Moving toward student-faculty partnership in systems-level assessment: A qualitative analysis
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v5i1.4204Mots-clés :
Student Partnership;, Program- and Institutional-level AssessmentRésumé
Partnership models have been effective across many areas of higher education such as involving students as teaching and learning consultants, in course design and redesign, and as co-instructors. However, there are few systems-level (i.e., entire programs or institutions) examples of partnership work and virtually none in systems-level assessment. Systems-level assessment models, such as program-level assessment in the United States, are used to inform broad changes to academic programs. Thus, student input may be crucial. This study sought to explore the broad factors that underlie potential student-faculty partnership efforts in systems-level assessment. Participants were faculty and staff members based in the United States and the United Kingdom who engaged in student-faculty partnerships at the program and/or classroom level. Qualitative coding and analyses of interviews with participants resulted in seven primary themes. This study examines patterns evident in student-faculty partnership work across several areas of higher education and begins to lay the foundation for a theory of student-faculty partnership in systems-level assessment.
Téléchargements
Références
Bain, K., & Zimmerman, J. (2009). Understanding great teaching. Peer Review, 11(2), 9-12.
Bain, K. (2012). What the best college students do. Harvard University Press.
Baker, V. L., & Griffin, K. A. (2010). Beyond mentoring and advising: Toward understanding the role of faculty “developers” in student success. About Campus, 14(6), 2-8.
Bovill, C. (2014). An investigation of co-created curricula within higher education in the UK, Ireland and the USA. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(1), 15-25.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative research. SagePublications Ltd, London.
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE bulletin, 3, 7.
Cook-Sather, A. (2010). Students as learners and teachers: Taking responsibility, transforming education, and redefining accountability. Curriculum Inquiry, 40(4), 555-575.
Cook‐Sather, A. (2011). Layered learning: Student consultants deepening classroom and life lessons. Educational Action Research, 19(1), 41-57.
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.
Cook-Sather, A., & Agu, P. (2013). Students of color and faculty members working together toward culturally sustaining pedagogy. To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development, 32, 271-285.
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. John Wiley & Sons.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
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: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(2), 63-74.
Gibson, L. (2011). Student-directed learning: An exercise in student engagement. College Teaching, 59(3), 95-101.
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York: HEA.
James Madison University (2020). The Assessment Cycle. Retrieved from https://www.jmu.edu/studentaffairs/staff-resources/saac/assessment-cycle.shtml
Meyer, J. H., Land, R., & Baillie, C. (Eds.). (2010). Threshold concepts and transformational learning(pp. 303-316). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
NVivo qualitative data analysis software; QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 11.4.2, 2017.
Sambell, K., & Graham, L. (2011). Towards an Assessment Partnership Model? Students’ experiences of being engaged as partners in Assessment for Learning (AfL) enhancement activity. Staff-student partnerships in higher education, 31-47.
Stoloff, M. L., Curtis, N. A., Rodgers, M., Brewster, J., & McCarthy, M. A. (2012). Characteristics of successful undergraduate psychology programs. Teaching of Psychology, 39(2), 91-99.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of qualitative research, 17, 273-85.
Werder, C., & Otis, M. M. (Eds.). (2010). Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning. Stylus.
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.
Williams, E. N., & Morrow, S. L. (2009). Achieving trustworthiness in qualitative research: A pan-paradigmatic perspective. Psychotherapy Research, 19(4-5), 576-582.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
(c) Tous droits réservés Nicholas A Curtis, Robin D. Anderson, 5683293 2021
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
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).
