Slides to support short presentation by Kathy Wright at the 2015 HE and FE Show in London on 14 October. The presentation is taken from previous keynotes by Dr Abbi Flint of the Higher Education Academy.

1. Delivering an engaging student
experience through partnership
The HE and FE Show, London
Higher Education Academy 14 October 2015

2. • Partnership as a specific form
of student engagement:
process not product.
• Pedagogic rationale
• Focus on learning
relationships as well as
working arrangements
• Partnerships between staff
and students and amongst
students
• The exact form of
partnership is contextual 2
Engagement through partnership
From NUS/HEA (2010) Student Engagement Toolkit

3. • to empower students to take responsibility for their learning
• as a way of developing a sense of belonging, and making HE more
accessible and inclusive
• as an ethical responsibility to students and staff
• to align with personal teaching philosophy
• to challenge and resist consumerist models of higher education, and
offer a constructive alternative
• to re-invent the university
• to align with the purpose and values of higher education
• as a meaningful way of engaging with the measurement agenda
• to align with policy directives
3
The case for engagement through
partnership

4. 4
Defining student engagement
Behavioural
perspective
•Student
behaviour
•institutional
practices
Psychological
perspective
•Cognitive
•Affective
•Relational
Socio-
cultural
perspective
• Social context
• Power
• Culture
• Discourse

6. Authenticity – the rationale for all parties to invest in partnership is meaningful and credible.
Honesty – all parties are honest about what they can contribute to partnership and about where the
boundaries of partnership lie.
Inclusivity – there is equality of opportunity and any barriers (structural or cultural) that prevent engagement
are challenged.
Reciprocity – all parties have an interest in, and stand to benefit from working and/or learning in partnership.
Empowerment – power is distributed appropriately and ways of working and learning promote healthy power
dynamics.
Trust – all parties take time to get to know one-another and can be confident they will be treated with respect
and fairness.
Courage – all parties are encouraged to critique and challenge practices, structures and approaches that
undermine partnership, and are enabled to take risks to develop new ways of working and learning.
Plurality – all parties recognise and value the unique talents, perspectives and experiences that individuals
contribute to partnership.
Responsibility – all parties share collective responsibility for the aims of the partnership, and individual
responsibility for the contribution they make.
6
Framework underpinned by
partnership values

7. 7
Conceptual
Model

8. Learning teaching and
assessment
• Active and collaborative
learning
• Personalised learning
• Professional/practical
experiences
• Peer education
Examples:
• University of Lincoln – students
as producers
• University of Westminster –
Broad Vision
Subject-based research and
inquiry
• Embedding research and
inquiry based learning (e.g. PBL)
• Example – Student as Producer –
University of Lincoln
• ‘Boutique’ UG research
schemes
Examples:
• University of Sheffield – Think
Ahead: SURE
• Oxford Brookes University - Get
published
8
Learning, teaching and research
partnerships

9. Scholarship of teaching and
learning (SOTL)
• Exploration of how students
learn within their discipline.
• Institutional examples
• University of Exeter – Students
as Change Agents
• Birmingham City University –
Student Academic Partners
• National example
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/rd/projects/c
hange-agents-network
Curriculum design and
pedagogic consultancy
• Different understandings of
‘curriculum’
• University Portsmouth –
pedagogic consultancy
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/s
tudent-and-staff-partnership-
awards
• Arts University Bournemouth –
partnership in curriculum and
course design
9
Partnership in the enhancement of
learning and teaching

10. 10
Conceptual
Model

11. 1. Inclusivity and scale
• Boutique vs mainstream
• Who actually participates?
2. Power relationships
• Different kinds of power
• Dominance of hierarchical
relationships, resistance to
students becoming partners
• Navigating university structures
and practices
• Access to resources
3. Blurring identities
• Problematic labels
• Shifting roles
4. Terms of engagement
• Induction and outduction
• Peripheral/full community
membership
• Reward and recognition
11
Tensions and opportunities

12. Recently published ‘Pedagogies of
partnership’
(https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resou
rce/pedagogies-partnership-what-
works)
To be published in next few months
guidance and resources on the
ethical implications
But still need to explore disciplinary
approaches to partnership
Learning from ‘failures’
Impact
12
Areas being explored

13. Inspiring teaching, transforming learning
The Higher Education Academy (HEA) is the national body for learning
and teaching in higher education. We work with universities and other
higher education providers to bring about change in learning and
teaching. We do this to improve the experience that students have
while they are studying, and to support and develop those who teach
them. Our activities focus on rewarding and recognising excellence in
teaching, bringing together people and resources to research and share
best practice, and by helping to influence, shape and implement policy -
locally, nationally, and internationally.
www.heacademy.ac.uk
13
The Higher Education Academy

14. Bauman, H-D.L. & Murray, J.J. (2010). Deaf studies in the 21st Century. In M. Maschark and P.E. Spencer (Eds.) Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and
education (Vol. 2) (pp. 210-225). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bovill, C. (2015) Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: challenges and opportunities, https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engaging-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-
challenges-and-opportunities
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.
Bovill, C. (2013) What are students and staff co-creating? How our definitions of curriculum influence the nature of co-creation. Paper presentation. RAISE Conference, 12-13 September,
Nottingham.
Bovill, C., Aitken, G., Hutchison, J., Morrison, F., Roseweir, K., Scott, A. & Sotannde, S. (2010) Experiences of learning through collaborative evaluation from a Postgraduate Certificate
in Professional Education International Journal for Academic Development 15 (2) 143-154.
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Millard, L. & Moore-Cherry, N. (forthcoming) Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching.
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C. & Felten, P. (2014) Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: a guide for faculty. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Deeley, S. (2014) Summative co-assessment: a deep learning approach to enhancing employability skills and attributes. Active Learning in Higher Education 15 (1) 39-51.
Duah, F., and Croft, T. (2011) Students as Partners in Mathematics Design. CETL-MSOR Conference. https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-
jspui/bitstream/2134/9904/3/Duah_Croft_2011final.pdf
Gärdebo, J. & Wiggberg, M. (2012) (Eds) Students, the University’s unspent resource: revolutionising higher education through active student participation. Report No 12 Division for
Development of Teaching and Learning. Uppsala University.
Healey, M., Flint, A. & Harrington, K. (2014) Engagement through partnership: students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York: Higher Education Academy
Healey, M., Bovill, C. & Jenkins, A. (forthcoming) Students as partners in learning. In Lea, J. (Ed.) Enhancing learning and teaching in higher education: Engaging with the dimensions of
practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Ella R. Kahu (2013) Framing student engagement in higher education, Studies in Higher Education, 38:5, 758-773,
Mihans, R., Long, D. & Felten, P. (2008) Student-Faculty Collaboration in Course Design and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching
and Learning, http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl, 2, 2.
O’Neill, G. (ed.) (2011) A Practitioner’s Guide to Choice of Assessment Methods within a Module, Dublin: UCD Teaching and Learning.
http://www.ucd.ie/teaching/resources/assessment/howdoyouassessstudentlearning/
Johanna Vuori (2014) Student engagement: buzzword or fuzzword? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management Vol. 36, Iss. 5, 2014
14
References