A mixed-method investigation of faculty perspectives on the benefits and challenges of engaging in student partnership activities in science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v8i2.5635Keywords:
Student-faculty partnerships, pedagogical partnerships, collaborative learning, science, faculty-partners, faculty perspectivesAbstract
There is a growing interest within higher education to engage with students as partners to reposition students from consumers to producers of knowledge. The purpose of this study was to gather insights into the benefits, barriers/challenges, and best practices for engaging in student-faculty partnership activities for science faculty members. Supervising or working with graduate teaching assistants, working with students on university committees, collaborating with undergraduate or graduate students on a new or existing research project, and co-authoring manuscripts with graduate students were regarded as the most impactful partnership activities. Common benefits of student partnership activities included: collaboration and relationship building, broadening perspectives and gaining feedback, personal satisfaction, and institutional and career-related benefits. Common barriers/challenges reported were interpersonal dynamics and maintaining relationships, student management, and external influences. Best practices consisted of planning and setting expectations, developing students’ agency, using open communication, and facilitating peer-to-peer collaboration and peer mentoring.
Downloads
References
Alhadad, S. S. J., Vasco, D., Williams, J. C., Dizon, P., Kapnias, R. L., Khan, S. B., Payne, H., Simpson, B. C., & Warren, C. D. (2021). Learning, unlearning, and relearning together: Unmasking power in a students as partners program using collaborative autoethnography. Student Success, 12(2), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.1934
Begley, G. S., Berkey, B., Roe, L., & Schuldt, H. E. Y. (2019). Becoming partners: Faculty come to appreciate undergraduates as teaching partners in a service-learning teaching assistant program. International Journal for Students as Partners, 3(1), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i1.3669
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
Bovill, C., Felten, P., & Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching (2): Practical guidance for academic staff and academic developers [Conference presentation]. International Consortium on Educational Development, Stockholm.
Bradshaw, C., Atkinson, S., & Doody, O. (2017). Employing a qualitative description approach to health care research. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 4, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393617742282
Chadha, D., Inguva, P. K., Bui Le, L., & Kogelbauer, A. (2023). How far do we go? Involving students as partners for redesigning teaching. Educational Action Research, 31(4), 620–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2022.2058974
Chittle, L., King, A., Sood, S., Hinch, I., Houser, C., Cavallo-Medved, D. (in-press). Fostering students as partners: A faculty-wide examination of science undergraduate and graduate students' perspectives of pedagogical partnerships. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
Cook-Sather, A., Bahti, M., & Ntem, A. (2019). Pedagogical partnerships. A how-to guide for faculty, students, and academy developers in higher education. Centre for Engaged Learning Open Access Book Series. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/pedagogical-partnerships.pdf
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Curran, R. (2017). Students as partners—Good for students, good for staff: A study on the impact of partnership working and how this translates to improved student-staff engagement. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i2.3089
Curtin, A. L., & Sarju, J. P. (2021). Students as partners: Co-creation of online learning to deliver high quality, personalized content. In E. Pearsall (Ed.), Advances in online chemistry education (pp. 135–163). American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2021-1389.ch010
Curtis, N. A., & Anderson, R. D. (2021). Moving toward student-faculty partnership in systems-level assessment: A qualitative analysis. International Journal for Students as Partners, 5(1), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v5i1.4204
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of advanced nursing, 62(1), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
Felten, P., (2013). Principles of good practice in SoTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 1(1), 121–125. https://doi.org/10.2979/teachlearninqu.1.1.121
Graneheim, U. H., Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001
Hall, R. (2021). Students as partners in university innovation and entrepreneurship. Education & Training, 63(7–8), 1114–1137. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2021-0003
Hamerski, P. C., Irving, P. W., & McPadden, D. (2021). Learning assistants as student partners in introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2). https://journals.aps.org/prper/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020107
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. Higher Education Academy.
Healey, M., Flint, A., Harrington, K. (2016). Students as partners: Reflections on a conceptual model. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 4(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.4.2.3
Healey, M., & Healey, R. (2019). Students as partners guide: Student engagement through partnership a guide to the advance HE framework. AdvanceHE. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mick-Healey/publication/338096919_Students_as_Partners_Guide_Student_Engagement_Through_Partnership_A_guide_to_the_Advance_HE_Framework/links/5e402bf2299bf1cdb91bd14b/Students-as-Partners-Guide-Student-Engagement-Through-Partnership-A-guide-to-the-Advance-HE-Framework.pdf
Johnston, J., & Ryan, B. (2022). From students-as-partners theory to students-as-partners practice: Reflecting on staff-student collaborative partnership in an academic development context. AISHE-J: The All Ireland Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 14(1), 1–27.
Knapp, T. R. (1990). Treating ordinal scales as interval scales: An attempt to resolve the controversy. Nursing Research, 39(2), 121–123. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-199003000-00019
Kondracki, N. L., Wellman, N. S., & Amundson, D. R. (2002). Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 34(4), 224–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60097-3
Kowalski, K., C., McHugh T. F., Sabiston, C. M., & Ferguson, L. J. (2018). Research Methods in Kinesiology. Oxford University Press.
Larson, L. M., Seipel, M. T., Shelley, M. C., Gahn, S. W., Ko, S. Y., Schenkenfelder, M., Rover, D. T., Schmittmann, B., & Heitmann, M. M. (2019). The academic environment and faculty well-being: The role of psychological needs. Journal of Career Assessment, 27(1), 167–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072717748667
Liang, Y., & Matthews, K. E. (2021). Students as partners practices and theorisations in Asia: A scoping review. Higher Education Research and Development, 40(3), 552–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1773771
Luo, B., Matthews, K., & Chunduri, P. (2019). “Commitment to collaboration”: What students have to say about the values underpinning partnership practices. International Journal for Students as Partners, 3(1), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i1.3688
Marquis, E. (2018). Embracing and/or avoiding the risks of partnership: A faculty perspective. Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 1(24), 1–8. https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss24/9
Matthews, K. E. (2017). Five propositions for genuine students as partners practice. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i2.3315
Matthews, K.E., Dwyer, A., Hine, L., & Turner, J. (2018). Conceptions of students as partners. Higher Education, 76(6), 957–971. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45116838
Matthews, K. E., Groenendijk, L. J., & Chunduri, P. (2017). We want to be more involved: Student perceptions of students as partners across the degree program curriculum. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i2.3063
Matthews, K. E., Mercer-Mapstone, L., Dvorakova, S. L., Acai, A., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Healey, M., Healey, R. L., & Marquis, E. (2019). Enhancing outcomes and reducing inhibitors to the engagement of students and staff in learning and teaching partnerships: Implications for academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 24(3), 246–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2018.1545233
Maunder, R. E. (2021). Staff and student experiences of working together on pedagogic research projects: Partnerships in practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(6), 1205–1219. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1809999
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), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i1.3119
Milne, J., & Oberle K. (2005). Enhancing rigor in qualitative description: a case study. Journal of Wound Ostomy & Continence Nursing, 32(6), 413–420. https://doi.org/10.1097/00152192-200511000-00014
Neuendorf, K. (2017). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.
Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Sage.
Petrescu, D. S., Yazdani, A., VanderSchee, C. R., Bailey, C. A., Covens, F., & Harpp, D. N. (2021). An undergraduate peer mentoring program at a Canadian university: Impact on student learning as perceived by instructors, peer mentors, and students. International Journal for Students as Partners, 5(2), 98–110. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v5i2.4553
Ryan R. M., & Deci E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68
Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-240x(200008)23:4<334::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-g
Sandelowski, M. (2010). What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing & Health, 33(1), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20362
Smith, J. L., Handley, I. M., Rushing, S., Belou, R., Shanahan, E. A., Skewes, M. C., Kambich, L., Honea, J., & Intemann, K. (2018). Added benefits: How supporting women faculty in STEM improves everyone’s job satisfaction. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 11(4), 502–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000066
Smith, B., & McGannon, K. R. (2018). Developing rigor in qualitative research: Problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2017.1317357
Sullivan, G. & Artino, A. (2013). Analyzing and interpreting data From Likert-Type scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education. 5(4). https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-5-4-18
Sullivan-Bolyai S., Bova C., & Harper D. (2005). Developing and refining interventions in persons with health disparities: The use of qualitative description. Nursing Outlook, 53(3), 127–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2005.03.005
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. The Falmer Press.
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 837–851.
Wu, H., & Leung, S., (2017). Can Likert Scales be treated as interval scales?—A simulation study. Journal of Social Service Research, 43(4), 527-532. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2017.1329775
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Laura Chittle, Eleftheria Laios, Aliyah King, Isabelle Hinch, Siddhartha Sood, Alexandra Sorge, Lana Milidrag, Chris Houser, Dora Cavallo-Medved
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).
