Challenging spaces: Liminal positions and knowledge relations in dynamic research partnerships
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i1.3739Mots-clés :
undergraduate research experiences, dynamic student relations, higher education research, third space, liminal positionsRésumé
This article draws upon concepts of liminality and Third Space to explore what happens when undergraduate students become research partners and illustrates how various positions emerge, change, and fluctuate within the educational space of an interdisciplinary course. Based on perspective dialogues with student groups who have worked on research projects concerned with learning environments in higher education, we discuss which experiences from various academic spaces the students make relevant and useas resources in their group work. Furthermore, we highlight how the act of challenging traditional knowledge hierarchies and well-established roles also involves a revision of students’ relations to each other.
Téléchargements
Références
Barrineau, S., & Anderson, L. (2018). Learning “betwixt and between”: Opportunities and challenges for student-driven partnership. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(1), 16-32. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3224
Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: Principles, methods, and practices (2nd ed.). University of South Florida Tampa Bay Open Access Textbooks Collection. Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=oa_textbooks
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
Brew, A. (2003). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 22(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436032000056571
Brew, A. (2013). Understanding the scope of undergraduate research: A framework for curricular and pedagogical decision-making. Higher Education, 66(5), 603-618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9624-x
Cates, R. M., Madigan, M. R., & Reitenauer, V. L. (2018). ‘Locations of Possibility’: Critical Perspectives on Partnership. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(1), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3341
Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 186-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2013.805694
Cook-Sather, A., & Alter, Z. (2011). What is and what can be: How a liminal position can change learning and teaching in higher education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 42(1), 37-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1492.2010.01109.x
Cook-Sather, A., Matthews, K. E., Ntem, A., & Leathwick, S. (2018). What we talk about when we talk about students as partners. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i2.3790
Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (1993). Through the lens of a critical friend. Educational Leadership, 51(2), 49-51.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction. College Teaching, 44(2), 43-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.1996.9933425
Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148-164. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.43.2.3
Han, X., McDougall, J., Mott, C., & Sudbury, S. (2018). Hunger by the sea: Partnerships in the brave third space. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(2), 71-84. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i2.3493
Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: Exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In R. Barnett (Ed.), Reshaping the University: New Relationships between Research, Scholarship and Teaching (pp. 67-78). New York, NY: Open University Press.
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher
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 Developers, 15(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601440903529877
Hodge, D. C., Magolda, M. B. B., & Haynes, C. A. (2009). Engaged learning enabling self authorship and effective practice. Liberal Education, 95(4), 18-23. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/engaged-learning-enabling-self-authorship-and-effective-practice
Jensen, K., & Bennett, L. (2016). Enhancing teaching and learning through dialogue: A student and staff partnership model. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 41-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2015.1113537
King, H., Kersh, N., Potter, J., & Pitts, S. (2015). Learner-led and boundary free: Learning across contexts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, Monograph Series II (11), 39-50. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/93035/
Levy, P. (2011). Embedding inquiry and research into mainstream higher education: A UK perspective. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 32(1), 33-39.
Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 37-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070120099359
Lopatto, D. (2003). The essential features of undergraduate research. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, (March), 139-142.
Neary, M. (2010). Student as producer: Pedagogy for the avant-garde. Learning Exchange, 1(1), 1-17.
Neary, M. (2012). Student as producer: An institution of the common? Enhancing Learning in the Social Sciences, 4(3), 1-16.
Neary, M. (2016). Student as producer: The struggle for the idea of the university. Other Education: The Journal of Educational Alternatives, 5(1), 89-94. Retrieved from https://www.othereducation.org/index.php/OE/article/view/163
Neary, M., & Winn, J. (2009). The student as producer: Reinventing the student experience in higher education. In L. Bell, M. Neary, & H. Stevenson (Eds.), The Future of Higher Education: Policy, Pedagogy and the Student Experience (pp. 192-210). London: Continuum.
Marquis, E., Puri, V., Wan, S., Ahmad, A., Goff, L., Knorr, K., Vassileva, I., & Woo, J. (2016). Navigating the threshold of student–staff partnerships: a case study from an Ontario teaching and learning institute. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2015.1113538
McDougall, J., & Potter, J. (2015). Curating media learning: Towards a porous expertise. E-Learning and Digital Media, 12(2), 199-211. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753015581975
Perry, R. P., & Smart, J. C. (2007). Introduction to the scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 1-8). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5742-3
Peters, J., & Mathias, L. (2018). Enacting student partnership as though we really mean it: Some Freirean principles for a pedagogy of partnership. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(2), 53-70. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i2.3509
Pitts, M. J., & Brooks, C. F. (2017). Critical pedagogy, internationalisation, and a third space: Cultural tensions revealed in students’ discourse. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38(3), 251-267. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2015.1134553
Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017). Porous expertise and powerful knowledge. In Digital Media, Culture and Education (pp. 83-106). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55315-7_5
Routledge, P. (1996). The third space as critical engagement. Antipode, 28(4), 399-419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.1996.tb00533.x
Shor, I., & Freire, P. (1987). What is the “dialogical method” of teaching? Journal of Education, 169(3), 11-31.
Turner, V. (1974). Dramas, fields, and metaphors: Symbolic action in human society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Wallin, P., Adawi, T., & Gold, J. (2017). Linking teaching and research in an undergraduate course and exploring student learning experiences. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(1), 58-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2016.1193125
Wallin, P., Lyng, R., Sortland, B., & Veine, S. (2017). Experts in teamwork - A large scale course for interdisciplinary learning and collaboration. Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, Calgary, Canada (pp. 1-11). Calgary, Canada: University of Calgary.
Werder, C., Thibou, S., & Kaufer, B. (2012). Students as co-inquirers: A requisite threshold concept in educational development? The Journal of Faculty Development, 26(3), 34-38.
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).
