Preliminary identification of barriers and facilitators to students as partners work
An exploratory learning community
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v10i1.6793Keywords:
Students as partners, collaboration barriers, partnership facilitators, learning communitiesAbstract
A learning community (LC) was convened that included university educators and learners to explore perspectives on students-as-partners (SaP) work on the university’s campus. The LC was facilitated by one educator and two learners. The qualitative data identified potential barriers to SaP, including learners’ views that the success or failure of this work was entirely dependent on educators, while the educators were concerned about managing power dynamics and challenges in engaging students in partnerships. Facilitators of SaP work on campus were identified as creating open lines of communication, fostering effective working relationships, and developing a sense of mutuality in which all participants were seen as having equal value in the partnership.
Downloads
References
American Council on Education. (2025). Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/institution
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
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Millard, L., & Moore-Cherry, N. (2015). Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching: Overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity in student-staff partnerships. Higher Education, 71, 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9896-4
Charmaz, K., & Thornberg, R. (2021). The pursuit of quality in grounded theory. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 305–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1780357
Chun Tie, Y., Birks, M., & Francis, K. (2019). Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. SAGE Open Medicine, 7, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118822927
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.
Cox, M. D. (2004). Introduction to faculty learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 97, 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.129
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Sage.
Delpit, L. D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280–298.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Sage.
Dilshad, R. M., & Latif, M. I. (2013). Focus group interview as a tool for qualitative research: An analysis. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 33(1), 191–198.
Eastern Michigan University. (2024). EMU Databook Fall 2024. https://irim.emich.edu/datafiles/pdf/EMU_Databook_2024_v2.pdf
Felten, P., Bagg, J., Bumbry, M., Hill, J., Hornsby, K., Pratt, M., & Weller, S. (2013). A call for expanding inclusive student engagement in SoTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 1(2), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.2.63
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Sociology Press.
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2016). Students as partners: Reflections on a conceptual model. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 4(2), 8–20. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.4.2.3
Hoben, K., Varley, R., & Cox, R. (2007). Clinical reasoning skills of speech and language therapy students. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 42(sup1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/13682820601171530
Lyon, A. R. (2017). Brief: Implementation science and practice in the education sector. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. https://education.uw.edu/sites/default/files/Implementation Science Issue Brief 072617.pdf
Marquis, E., Jayaratnam, A., Lei, T., & Mishra, A. (2019). Motivations, barriers, & 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. (2017). Five propositions for genuine students as partners practice. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i2.3315
McKay, S. (2017). Quality improvement approaches: Implementation science. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. https://www.carnegiefoundation.org/blog/quality-improvement-approaches-implementation-science/
McLafferty, I. (2004). Focus group interviews as a data collecting strategy. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48(2), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03186.x
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science, 6, Article 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42
Mihans, R. J., Long, D. T., & Felten, P. (2008). Power and expertise: Student-faculty collaboration in course design and the scholarship of teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2008.020216
Saldaña, J. (2014). Coding and analysis strategies. In P. Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 581–598). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199811755.013.001
Soicher, R. N., Becker-Blease, K. A., & Bostwick, K. C. (2020). Adapting implementation science for higher education research: The systematic study of implementing evidence-based practices in college classrooms. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5, Article 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00255-0
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research (1st ed.). Sage.
Troisi, J. D., Palmer, M. S., Wright, M. C., Hostetler, L. A., & Hurney, C. A. (2025). Developing high-impact course design institutes: A model for change. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003448358
Weller, S., Domarkaite, G. K., Lam, J. L. C., & Metta, L. U. (2013). Student-faculty co-inquiry into student reading: Recognising SoTL as pedagogic practice. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(2), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2013.070209
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Willig, C. (2013). Grounded theory methodology. In C. Willig (Ed.), Introducing qualitative research in psychology (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sarah Ginsberg, Jeffrey Bernstein, Alivia English
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).
