This focused on an evaluation of the teaching development grants scheme run by the Higher Education Academy. The scheme’s aim was to inspire and support effective practice in learning and teaching across the sector. The evaluation included grants awarded from 2012 and 2013 and there had been 2000 applications with 250 grants awarded and an investment of over £3,000,000. The evaluation planned to review the effectiveness of the scheme, the impact of the scheme and the methodologies used and hoped to be able to make some recommendations.

The evaluation lenses used were student engagement, student learning experiences, pedagogical and professional practice, benefit beyond the institution and sustainability. The main findings were positive in terms of contribution to the development and support of teaching but there were many variables which made measuring impact difficult. Student engagement was however a challenging issue. There were some unintended benefits which included the attitudes of staff working together, ways of working with students and strengthening links between teaching and research.

The session focused on student engagement issues. Within the projects they found that often there was a lack of clarity and understanding of this term and that two interpretations mainly existed. The first was around students operational involvement and the second was that staff engaged students in their own learning. The guidance for all projects provided reference to model of dimensions of student engagement from Coates (2007). The model has five dimensions which are:

• active and collaborative learning;
• participation in challenging academic activities;
• formative communication with academic staff;
• involvement in enriching educational experiences;
• feeling legitimated and supported by university learning communities.

Hamish Coates (2007), ‘A model of online and general campus-based student engagement’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 32(2), 121-141.

The participants in the session then discussed aspects of this model. There were issues around what does challenging mean? This can be personal for the student but can also be challenging to develop them further. The whole issue of engagement and what this meant was also debated as students are unique and so engagement will mean different things to individuals. The model whilst felt to be useful was also using language that perhaps not all staff and students could engage with.

Key findings from the evaluation around student engagement included the need to consider and understand the risks of directly engaging students, setting realistic expectations when scoping projects, do good preparatory work, understand the context of your institution, allow yourself to be opportunistic, think through longer terms plans so what can be sustainable, don’t underestimate what students can do and are willing to do but the support they need and don’t spend a lot of time on something that might not have any impact except on a few.

With the latest press release from the HEA about their funding reduction sadly these projects will no longer be available but some good advice here about student engagement projects.