Perception of students as partners in learning among students and faculty members of the Aga Khan University School of Nursing and Midwifery, Karachi, Pakistan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v10i1.6763Keywords:
academic development, Accelerated Nursing, Active Student EngagementAbstract
This study explores perceptions of the students-as-partners approach in nursing education among students and faculty at the Aga Khan University School of Nursing and Midwifery, Karachi, Pakistan. The approach has gained prominence in higher education for fostering active engagement, mutual respect, and collaborative knowledge construction, making it highly relevant in nursing, where theory and practice must align. This study contributes to the limited body of literature on students as partners (SaP) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by offering an original perspective that incorporates student, faculty, and leadership voices within a hierarchical, resource-constrained context. This study used, with 120 participants (80 students and 40 faculty) completing a structured questionnaire and open-ended questions. We adopted a qualitative descriptive exploratory design to remain close to participants’ accounts while systematically describing patterns salient to the local context. The findings revealed that 85% of students and 90% of faculty expressed a favorable view of the approach, highlighting benefits such as improved critical thinking, enhanced communication, and stronger mutual respect. Both groups acknowledged their potential to create a more supportive and inclusive learning environment. However, hierarchical traditions, time constraints and the absence of institutional policies were identified as significant barriers. The results underscore strong readiness and mutual interest in adopting the students-as-partners approach, suggesting its promise to enrich nursing education and practice.
Downloads
References
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), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.568690
Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., Bywaters, D., & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dvorak, K., Bleakney, J., Rosinski, P., & Carpenter, R. G. (2019). Effectively integrating course-embedded consultants using the students as partners model. The National Teaching & Learning Forum. 29(1), 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ntlf.30222
Marquis, E., Jayaratnam, A., Lei, T., & Mishra, A. (2019). Motivations, barriers, and understandings: How students at four universities perceive student–faculty partnership programs. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(6), 1240–1254. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1638349
Matthews, K. E., Dwyer, A., Hine, L., & Turner, J. (2018). Conceptions of students as partners. Higher Education, 76, 957–971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0257-y
Nyanchoka, L., Tudur-Smith, C., Porcher, R., & Hren, D. (2020). Key stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences with defining, identifying and displaying gaps in health research: A qualitative study. BMJ Open, 10(11), e039932. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039932
Nyumba, T. O., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2020). Essentials of nursing research: Appraising evidence for nursing practice (9th ed.).
Roberts, R. E. (2020). Qualitative interview questions: Guidance for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 25(9), 3185–3203. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2020.4640
Thomas, L., MacMillan, J., McColl, E., Hale, C., & Bond, S. (1995). Comparison of focus group and individual interview methodology in examining patient satisfaction with nursing care. Social Science in Health, 1(4), 206–220.
Zhen, R., Liu, R.-D., Ding, Y., Wang, J., Liu, Y., & Xu, L. (2017). The mediating roles of academic self-efficacy and academic emotions in the relation between basic psychological needs satisfaction and learning engagement among Chinese adolescent students. Learning and Individual Differences, 54, 210–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.01.017
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Anum Gujrati, Yasmin Amarsi, Khairulnissa Ajani
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).
