the most frequent users of guest speakers, andtwo focus groups with students from allundergraduate levels. Ultimately, the purpose of theproject was to find ways of enhancing the learningassociated with the use of visiting speakers.Existing researchThere is little robust theoretical or empiricalresearch available that deals directly with the use ofguest speakers. Limited insights are available,nevertheless, from literatures that exploreemployer engagement and practice-based learning.Guidance from commentators varies. Some dismissindustry guest speakers as little more thanentertainment (Kemp and Foster, 1995; Payne,Sumter and Sun, 2003) whereas most are positive(see for example Metrejean et al, 2002; Garraway,2006). Particularly valuable contributions are made byKarns (2006) and, especially, Ormrod (2004). Theynote the importance of making connections betweenlearning outcomes and the contribution of guestspeakers, and that careful planning is required, whichincludes encouraging and enabling guest speakers torelate theory to practice. How such connections aremade may vary; there is little sense from the (limited)literature that there is a ‘best’ way of connectingtheory to practice via guest speakers.Visiting speakers: staff perspectivesThe discussion that follows draws on the survey ofacademic staff and subsequent interviews withmost frequent users of guest speakers. Theintention here is to provide a flavour of the findingsrather than a complete review; a more extensivereview will be published elsewhere.Though intensity of usage varied, 22 of the 27full-time members of staff who participated in thisproject used guest speakers at some point duringmost academic years. The rationale for usagevaried but for most tutors the purpose was evidentlyto add credibility and currency to their courses andto make connections between industry and theUniversity.The selection of visiting speakers was invariablyinformal, based largely on individual networks orinformation available in the media. This informalityis exemplified by the selection process. Tutorsgenerally had a sense of the kind of people theyrequired as visiting speakers rather than asystematic process that matched the skills andknowledge available with the requirements of aparticular module. Few tutors, if any, knew thequalifications of industry speakers or consideredthis a matter of importance.For most tutors, successful guest speaker sessionswere those where the students were ‘activelearners’ (engaging with visitors) rather than justlistening to lectures. In these cases, the visitorstended to participate in more than one session andresponded to input from the students (such as apresentation or short piece of reflective work). Thisoffered students the additional potential benefits ofbeing able to network or get to know employerswith a view to future employment.Tutors felt they faced several logistical challengeswhen trying to organise activities involving visitingspeakers but that these were outweighed by theadvantages of the speaker.Learning from visiting speakers: the case of events managementJames Musgrave, Rhodri Thomas and Bridget Kusyj36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:54  Page 44ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 6: SUMMER 2009 43The extensive briefing of speakers that is advocatedby some commentators (Ormrod, 2004) was notcommon practice. Briefing of students prior toevents was also limited. The majority of tutorsprovided advance notice of speakers but there waslittle sense of systematic preparation for and reviewof sessions. In some cases this is explained by theaim of the session (for some at Level 1 it was simplyto introduce a new sector), and in others there wasan expectation that students should, as part of thelearning process, grapple with the relationshipsbetween theory and practice.Evaluation of speakers is best characterised asinformal and tended to consist of conversationswith students the following week. Emphasis wasput on what one tutor called the “wow factor andthe buzz” after the event. Another tutorincorporated material discussed by the speaker intoa ‘test quiz’ but because this was not a formal partof the course not all students completed it. Twoothers claimed to use feedback sheets. This studyfound little evidence of formal evaluation of theimpact of speakers on learning, though thedesirability of doing so (and the associatedmethodological challenges) was recognised byseveral tutors.Visiting speakers: student perspectivesThe focus groups with students explored fourissues: the features of a good guest speaker;potential benefits and limitations of using guestspeakers; preparation; and reflection.There was a degree of unanimity about the qualitiesof a good visiting speaker. These were that theycould speak about their personal experiences andemployment; that they could relate theirexperiences to theory; that the material beingpresented was relevant to the course; that theyavoided too many facts and figures perceived as notrelevant; that they used visual aids; and that theywere enthusiastic and able to stimulate studentparticipation and questions.Students welcomed the idea of visiting speakersand readily identified the potential value of beingexposed to practitioners. Levels of satisfaction withguest speakers, however, varied. Level 3 studentswere distinctly more enthusiastic about the valuespeakers added to their learning yet were also,perhaps somewhat paradoxically, often also morecritical that their expectations had not been fullymet. The broad consensus among the Level 1students was that the volume of speakers inevitablyresulted in mixed ‘performances’. Nevertheless,there was a general perception that learningoccurred but that, often, this was because goalswere little more than ‘introductory’.Most students did not appear to invest time inpreparing for sessions led by visiting speakers andsometimes even seemed unaware that suchsessions were taking place until they arrived atclasses. Even those who did prepare generallylimited their efforts to elementary data-gatheringabout the speakers or the company that theyrepresented. Though several sensed that such anapproach was limited (and even unsatisfactory),there was a common uncertainty about how theymight better prepare.For some, notably Level 3 students, there wassometimes a degree of frustration that visitingspeakers did not know the relevant theories beingstudied and could not, therefore, incorporatecomments on them into their presentations oranswer questions about them. To some extent, suchcritical perspectives are perhaps indicative ofgreater reflection (or an ability to articulate theirreflection) among final-year students. Such aninterpretation is reasonable but should not beexaggerated. It would be misleading to suppose thatreflection by students on the contribution of visitingspeakers to their learning was extensive orhappened automatically. There is little doubt thatstudents felt they learned most when evaluationand reflection was structured by the tutor.Concluding commentsIn this paper, it has been possible to provide only aglimpse of the insights from the project on the useand value of visiting speakers. Additional analysis ofthe data has been undertaken and will be reportedat greater length elsewhere. Nevertheless, from theforegoing it is possible to offer observations oncurrent practice and recommendations forimprovement.It is clear that students generally welcome visitingspeakers, though promotion ensures greaterattendance. Inevitably the quality of speakers and36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:54  Page 45ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 6: SUMMER 200944the student experience varies. Generally, however,it seems that students learn from theirengagement, with Level 3 students articulatingmore sophisticated positive outcomes.Analysis of the data suggests that student learningmight be enhanced if the degree of informality thattypifies current practice is, to an extent, formalised.Formalisation in this case suggests paying moreattention to the following:• Agreeing learning outcomes with guest speakersand ensuring that they understand where theirsession fits with the broader aims of the module• Preparing students for the session so that theyare able, where appropriate, to relate relevantresearch evidence (the theoretical or empiricalmaterial considered during other parts of themodule) to what visiting speakers present• Encouraging reflection, perhaps by introducingactivities that encourage students to makeconnections between what the visitor hasdiscussed and other parts of the course.ReferencesGarraway, J. (2006) Creating Productive Interactionbetween Work and the Academy. Higher Education52, 447-464.Karns, G.L. (2006) Learning Style Differences in thePerceived Effectiveness of Learning Activities.Journal of Marketing Education 28(1), 56-63.Kemp, I. and Foster, K. (1995) From Ivory Towers toFactory Floors. Education and Training 37(2), 26-32.Metrejean, C., Pittman, J. and Zarzeski, M. T. (2002)Guest Speakers: reflection on the role ofaccountants in the classroom. Accounting Education11(4), 347-364.Ormrod, N.G. (2004) The Use of Guest Speakers,Company Visits and Professional Bodies’ Events in theCurriculum. Discussion paper. Manchester:Manchester Metropolitan University.Payne, B.K., Sumter, M. and Sun, I. (2003) Bringingthe Field into the Criminal Justice Classroom: fieldtrips, ride-alongs, and guest speakers. Journal ofCriminal Justice Education 14(2), 327-344.James Musgrave, Rhodri Thomas andBridget KusyjUK Centre for Events Management36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:54  Page 46

Bringing the Field into the Criminal Justice Classroom: field trips, ride-alongs, and guest speakers.

Creating Productive Interaction between Work and the Academy.

From Ivory Towers to Factory Floors.

Guest Speakers: reflection on the role of accountants in the classroom.

Learning Style Differences in the Perceived Effectiveness of Learning Activities.

The Use of Guest Speakers,

Learning from visiting speakers: the case of events management

Learning from visiting speakers: the case of events management

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Leeds Beckett Repository