Students as partners in collaborative course design and educational research

Auteurs-es

  • Cortney Hanna-Benson Western University
  • Shayla Kroeze Western University
  • Radhika Gandhi Western University
  • Tom Haffie Western University
  • Lindi M. Wahl Western University

DOI :

https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v4i2.4237

Mots-clés :

collaborative course design, syllabus design, phenomenological analysis

Résumé

The impact of collaborative course design is explored in this qualitative, longitudinal study of an upper-year course in which 30-40 undergraduate students co-designed the course syllabus, including both course content and assessments. In addition, the research questions and methods were co-designed by a research team involving six undergraduate student partners, an educational developer, and two faculty members. Student written work and focus-group transcripts were coded and analyzed using longitudinal interpretive phenomenological analysis. The two major themes emerging from this analysis were (a) growth (i.e., the development of academic skills, reflective practice, and personal growth that extended beyond the course), and (b) awareness (of students as a community of learners, of instructors as partners in learning, and of personal agency in learning). Personal reflections on the impact of this partnership revealed broad benefits to both students and academic staff.

Téléchargements

Les données relatives au téléchargement ne sont pas encore disponibles.

Références

Bauer, K. W., & Bennett, J. S. (2003). Alumni perceptions used to assess undergraduate research experience. Journal of Higher Education, 74(2), 210-230. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2003.0011

Blinne, K. C. (2013). Start with the syllabus: HELPing learners learn through class content collaboration. College Teaching, 61(2), 41-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2012.708679

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. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.770264

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.

Brubaker, N. D. (2012). Negotiating authority through jointly constructing the course curriculum. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 18(2), 159-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2012.632273

Calman, L., Brunton, L., & Molassiotis, A. (2013). Developing longitudinal qualitative designs: Lessons learned and recommendations for health services research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(14), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-14

Chen, P. L., Chung, D. S., Crane, A., Hlavach, L., Pierce, J., & Viall, E. K. (2001). Pedagogy under construction: Learning to teach collaboratively. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 56(2), 25-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769580105600203

Cockell, J. & McArthur-Bain, J. (2012) The tenets of appreciative inquiry. In Appreciative inquiry in higher education: A transformative force (1st ed., pp. 13-31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

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

Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J. M. (2005). Essential elements of appreciative inquiry. In Appreciative inquiry handbook: For leaders of change (2nd ed., pp. 1--32). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Cordner, A., Klein, P. T., & Baiocchi, G. (2012). Co-designing and co-teaching graduate qualitative methods: An innovative ethnographic workshop model. Teaching Sociology, 40(3), 215-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X12444072

Dawson, P., van der Meer, J., Skalicky, J., & Cowley, K. (2014). On the effectiveness of supplemental instruction: A systematic review of supplemental instruction and peer-assisted study sessions literature between 2001 and 2010. Review of Educational Research, 84(4), 609-639. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314540007

Eigel, K., & Kuhnert, K. (2005). Authentic development: Leadership development level and executive effectiveness. Authentic Leadership Theory and Practice: Origins, Effects and Development, 3, 357-385.

Fassett, D. D. L., & Warren, D. J. T. (2006). Critical communication pedagogy. SAGE Publishing.

Gilley, B., & Clarkston, B. (2014). Research and teaching: Collaborative testing: Evidence of learning in a controlled in-class study of undergraduate students. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(3), 83-91. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst14_043_03_83

Glenn, W. J. (2003). Imagine the possibilities: A student-generated unit to inspire creative thought. The English Journal, 92(5), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.2307/3650422

Glynn, S. M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Science motivation questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1159-1176. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20442

Hains, B. J., & Smith, B. (2012). Student-centered course design: Empowering students to become self-directed learners. Journal of Experiential Education, 35(2), 357-374. https://doi.org/10.1177/105382591203500206

Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184-192. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192

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.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher

Held, G., & Rosenberg, W. (1983). Student-faculty collaboration in teaching college writing. College English, 45(8), 817-823. https://doi.org/10.2307/376700

Hess, G. (2008). Collaborative course design: Not my course, not their course, but our course. Washburn Law Journal, 47(2), 367-387.

Holt, D. G., & Willard-Holt, C. (1995, April). Efficacy of student-selected curricula. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearhouse.

Hudd, S. S. (2003). Syllabus under construction: Involving students in the creation of class assignments. Teaching Sociology, 31(2), 195-202. https://doi.org/10.2307/3211308

Hufford, T. L. (2011). The role of the undergraduate student in teaching and learning biology. Atlas Journal of Science Education, 1(2), 38-42. https://doi.org/10.5147/ajse.v1i2.73

Jafar, A. (2016). Student engagement, accountability, and empowerment: A case study of collaborative course design. Teaching Sociology, 44(3), 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X16644489

Kay, A. E., Hardy, J., & Galloway, R. K. (2019). Student use of PeerWise: A multi-institutional, multidisciplinary evaluation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12754

Lesnick, A., & Cook-Sather, A. (2010). Building civic capacity on campus through a radically inclusive teaching and learning initiative. Innovative Higher Education, 35(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-009-9122-3

Maunder, R. E., Cunliffe, M., Galvin, J., Mjali, S., & Rogers, J. (2013). Listening to student voices: Student researchers exploring undergraduate experiences of university transition. Higher Education, 66, 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9595-3

McCulloch, A. (2009). The student as co-producer: Learning from public administration about the student-university relationship. Studies in Higher Education, 34(2), 171-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802562857

Mihans, R. J., Long, D., & 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). https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2008.020216

Moreno-Lopez, I. (2005). Sharing power with students: The critical language classroom. Radical Pedagogy. Retrieved from http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue7_2/moreno.html

Petrie, N. (2014). Vertical leadership development – Part 1: Developing leaders for a complex world (White paper). Center for Creative Leadership. Retrieved from http://insights.ccl.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/VerticalLeadersPart1.pdf

Petrie, N. (2015). The how-to of vertical leadership development – Part 2: 30 Experts, 3 conditions, and 15 approaches (White paper). Center for Creative Leadership. Retrieved from https://leadershipcoefficient.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/White-paper_How-To-of-Vertical-Leadership-part2.pdf

Shor, I. (1997). When students have power: Negotiating authority in a critical pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, 48(4), 588. https://doi.org/10.2307/358469

Smith, J. A. (1994). Reconstructing selves: An analysis of discrepancies between women’s contemporaneous and retrospective accounts of the transition to motherhood. British Journal of Psychology, 85(3), 371-392. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1994.tb02530.x

Smith, J. A. (2011). Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Health Psychology Review, 5(1), 9-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2010.510659

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.

Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2008). The aim of interpretative phenomenological analysis. In Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (2nd ed., pp. 53-80), J. A. Smith (ed). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Spiers, J., Smith, J. A., & Drage, M. (2016). A longitudinal interpretative phenomenological analysis of the process of kidney recipients’ resolution of complex ambiguities within relationships with their living donors. Journal of Health Psychology, 21(11), 2600-2611. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105315581070

Taylor, C. A., & Bovill, C. (2018). Towards an ecology of participation: Process philosophy and co-creation of higher education curricula. European Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 112-128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117704102

Thomson, R., Martin, J. L., & Sharples, S. (2017). The experience of couples being given an oxygen concentrator to use at home: A longitudinal interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Health Psychology, 22(6), 798-810. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105315615932

Vickrey, T., Rosploch, K., Rahmanian, R., Pilarz, M., & Stains, M. (2015). Research-based implementation of peer instruction: A literature review. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-11-0198

Téléchargements

Publié-e

2020-10-29

Comment citer

Hanna-Benson, C., Kroeze, S., Gandhi, R., Haffie, T., & Wahl, L. M. (2020). Students as partners in collaborative course design and educational research. International Journal for Students as Partners, 4(2), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v4i2.4237

Numéro

Vol. 4 No. 2 (2020)

Rubrique

Research Articles

Licence

(c) Tous droits réservés Cortney Hanna-Benson, Shayla Kroeze, Radhika Gandhi, Tom Haffie, Lindi M. Wahl 2020

Licence Creative Commons

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).