‘Interactions with purpose’: Exploring staff understandings of student engagement in a university with an ethos of staff-student partnership
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i2.3410Mots-clés :
engagement, partnership, definitions, values, staffRésumé
This paper describes qualitative research that used concept-map mediated interviews to explore academic staff understandings of student engagement, within a UK university with an explicit ethos of student engagement through partnership. The research explored how staff conceptualised student engagement and how it was experienced through practice. Our findings indicate that understandings of student engagement are highly individual and contextual and were framed in diverse ways by our participants. However, there were features that cut across these diverse understandings. Reflecting on the difference between staff-student partnership and other forms of engagement, we suggest partnership can be distinguished by an understanding of engagement as a relationship between staff and students, and through the way features and values are put into practice.
Téléchargements
Références
Baxter Magolda, M. (2007). Self-authorship: The foundation for twenty-first-century education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 109, 69-83.
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.
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.
Bryson, C., & Hardy, C. (2012). The nature of academic engagement: What the students tell us. In I. Solomonides, A. Reid, & P. Petocz (Eds.). Engaging with learning in higher education (pp. 25-46) Faringdon: Libri.
Chickering, A., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London, Routledge.
Cook-Sather, A. (2013). Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 186-198.
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Curran, R., & Millard, L. (2015). A partnership approach to developing student capacity to engage and staff capacity to be engaging: Opportunities for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 67-78.
Department for Education. (2017). Teaching excellence and student outcomes framework specification. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teaching- excellence-and-student-outcomes-framework-specification
Fielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 295-311.
Flint, A. (2016). Moving from the fringe to the mainstream: Opportunities for embedding student engagement through partnership. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 1(1). Retrieved from https://journals.gre.ac.uk/index.php/raise/issue/view/46/showToc
Flint, A. (2018). Un-fuzzing the fuzzword: Reflections on using visual methods to explore understandings of student engagement through partnership in ‘Proceedings of the RAISE international colloquium on partnership’. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 2(1), 116-117. Retrieved from https://journals.gre.ac.uk/index.php/raise/article/view/Bryson
Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.
Gibbs, G. (2016). #53Ideas 42—‘Student engagement’ is a slippery concept. The SEDA Blog. Retrieved from http://thesedablog.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/53ideas-42/#more-496
Gourlay, L. (2017). Student engagement, ‘learnification’ and the socio-material: Critical perspectives on higher education policy. Higher Education Policy, 30(1), 23-34.
Harris, L. (2008). A phenomenographic investigation of teacher conceptions of student engagement in learning. The Australian Educational Researcher, 35(1), 57-79.
HEA (2016) FrameWORKS. 04 student engagement through partnership. Higher Education Academy, York.
HEA & NUS (2011). Student engagement toolkit. Retrieved from https://www.nusconnect.org.uk/the-student-engagement-partnership-tsep/student- engagement-toolkit
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/engagement-through-partnership- students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher
Hodge, D., Baxter Magolda, M., & Haynes, C. (2009, Fall). Engaged learning: Enabling self- authorship and effective practice. Liberal Education, 95(4), 16-23.
Jewitt, C., & Oyama, R. (2001). Visual meaning: A social semiotic approach. In T. van Leewen & C. Jewitt (Eds.). The handbook of visual analysis (pp. 134-156). London: Sage.
Kahn, P. (2014). Theorising student engagement in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 40(6), 1005-1018.
Kahu, E. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758-773.
Kahu, E., Picton, C., & Nelson, K. (2017, July). Experiencing the educational interface: Understanding student engagement. Poster presentation, STARS Conference, Adelaide, Australia.
Kandiko, C., & Mawer, M. (2013). Student expectations and perceptions of higher education. Retrieved from https://www.kcl.ac.uk/study/learningteaching/kli/People/Research/student-expectations- perceptions-HE.aspx
Kinchin, I., Streatfield, D., & Hay, D. (2010). Using concept mapping to enhance the research interview. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(1), 52-68.
Kuh, G. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington DC: AAC&U.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.
Macfarlane, B. & Tomlinson, M. (2017). Critiques of student engagement. Higher Education Policy, 30(1), 5-21.
Mercer-Mapstone, L., Dvorakova, S., 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). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i1.3119
Mitchell, C., Theron, L., Stuart, J., Smith, A., & Campbell, Z. (2011). Drawings as research method. In L. Theron, C. Mitchell, A. Smith, & J. Stuart (Eds.). Picturing research: Drawing as visual methodology (pp 19-36). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Neary, M. (2012). Student as producer: An institution of the common? [or how to recover communist/revolutionary science]. York: Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://studentasproducer.lincoln.ac.uk/files/2014/03/ELiSS0403A_Guest_paper.pdf
Newbery, G. (2012). The psychology of being engaged and its implications for promoting engagement. In I. Solominides, A. Reid, & P. Petocz, (Eds.). Engaging with learning in higher education (pp. 47-70). Faringdon: Libri.
Nygaard, C., Brand, S., Bartholomew, P., & Millard, L. (Eds.). (2013). Student engagement: Identity, motivation and community. Faringdon: Libri.
Quality Assurance Agency. (2012). UK quality code for higher education—Chapter B5: Student engagement. Retrieved from https://www.qaa.ac.uk/quality-code/the-existing-uk-quality- code/part-b-assuring-and-enhancing-academic-quality
Solomonides, I., Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2012). A relational model of student engagement. In I. Solomonides, A. Reid, & P. Petocz, (Eds.). Engaging with learning in higher education (pp. 11-24). Faringdon: Libri.
Thomas, L. (2012) Building student engagement and belonging in higher education at a time of change: Final report from the What Works? Student Retention and Success programme. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/building-student- engagement-and-belonging-higher-education-time-change-final-report
Trowler, P., & Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement evidence summary. Retrieved from http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/61680/1/Deliverable_2._Evidence_Summary._Nov_2010.pdf
Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/StudentEngagementLiteratureReview_1.pdf
Vuori, J. (2014). Student engagement: Buzzword or fuzzword? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36(5), 509-519.
Wenstone, R. (2012). A manifesto for partnership. Retrieved from http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/a-manifesto-for-partnership
Werder, C., & Otis, M. (Eds.) (2010). Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Wheeldon, J., & Faubert, J. (2009). Framing experience: Concept maps, mind maps, and data collection in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 68-83.
Wimpenny, K., & Savin-Baden, M. (2013). Alienation, agency and authenticity: A synthesis of the literature on student engagement. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 311-326.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
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).
