Author: Pam Parker

Wednesday 22nd April (2020) 12.30 – 13.45 Attainment/Awarding Gaps in Higher Education

Join the discussion online

Sustained research across the UK HE sector demonstrates that a persistent attainment – or degree-awarding – gap exists between Black, Asian or Minority Ethnic [BAME] students and their White counterparts. A joint National Union of Students [NUS] and Universities UK [UUK] report published in May 2019 concluded that: “A student’s race and ethnicity can significantly affect their degree outcomes. Of the disparities that exist within higher education, the gap between the likelihood of White students and students from Black, Asian or minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds getting a first- or upper-second-class degree is among the most stark – 13% among 2017-18 graduates.” (NUS/UUK, 2019, p. 1). Extensive work is being undertaken at City, University of London to identify and seek to understand the attainment/awarding gaps our institution currently has, and to develop a range of responses at institutional and sectional levels including in the areas of curriculum and inclusive learning and teaching. There is a growing body of literature relating to awarding/attainment gaps and, as increasing numbers of institutions are beginning to report on maturing or concluded projects of their own, this seems an opportune time for the journal club to read and debate some of the evidence. We’d like you to read two articles plus (if you have time) a piece written by a student:

Firstly, a critique of existing research into the BAME attainment gap and the difficulties of undertaking research/making change in the face of institutional resistance.
Austen, L. et al (2017) ‘Why is the BME attainment gap such a wicked problem?’, The Journal of Educational Innovation, Partnership and Change, Vol. 3, No. 1. Available at: https://journals.studentengagement.org.uk/index.php/studentchangeagents/article/view/587/pdf

Secondly, Nona McDuff and colleagues describes how Kingston University substantially narrowed their BAME attainment gap through an outcome-focused institutional change programme.
McDuff, N., Tatam, J., Beacock, O., Ross, F. (2018) ‘Closing the attainment gap for students from black and minority ethnic backgrounds through institutional change’, Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 79-101. Available at http://tinyurl.com/vw359r3.

To help us with the discussion here are some questions you might like to consider when reading the article:
• What was the purpose of the research and were the research questions/hypothesis clear?
• Does the literature review seem thorough and draw on recent literature related to the
research problem?
• Is there a theoretical or conceptual model for the research?
• Is there reference to ethical approval for the study?
• Was there a clear discussion of how the sample was chosen and the representativeness of the sample to the population as well as details of recruitment?
• Is the research methodology clearly indicated alongside the data collection tools?
• Is the analysis of the data clearly outlined?
• Were the findings clearly presented and discussed?
• Were any limitations for the study indicated?
• What are the implications of the research for practice? What are the implications of the research for our new lecture capture policy at City?
• Has further research been indicated?

Tuesday 18th February 12.30 – 13.45 Journal club LEaD training room – Academic Literacies: embedding in course design and collaboration with academic staff

 

In this month’s Journal Club we will explore two articles on the theme of developing students’ academic literacies.

 

Mary Lea and Brian Street set out a framework for supporting student writing in higher education in their seminal 1998 article which proposed a framework for academic literacies. The first article you are asked to read is a development of these ideas by Mary Lea, published in 2004. Although written some time ago the article examines how research findings from academic literacies might be used to underpin course design in higher education. It uses a case study of an online postgraduate course and explores the role that technology might play in supporting students’ academic literacy development. We’ll consider what changes we can make to course or curriculum design to embed academic literacies.

 

Mary R. Lea * (2004) Academic literacies: a pedagogy for course design, Studies in Higher Education, 29:6, 739-756, https://0-www-tandfonline-com.wam.city.ac.uk/doi/full/10.1080/0307507042000287230

 

Meanwhile in a more recent article by Lotte Bergman we will discuss academic perceptions about supporting student’s academic literacy development. Many academic staff feel under-prepared to help students develop their writing skills. In this second article a group of university teachers from different disciplines reflected on and were able to extend their knowledge about how best to support their students through a programme of continuing professional development. A number of teachers made changes to their teaching practices in light of the interventions described and their confidence and ability to support students’ grew.

 

Bergman, L. (2016). Supporting academic literacies: university teachers in collaboration for change. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(5), 516-531. https://0-www-tandfonline-com.wam.city.ac.uk/doi/full/10.1080/13562517.2016.1160220

 

We’ll discuss both articles and reflect on whether some of the approaches in this articles are relevant to the challenges we face at City to support student academic literacies.

To help us with the discussion here are some questions you might like to consider when reading the article:

·         What was the purpose of the research and were the research questions/hypothesis clear?

·         Does the literature review seem thorough and draw on recent literature related to the research problem?

·         Is there a theoretical or conceptual model for the research?

·         Is there reference to ethical approval for the study?

·         Was there a clear discussion of how the sample was chosen and the representativeness of the sample to the population as well as details of recruitment?

·         Is the research methodology clearly indicated alongside the data collection tools?

·         Is the analysis of the data clearly outlined?

·         Were the findings clearly presented and discussed?

·         Were any limitations for the study indicated?

·         What are the implications of the research for practice? What are the implications of the research for our new lecture capture policy at City?

·         Has further research been indicated?

January Journal Club theme: The Role of Lecture Capture

22nd January 12.30 – 13.45

As part of the Growing Access to Lecture cApture (GALA) project, City is currently expanding provision of lecture capture facilities to all centrally timetabled learning spaces and updating the existing lecture capture policy. We have suggested two articles that consider the role of lecture capture from the perspectives of the students and the lecturers. The readings are provided below:

Nordmann, E., & McGeorge, P. (2018, May 1). Lecture capture in higher education: time to learn from the learners. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ux29v

Joseph-Richard, P., Jessop, T., Okafor, G., Almpanis, T. & Price, D. (2018). Big brother or harbinger of best practice: Can lecture capture actually improve teaching? British Educational Research Journal, 44 (3), pp. 377-392. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul_Joseph_Richard/publication/324578306_Big_brother_or_harbinger_of_best_practice_Can_lecture_capture_actually_improve_teaching/links/5b1eb984a6fdcc69745bed74/Big-brother-or-harbinger-of-best-practice-Can-lecture-capture-actually-improve-teaching.pdf

To help us with the discussion here are some questions you might like to consider when reading the article:

  • What was the purpose of the research and were the research questions/hypothesis clear?
  • Does the literature review seem thorough and draw on recent literature related to the
    research problem?
  • Is there a theoretical or conceptual model for the research?
  • Is there reference to ethical approval for the study?
  • Was there a clear discussion of how the sample was chosen and the representativeness of the sample to the population as well as details of recruitment?
  • Is the research methodology clearly indicated alongside the data collection tools?
  • Is the analysis of the data clearly outlined?
  • Were the findings clearly presented and discussed?
  • Were any limitations for the study indicated?
  • What are the implications of the research for practice? What are the implications of the research for our new lecture capture policy at City?
  • Has further research been indicated?

December 2019 Journal Club

The journal club met today for the first time. We discussed the two articles from the journal Teaching in Higher Education.

We discussed the article about student perceptions first by Lubicz-Narrocka and Bunting. The article was set in the context of the TEF and there was reference to other relevant literature including the discussion of the findings although, the authors make the point that most of the literature published is about academic views and not students. The two authors were themselves students one undertaking a PhD and one a Master’s level student. The study was qualitative in nature but had no research question because the authors were keen to have the themes emerging from the data using a grounded approach. Ethical approval was gained for the study. The study was of one institution and the anonymised comments from the student nominations for student-led teaching awards. There were eight categories of award and from the data four themes emerged which follow. Concerted, visible effort which focused on being approachable, engaging with students and teaching was clearly structured. Commitment to engaging students which referred to passion, enthusiasm and practical real life examples. Breaking down student-teacher barriers which referred to working in partnership, using students feedback to make changes and personal connections. Lastly there was stability of support with teachers helping students overcome struggles and having a positive attitude. The members of the club discussed at length the areas students identified and how these indicate personal connections and staff caring about what matters to students. There was discussion about supporting the student journey and this was evident through comments such as the quality and quantity of feedback. The article was well written and provided some good insight but the members felt that some follow up research could be to explore some of this further with students in focus groups and to look at whether there were discipline differences and across years of study.

Article two which had a staff focus by Wood and Su was also set within the context of TEF and other literature. This was also a qualitative study but did have clear research questions which formed the interview schedule. The members of the club however found the approaching of participants less clear with reference to a website and professional networks. 30 participants were approached and only 16 (53%) responded but these did go across grades of staff. There was reference to ethical approval but this seemed to be from two institutions and not therefore covering all the places the participants were from and so this raised an issue for us about ethical approval. We then discussed the findings which were presented using the questions rather than themes. There were some interesting points made but there was more discussion in this article of teaching rather than student engagement although there was reference to a journey. The members were interested that despite the authors discussing the difficulty with the concept teaching excellence no other term was offered.   There was also no suggestion for any follow up research. The members did think the articles were a good contrast around the topic.

December Journal Club theme: Teaching Excellence

Monday 16th December | 12.30 – 13.45 | B310 (LEaD training room)

Here are the references to the two articles and links through the library:

Wood M & Su F (2017) What makes an excellent lecturer? Academics perspectives on the discourse of ‘teaching excellence’ in higher education Teaching in Higher Education 22 (4) pp451-466 https://0-www-tandfonline-com.wam.city.ac.uk/doi/full/10.1080/13562517.2017.1301911

Lubicz-Nawrocka T & Bunting K (2019) Student perceptions of teaching excellence: an analysis of student-led teaching award nomination data Teaching in Higher Education 24 (1) pp63-80 https://0-www-tandfonline-com.wam.city.ac.uk/doi/full/10.1080/13562517.2018.1461620

To help us with the discussion here are some questions you might like to consider when reading the article:

  • What was the purpose of the research and were the research questions/hypothesis clear?
  • Does the literature review seem thorough and draw on recent literature related to the
    research problem?
  • Is there a theoretical or conceptual model for the research?
  • Is there reference to ethical approval for the study?
  • Was there a clear discussion of how the sample was chosen and the representativeness of the sample to the population as well as details of recruitment?
  • Is the research methodology clearly indicated alongside the data collection tools?
  • Is the analysis of the data clearly outlined?
  • Were the findings clearly presented and discussed?
  • Were any limitations for the study indicated?
  • What are the implications of the research for practice?
  • Has further research been indicated?