Developing a collaborative book project on higher education pedagogy: The institutional, organizational, and community identity dimensions of student-staff partnerships
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i2.3714Keywords:
research-based education, graduate teaching assistants, pedagogical innovation, consortium, interdisciplinarityAbstract
This case study presents an ambitious student-staff partnership project at University College London (UCL) to publish a collaborative book on higher education pedagogy. Over two-and-a-half years, a total of 86 students and staff contributed to the project, which sought to provide educators with a new type of scholarly material under the unifying theme of connecting research and teaching. Multiple layers of student-staff partnership were interwoven throughout the project; this case study contextualizes these layers against three dimensions: institutional, organizational, and community identity. Central to the project was our distinctive approach to engaging with Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs) and their crucial role in bringing the three dimensions together. As such, the project represents a model of enhanced student-staff partnership that has the capacity to empower students and break down educational silos to form new, multi-specialty learning communities.
Downloads
References
Bovill, C., & Bulley, C. J. (2011). A model of active student participation in curriculum design: Exploring desirability and possibility. In: Rust, C. (Ed.), Improving student learning (ISL) 18: Global theories and local practices: Institutional, disciplinary and cultural variations. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011). Students as co-creators of teaching
approaches, course design, and curricula: Implications for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), 135-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.568690
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Millard, L., & Moore-Cherry, N. (2016). Addressing
potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching: Overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity in student-staff partnerships. Higher Education, 71(2), 195-208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9896-4
Braun, D. (2003). Lasting tensions in research policy-making: A delegation problem. Science
and Public Policy, 30(5), 309-21. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780353
Brost, C., Lauture, C., Smith, K., & Kersten, S. (2018). Reflections on that-has-been:
Snapshots from the students-as-partners movement. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(1), 130-135. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3366
Carey, P. (2013). Student as co-producer in a marketised higher education system: A case
study of students’ experience of participation in curriculum design. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 50(3), 250-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796714
Carnell, B., & Fung, D. (2017). Developing the higher education curriculum. London: UCL
Press.
Compton, M., & Tran, D. (2017). Liminal space or in limbo? Post graduate researchers and
their personal pie charts of identity. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.21100/compass.v10i3.620
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2013.805694
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and
teaching: A guide for faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Davies, J. P., & Pachler, N. (2018). Teaching and learning in higher education: Perspectives
from UCL. London: UCL IOE Press.
Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (2014). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher
education. London: Routledge.
Fung, D. (2017). A connected curriculum for higher education. London: UCL Press.
Grant-Vallone, E. J., & Ensher, E. A. (2000). Effects of peer mentoring on types of mentor
support, program satisfaction and graduate student stress: A dyadic
perspective. Journal of College Student Development, 41(6), 637-42.
Harland, T. (2012). University teaching: An introductory guide. London: Routledge.
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Developing students as partners in learning
and teaching in higher education. York: Higher Education Academy.
Hessels, L. K., & Deuten, J. J. (2013). Coordination of research in public-private partnerships:
Lessons from the Netherlands. Rathenau Working Papers, 1302. The Hague:
Rathenau Instituut.
Hunt, L., & Chalmers, D. (2013). University teaching in focus: A learning-centred approach.
London: Routledge.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lepori, B. (2011). Coordination modes in public funding systems. Research Policy, 40(3), 355-
67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.016
Little, B., Locke, W., Scesa, A., & Williams, R. (2009). Report to HEFCE on student
engagement. London: Centre for Higher Education Research and Information
(CHERI).
Marie, J. (2018). Students as partners. In J. P. Davies & N. Pachler (Eds.), Teaching and
learning in higher education: Perspectives from UCL. London: UCL IOE Press.
Morton, J. (2012). Communities of practice in higher education: A challenge from the
discipline of architecture. Linguistics and Education, 23(1), 100-111.
Muzaka, V. (2009). The niche of Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs): Perceptions and
reflections. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1), 1-12.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802602400
Ntem, A., & Cook-Sather, A. (2018). Resistances and resiliencies in student-faculty
pedagogical partnership. International Journal for Students As Partners, 2(1), 82-96.
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3372
Park, C., & Ramos, M. (2002). The donkey in the department? Insights into the Graduate
Teaching Assistant (GTA) experience in the UK. Journal of Graduate Education, 3, 47-53.
Thomas, L. (2012). Building student engagement and belonging in higher education at a time
of change: Final report from the What Works? Student Retention & Success
programme. York: Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/building-student-engagement-and-belonging-higher-education-time-change-final-report
Tong, V. C. H., Standen, A. & Sotiriou, M. (2018). Shaping higher education with students:
Ways to connect research and teaching. London: UCL Press.
University College London (UCL). (n.d.). UCL 2034: A new 20-year strategy for UCL. Retrieved
from https://www.ucl.ac.uk/2034/
Wardenaar, T., de Jong, S. P. L., & Hessels, L. K. (2014). Varieties of research coordination: A
comparative analysis of two strategic research consortia. Science and Public Policy. 41(6), 780-792. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu008
Weller, S. (2016). Academic practice: Developing as a professional in higher education.
London: Sage.
Winstone, N., & Moore, D. (2017). Sometimes fish, sometimes fowl? Liminality, identity
work and identity malleability in graduate teaching assistants. Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, 54(5), 494-502.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2016.1194769
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
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 - this applies to the submitted, accepted, and published versions of the manuscript. This can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
