Student reviewers of teaching practice: Reflections on the design & experience of participants
This case study focuses on the benefits and challenges of students and staff working in partnership to review virtual learning environments as part of a wider review of an academic course. The paper considers how it enables a more rounded view of the course to be gained and how students identified possible enhancements to online sites in their own departments from the experience. Most issues raised by students related to the organization of the sites, with differences between students and staff in both the approach they thought should be taken to this and the importance placed upon it. These different perspectives make dialogue and respect very important in this area of student-staff partnership.
Bennett, S., & Maton, K. (2010). Beyond the ‘digital natives’ debate: Towards a more nuanced understanding of students’ technology experiences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 321-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00360.x
Byrne, J., Brown, H., & Challen, D. (2010). Peer development as an alternative to peer observation: A tool to enhance professional development. International Journal for Academic Development, 15(3), 215-228. 3370-Marie et al- Layout.docxhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2010.497685
Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 186-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2013.805694
Cook-Sather, A., & Alter, Z. (2011). What is and what can be: How a liminal position can change learning and teaching in higher education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 42(1), 37-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1492.2010.01109.x
Cook-Sather, A., & Luz, A. (2015). Great engagement in and responsibility for learning: What happens when students cross the threshold of student-faculty partnership. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(6), 1097-1109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.911263
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Crawford, K. (2012). Rethinking the student-teacher nexus: Students as consultants on teaching in higher education. In Neary, M., Stevenson, H., & Bell, L. (Eds.) Towards Teaching in Public: Reshaping the Modern University. London: Bloomsbury.
Gosling, D. (2002). Models of Peer Observation of Teaching. York: Learning and Teaching Support Network, Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from 3370-Marie et al- Layout.docxhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Gosling/publication/2676874 99_Models_of_Peer_Observation_of_Teaching/links/545b64810cf249070a7955d3.pdf
Hendry, G., & Dean, S. (2002). Accountability, evaluation of teaching and expertise in higher education. International Journal for Academic Development, 7(1), 75-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601440210156493
Huxham, M., Scoles, J., Green, U., Purves, S., Welsh, Z., & Gray, A. (2017). ‘Observation has set in’: Comparing students and peers as reviewers of teaching. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 887-899. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1204594
New Media Consortium. (2017). The NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Retrieved from3370-Marie et al-Layout.docx http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2017-nmc- horizon-report-he-EN.pdf
Peat, J. (2011). New to the field: Integrating the student voice into the PG Cert. Educational Developments, 12(4), 18-19.
Peel, D. (2005). Peer observation as a transformatory tool? Teaching in Higher Education, 10(4), 489-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510500239125
Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2015). Personalising learning: Exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course. Computers & Education, 88, 354-369.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).