Context Matters: Responding to a reflexive student account of the methods and motivations for sharing student voice at Northumbria University
Keywords:
Partnership, Representation, Inclusion, PowerAbstract
Background and rationale
Engaging with student voice is more important than ever in shaping the experience of those studying and working in higher education settings. Providing new and effective mechanisms for elevating student voice, particularly of those from underrepresented groups, has become a priority for many universities and Students’ Unions. There is a growing expectation for providers to work in partnership with students to assure and enhance the quality of their provision, for example the Quality Assurance Agency’s Guiding Principles on Student Engagement include ‘Student engagement through partnership working is integral to the culture of higher education, however and wherever provision is delivered - student engagement is led strategically, but widely owned’ (QAA, 2018, p. 4).
Using reflections of staff and students, this case study proposes to explore the current student voice landscape at Northumbria University. In doing so, we will explore some of the structures and channels that exist within the Students’ Union and the university, and their benefits and barriers to students.
Downloads
References
Barton, E., Bates, E. A., & O’Donovan, R. (2017). “That extra sparkle”: students’ experiences of volunteering and the impact on satisfaction and employability in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(4), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877x.2017.1365827
Beames, S., & Brown, M. (2016). Adventurous Learning: A Pedagogy for a Changing World (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315736488
Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2017). Where Student Engagement Meets Faculty Development: How Student-Faculty Pedagogical Partnership Fosters a Sense of Belonging. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 1(2), 3–3.
Dunne, E., & Owen, D. (2013). Student Engagement Handbook. Emerald Group Publishing.
Felten, P., Bragg, J., Bumbry, M., Hill, J., Hornsby, K., Pratt, M., & Weller, S. (2013). A Call for Expanding Inclusive Student Engagement in SoTL. Teaching & Learning Inquiry the ISSOTL Journal, 1(2), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.2.63
Haski-Leventhal, D., Paull, M., Young, S., MacCallum, J., Holmes, K., Omari, M., Scott, R., & Alony, I. (2019). The Multidimensional Benefits of University Student Volunteering: Psychological Contract, Expectations, and Outcomes. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(1), 089976401986310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764019863108
Hayman, R., Mendes, R., Allan, J., & Veuger, S. (2024). Leading a faculty-wide peer-support programme for widening participation students: Learning from the personal and professional development of an undergraduate intern.International Journal for Students as Partners,8(2), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v8i2.5763
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/hea/private/resources/engagement_through_partnership_1568036621.pdf
Holen, R., Ashwin, P., Maassen, P., & Stensaker, B. (2020). Student partnership: Exploring the Dynamics in and between Different Conceptualizations. Studies in Higher Education, 46(12), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1770717
Leckey, J., & Neill, N. (2001). Quantifying Quality: The importance of student feedback. Quality in Higher Education, 7(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320120045058
Manuel, O., Javier, F., Joaquim, & Lourenço, R. T. (2025). Student contributions to quality assurance in higher education: a systematic literature review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2445727
Marquis, E., Puri, V., Wan, S., Ahmad, A., Goff, L., Knorr, K., Vassileva, I., & Woo, J. (2015). Navigating the threshold of student–staff partnerships: a case study from an Ontario teaching and learning institute. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2015.1113538
Mendes, A. B., & Hammett, D. (2020). The new tyranny of student participation? Student voice and the paradox of strategic-active student-citizens. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(1), 164–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1783227
Smith, H., Verwoord, R., Yahlnaaw, & Veitch,C. (2019). P.O.W.E.R.: A reflective framework for students-as-partners practices and processes. BCcampus. https://bccampus.ca/2019/04/23/p-o-w-e-r-a-reflective-framework-for-students-as-partners-practices-and-processes/
Trowler, V. (2015). Negotiating Contestations and “Chaotic Conceptions”: Engaging “Non-Traditional” Students in Higher Education. Higher Education Quarterly, 69(3), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12071
UK Quality Code for Higher Education. (2024). https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/uk-quality-code-for-higher-education-2024.pdf
Watson, S. (2003). Closing the Feedback Loop: Ensuring Effective Action from Student Feedback. Tertiary Education and Management, 9(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023586004922
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:a. 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.
b. 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.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
