Learning together: A case study of a partnership to co-create assessment criteria
Keywords:students as partners, partnership values, reciprocity, authenticity, power
This case study outlines a staff-student partnership to co-create generic assessment criteria to use in a UK business school. It highlights the potential for staff-student partnerships to create a temporary subfield, in which the established power differentials of academia are dissolved and partnership values can be established. We draw on a series of 10 semi-structured interviews with partnership participants. The values that underpin partnerships are linked to three major phases of the partnership process: establishing the partnership, partnership operation and atmosphere, and the partnership outcomes. The findings indicate that the values of authenticity, reciprocity, and inclusion are critical antecedents to establishing a successful partnership and that careful attention should be paid to establishing the partnership. The case extends our understanding of the partnership process by emphasising these antecedents. The study is multi-authored, which reflects an extension to the partnership process described in the case study.
Bearman, M., & Ajjawi, R. (2021). Can a rubric do more than be transparent? Invitation as a new metaphor for assessment criteria. Studies in Higher Education, 46(2), 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1637842
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 15–29). Greenwood.
Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo Academicus. Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford University Press.
Bovill, C. (2019). A co-creation of learning and teaching typology: What kind of co-creation are you planning or doing? International Journal for Students as Partners, 3(2), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i2.3953
Bovill, C. (2020). Co-creation in learning and teaching: The case for a whole-class approach in higher education. Higher Education, 79(6), 1023–1037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00453-w
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 0(0), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging Students as Partners in Learning and Teaching: A Guide for Faculty. John Wiley & Sons.
Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2017). Where Student Engagement Meets Faculty Development: How Student-Faculty Pedagogical Partnership Fosters a Sense of Belonging. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 1(2), 3–3.
Deeley, S. J., & Bovill, C. (2017). Staff student partnership in assessment: Enhancing assessment literacy through democratic practices. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 463–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1126551
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. Advance HE. https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher
Healey, M., & Healey, R. (2018). ‘It depends’: Exploring the context-dependent nature of students as partners practices and policies. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3472
Healey, M., O’Connor, K. M., & Broadfoot, P. (2010). Reflections on engaging students in the process and product of strategy development for learning, teaching, and assessment: An institutional case study. International Journal for Academic Development, 15(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601440903529877
Marquis, E., Jayaratnam, A., Mishra, A., & Rybkina, K. (2018). “I feel like some students are better connected”: Students’ perspectives on applying for extracurricular partnership opportunities. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(1), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3300
Matthews, K. E., Dwyer, A., Hine, L., & Turner, J. (2018). Conceptions of students as partners. Higher Education, 76(6), 957–971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0257-y
Meer, N., & Chapman, A. (2015). Co-creation of Marking Criteria: Students as Partners in the Assessment Process. Business and Management Education in HE, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.11120/bmhe.2014.00008
Mercer-Mapstone, L., & Bovill, C. (2020). Equity and diversity in institutional approaches to student–staff partnership schemes in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1620721
Mercer-Mapstone, L., Dvorakova, S. L., Matthews, K. E., Abbot, S., Cheng, B., Felten, P., Knorr, K., Marquis, E., Shammas, R., & Swaim, K. (2017). A Systematic Literature Review of Students as Partners in Higher Education. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i1.3119
Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003786559
Office for Students. (2018a, March 7). National Student Survey (Worldwide). Office for Students. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/student-information-and-data/national-student-survey-nss/
Office for Students. (2018b, December 12). Access and participation plans (Worldwide). Office for Students. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/promoting-equal-opportunities/access-and-participation-plans/
Quality Assurance Agency. (2014). UK Quality Code for Higher Education. https://www.qaa.ac.uk/quality-code/qualifications-and-credit-frameworks
Reddy, Y. M., & Andrade, H. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902862859
University of Sussex. (2020). Access and Participation Plan (2020-21 to 2024-25). https://www.sussex.ac.uk/study/terms-and-conditions/access-agreements
University of Sussex. (2021). Apply to be a Connector. https://student.sussex.ac.uk/experience/connectors/apply
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Susan Smith, Kimiya Akhyani, Dan Axson, Andre Arnautu, Ilina Stanimirova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 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).