In January’s meeting of the LEaDER Journal Club we explored the subject of student experiences of assessment, discussing two papers:

• “Rethinking Authentic Assessment: Work, Well-Being, and Society” by Jan McArthur
• “Assessment as a Matter of Being and Becoming: Theorising Student-Formation in Assessment” by Juuso Henrik Nieminen and Lili Yang

The papers share a focus on how assessments shape students’ experiences of learning. McArthur (2022, p.86) proposes an approach that engages with why the assessment task matters, arguing that as educators we must reflect “deeply on what we do and do not wish to achieve through this form of assessment.”  Cautioning against an approach that conflates “the real world and the world of work”, McArthur (2022, p.87) argues for the importance of engaging with the social value of a task and proposes a shift in focus from “the world of work to a richer understanding of society as a whole.”  Nieminen and Yang (2024, p.1) explore assessment as a process through which “students become known” and argue for the importance of recognising that assessment “shapes not only student learning but student identities as well”.  Drawing on the notion of “student formation”, they argue that many assessment modes result in “other-formation”, ignoring the importance of “self-formation” and reflexivity which tend to be valued at other points in the learning process (Nieminen and Yang, 2024, p.2).

Image by rawpixel.com on Freepik

Our discussion explored the potential application of these papers to our own practice, with a specific focus on the importance of ensuring a clear rationale for the assessment design and a consideration of the ethics of assessment practice.  The provocations of McArthur prompted reflection on way assessments can function as part of a wider means of education transforming society, while the argument of Nieminen and Yang initiated a discussion about the relationship between assessment and pedagogies of care.  In particular, we reflected on the tension between assessments that socialise students in university or disciplinary values and culture, versus those that promote performativity and/or competition.

Thank you to everyone who attended for a thought-provoking discussion!

Our next meeting will take place on Tuesday 13^th February 2024 and will be led by Dr Jane Secker.  The session will explore open access in HE, with a focus on the following two papers:

• Nazim and M. Ashar. (2023), “Factors influencing the adoption and use of open access scholarly communication among researchers in India”
• Schultz. (2023). “A survey of US science journalists’ knowledge and opinions of open access research”

The session will run from 12-1pm and will be held over Zoom.  Please register to attend here.

Happy New Year!

Our first meeting of the Journal Club for 2024 will consider student experiences of assessment, particularly in relation to authentic assessment, well-being, and identity.  We will be exploring the following papers:

• “Rethinking Authentic Assessment: Work, Well-Being, and Society” by Jan McArthur
• “Assessment as a Matter of Being and Becoming: Theorising Student-Formation in Assessment” by Juuso Henrik Nieminen

The session will take place from 12-1pm on Tuesday 16th January.  It will be held on Zoom.

Please book your place here.

In May’s meeting of the LEaDER Journal Club we were pleased to be joined by Sandra Guzman-Rodriguez from the Office for Institutional Equity & Inclusion.  Sarny led the discussion, which focussed on the following two papers:

• Compton et al. (2023), “View of ‘Not as a temporary fluke but as standard’: realising the affordances of hybrid and online teaching for inclusive and sustainable education.”
• Fennelly-Atkinson et al. (2022), “Identifying accessibility factors affecting learner inclusion in online university programs.”

Both papers made a clear case for the importance of centring accessibility in all learning an teaching practice. Fennelly-Atkinson et al. (2022) providing insights into institutional approaches to accessibility and the legal dimension of accessibility compliance.  Compton et al. (2023) focussed on the importance of learning from the adjustments to learning and teaching activities made during the pandemic, as well as the benefits and challenges of hybrid teaching.

We began by discussing definitions of the terms hybrid/HyFlex and online teaching, examining the range of possible practices which may fall under these headings.  As a group, we had a range of experiences of teaching online and were interested in Compton et al.’s (2023) notion of “Basic Hybrid” and the movement to more sophisticated “blends” since the pandemic.  Compton et al. draw on Snelling (2022) to identify the development of blended practice and its associated access benefits as an “unexpected silver lining” of the pandemic.

The group found Fennelly-Atkinson’s (2022) consideration of institutional frameworks for embedding accessibility valuable, reflecting on existing models at City and how these might be developed.  We discussed the centrality of training in the field of accessible practice, as well as the importance of support and strategy at an institutional level for promoting accessibility across programmes.

Another valuable talking point was Compton et al.’s (2023) discussion of belonging in education.  We explored some of the assumptions that often underpin in-person/online teaching practice, particularly challenging the idea that being in-person is inherently more geared towards fostering a sense of belonging. This is something we will be picking up on in our next session, which focusses specifically on the significance of belonging within HE.

The session will take place on Tuesday 13th June at midday and we will be looking at the following papers:

We’re pleased to announce that the next two meetings of the LEaDER Journal Club will take place at midday on Tuesday 16th May and Tuesday 13th June.

May’s session marks Global Accessibility Awareness Day, with papers exploring the importance of accessibility in teaching and learning in HE.  We will be looking at the following papers:

• Compton et al. (2023), “View of ‘Not as a temporary fluke but as standard’: realising the affordances of hybrid and online teaching for inclusive and sustainable education“.
• Fennelly-Atkinson et al. (2022), “Identifying accessibility factors affecting learner inclusion in online university programs.”

In June, as we look ahead to the new academic year, we will be exploring the importance of belonging in students’ transition to HE, with a focus on the following papers:

For February’s meeting of the LEaDER Journal Club, we will be exploring student transition and how to support students as they make their way through their degree programme.

Listed below are the two articles we will be discussing:

Karen Gravett & Rola Ajjawi (2022) Belonging as situated practice, Studies in Higher Education, 47:7, 1386-1396, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2021.1894118

And

Catherine Meehan & Kristy Howells (2019) In search of the feeling of ‘belonging’ in higher education: undergraduate students transition into higher education, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43:10, 1376-1390, DOI: 10.1080/0309877X.2018.1490702

Photo by Thomas Buchholz on Unsplash

January’s meeting of the LEaDER Journal Club explored playful pedagogical practice in a session facilitated by Dr Jane Secker.  Discussion focussed on two papers examining the pedagogical value of play by Nicola Whitton and Jane Secker and Chris Morrison.

Whitton’s paper considers the growth in playful approachse used in higher education, from games and gamification, to play and playfulness. Focussing on two case studies, Whitton focusses on the value of play as a safe space, in which failure is accepted, learners are immersed in an activity, and intrinsic motivation for learning develops.  The paper identifies and analyses three types of play: playful tools, playful techniques, and playful tactics.

Whitton’s paper proved a great starting point for our discussion, giving a useful summary of what playful learning means in HE and a great accessible introduction to the topic for those who are new to playful approaches. As well as engaging with the benefits of play, the article prompted valuable discussion about the challenges of adopting playful practice.  We discussed the fact that play is not always valued as a pedagogical practice in HE and that there is only limited research on its use in teaching adults.

Photo by Andrey Metelev on Unsplash

This discussion linked well with the paper by Secker and Morrison, which explores the pedagogic value of games in the context of creating two games to teach librarians and educators about copyright. Considering the role games can play in teaching in a ‘contested space’, Secker and Morrison advocate for games as a mode of problem based learning, which make learning more active and engaging.

The paper prompted a great discussion about the variety of playful practices already used by attendees.  Again, some challenges with playful approaches were identified, including some students expressing reluctance to participate and the time investment required of facilitators when developing play-based activities.  The discussion spoke to the themes of Playful Learning Research currently being undertaken at City.

The next meeting of the Journal Club will take place at midday on Thursday 23rd February.  We will be discussing the following papers:

• “Belonging as situated practice” by Karen Gravett and Rola Ajjawi (2022)
• “In search of the feeling of ‘belonging’ in higher education: undergraduate students transition into higher education” by Catherine Meehan and Kristy Howells (2019)

Please book your place here.

Thanks to Dr Jane Secker for facilitating January’s session and for providing a write-up of the session on which this post was based.

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?

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?

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?