Proceedings of the RAISE International Colloquium on Partnership
RAISE convened a major event on June 23rd 2017, hosted at Birmingham City University. This was undertaken under the auspices of the RAISE Special Interest Group on Partnership. The event organisers were successful in bringing together leading, international commentators and practitioners to discuss and reflect on developments in partnerships between students and staff in Higher Education.
We noted that students and staff working in partnership has rapidly become a major feature of the HE landscape around the world. There is much evidence to show that partnership working may be a powerful catalyst to enhance student engagement and enhance student learning. Indubitably there are benefits to staff and institutions too. Developing such an ethos presents an attractive alternative to neo-liberal, transactional and consumer models of HE. We wished to take stock of these developments and explore the opportunities, challenges, and consequences of such approaches. Is partnership truly inclusive and open to all? What are the ethical tensions? Are some of these practices more ‘pseudo-partnership’ then genuine? Is there a danger of appropriation through neo-liberal or managerialist agendas?We asked contributors to summarise the presentations and workshops they gave at the event for these proceedings and we are delighted that so many of them have been able to do so
Ahlfeldt, S., Mehta, S., and Sellinow, T. (2005). Measurement and analysis of student engagement where varying levels of PBL methods of instruction were is use. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(1), 5–20.
Allin, L. (2014) “Collaboration Between Staff and Students in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: The Potential and the Problems”, Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal 2 (1), pp.95-102.
Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35 (4), 216-224
Bourner, T (2004) The broadening of the higher education curriculum, 1970-2002: an ipsative enquiry. Higher Education Review 36 (2) 39-52.
Bovill, C. (2013). Students and staff co-creating curricula - a new trend or an old idea we never got around to implementing? Improving student learning through Research and Scholarship: 20 years of ISL. C. Rust (Ed). Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff and Educational Development. (Chapter 3 pp96-108).
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. (2017) A framework to explore roles within student-staff partnerships in higher education: which students are partners, when and in what ways? International Journal for Students as Partners 1 (1) 1-5: https://mulpress.mcmaster.ca/ijsap/article/view/3062/2770
Bovill, C., and Felten, P. (2016). Cultivating student-staff partnerships through research and practice. International Journal for Academic Development, 20(1), 1–3.
Bovill, C., Cook‐Sather, A. and Felten, P. (2011) ‘Students as co‐creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: Implications for academic developers’, International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), pp. 133–145.
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Millard, L. and Moore-Cherry, N. (2016) Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching: overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity in student–staff partnerships. Higher Education, 71(2), pp. 195-208
Bragg, S. (2007). “Student Voice” and Governmentality: The production of enterprising subjects? Discourse: Studies In The Cultural Politics Of Education, 28(3), 343-358.
Brooke, J. (2017). "Mental Health and Student Engagement – A Personal Account." Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal 1(2): 12-15. https://journals.gre.ac.uk/index.php/raise/article/view/brooke
Brooks, R., Byford, K., and Sela, K. (2015). The changing role of students’ unions within contemporary higher education. Journal Of Education Policy, 30(2), 165-181.
Bryson, C. (2014). Clarifying the concept of student engagement. In C. Bryson (Ed.), Understanding and developing student engagement (pp. 1-22). Abingdon: Routledge.
Bryson., C., Furlonger, R. and Rinaldo-Langridge, F. (2015) A critical consideration of, and research agenda for, the approach of ‘students as partners’. Proceedings of the IUT Conference, Ljubljana, July
Buckley, A. (2014) How radical is student engagement? (And what is it for?) Student Engagement and Experience Journal, 3:2
Charmaz, K. (2008) Grounded Theory as an Emergent Method. In Nagy Hesse-Biber, S. and Leavy, P. (Eds), Handbook of Emergent Methods, New York: The Guildford Press.
Clarke, A. (2003) Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, presence, and power: Exploring ‘student voice’ in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 359–390.
Cook-Sather, A. (2011). Layered learning. Educational Action Research, 19(1), 41-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2011.547680
Cook-Sather, A. (2013) Students of Color and Faculty Members Working together Toward Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy. In Groccia, J., and Cruz, L. (Eds.), To Improve the Academy, 32. San Fransisco: Jossey. Bass/Anker.
Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 186–198.
Cook-Sather, A., and Abbot, S. (2016). Translating partnerships: How faculty-student collaboration in explorations of teaching and learning can transform perceptions, terms, and selves. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 4(2). tlijournal.com/tli/index.php/TLI/issue/view/15/
Cook-Sather, A., and Felten, P. (2017). Ethics of academic leadership: Guiding learning and teaching. In Frank Wu and Margaret Wood (Eds.), Cosmopolitan Perspectives on Becoming an Academic Leader in Higher Education (pp. 175-191). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Cook-Sather, A. and Luz, A. (2015). Greater engagement in and responsibility for learning: What happens when students cross the threshold of student-faculty partnership. Higher Education Research and Development, 34(6), 1097–1109.
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., and Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Crawford, K. (2012). Rethinking the student/teacher nexus: Students as consultants on teaching in higher education. In M. Neary, L. Bell and H. Stevenson (Eds.), Towards Teaching in Public: Reshaping the Modern University: Continuum.
Curran, R. (2016). Staff and Student Guide to Engagement through Partnership. Ulster University, Centre for HE Research and Practice. Retrieved from https://www.ulster.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/131467/SS-Guide-to-Engagement-through-Partnership.pdf
Curran, R. (2017). Students as partners—good for students, good for staff: A study on the impact of partnership working and how this translates to improved student-staff engagement. International Journal for Students as Partners 1(2). Retrieved from https://mulpress.mcmaster.ca/ijsap
Curran, R., and Millard, L. (2016). A partnership approach to developing student capacity to engage and staff capacity to be engaging: opportunities for academic developers. International Journal For Academic Development, 21(1), 67-78.
DFID (2003) Tools for development: A handbook for those engaged in development activity. London: Department for International Development.
Dunne, E., and Zanstra, R. (2011) Students as change agents: New ways of engaging with learning and teaching in Higher Education, The Higher Education Academy: University of Exeter.
Edwards, G (2017) Habermas and social movements research. Colonisation as a living battle in M. Murphy (2017) (Ed.) Habermas and Social Research: Between Theory and Method. Routledge: London and New York.
Felten, P. (2011) Monet moments and the necessity of productive disruption. Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 2.
Felten, P. (2017). Emotion and partnership. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(2). https://mulpress.mcmaster.ca/ijsap/article/view/3070
Ferraresi, A., Zanchetta, E., Baroni,, M. and Bernardini, S. (2008). Introducing and evaluating ukWaC, a very large web-derived corpus of English. In: Proceedings of the 4th Web as Corpus Workshop (WAC-4) Can we beat Google, pp. 47–54, see also https://www.sketchengine.co.uk/ukwac-corpus/
Flint, A. and Millard, L. (2016) Defining student engagement in practice: individual understandings and motivations. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Higher Education Annual Conference 2016. Paper available online at: https://www.srhe.ac.uk/conference2016/abstracts/0036.pdf
Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P., and Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Freire P (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Revised ed. London: Penguin
Frison, D., and Melacarne, C. (2017). Introduction – Students-faculty partnership in Italy: Approaches, practices, and perspectives. Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 20 http://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss20/1
Gibbs. G. (2016). 53 powerful ideas all teachers should know about: “Student engagement” is a slippery concept. Staff and Educational Development Association. Retrieved from: http://www.seda.ac.uk/53-powerful-ideas
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A.L. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldinhe.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Gourlay, L. (2016) The ‘learnification’ of student engagement. Paper presentation. SRHE Conference, Celtic Manor Resort, Newport, 7-9 December.
Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. (1994) ‘Competing paradigms in qualitative research’ In: Norman K. Denzin and Yvonne S. Lincoln (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Routledge.
Habermas, J (1987) The theory of communicative action, volume two: Lifeworld and system: a critique of functionalist reason.(trans) T. McCarthy. In McLean, M. (2008) Pedagogy and the University. Critical Theory and Practice. Continuum Studies in Education, London.
Harrington, K., Sinfield, S., and Burns, T. (2016). Student engagement. In H. Pokorny and D. Warren (Eds.), Enhancing teaching practice in higher education (pp.106-124). London: Sage.
Healey, M., Flint, A. and Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York: Higher Education Academy, available from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher-education
Hermsen, T., Kuiper, T., Roelofs, F., and van Wijchen, J. (2017). Without emotions, never a partnership! International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(2). https://mulpress.mcmaster.ca/ijsap/article/view/3228/2893
Heron, J. (1992). The politics of facilitation: Balancing facilitator authority and learner autonomy. In J. Mulligan and C. Griffin (Eds.), Empowerment through experiential learning: Explorations of good practice (pp. 66–75). London: Kogan Page.
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C., and McSweeney, F. (2016) “Emotional intelligence and graduates – employers’ perspectives.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 228: 515-522. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.079
Kahn, P. (2014). Theorising student engagement in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 40(6), 1005-1018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/berj.3121
Kahu, E. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education, Studies in Higher Education, 38 (5), 758-773.
Keltner, D., and Haidt, J. (1999). Social functions of emotions at four levels of analysis. Cognition and Emotion, 13(5), 505-521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026999399379168
Kilgarriff, A. et al. (2014). The Sketch Engine: ten years on. Lexicography, 1(1), 7-36.; see also http://www.sketchengine.co.uk
Klemenčič, M. (2014). Student power in a global perspective and contemporary trends in student organising. Studies In Higher Education, 39(3), 396-411.
Könings K.D., Bovill, C. and Woolner, P. (2017) Towards an Interdisciplinary Model of Practice for Participatory Building Design in Education European Journal of Education 52 (3) 306-317. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12230/full
Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J.H. and Whitt, E.J. (2010). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
LeDoux, J. (2002). Synaptic Self. New York: Viking.
Little, B. and Williams, R. (2010) ‘Students’ Roles in Maintaining Quality and in Enhancing Learning: Is There a Tension?’, Quality in Higher Education, 16(2), pp. 115–127.
Lopes, P.N., Grewal, D., Kadis, J., Gall, M. and Salovey P. (2006) Evidence that emotional intelligence is related to job performance and affect and attitudes at work Psichothemia 18(1): 132-138. http://www.eiconsortium.org/pdf/Lopes.Grewal.Kadis.Gall.Salovey.Psichothema.2006.pdf
Macfarlane, B. and Tomlinson, M. (2017) Critiques of student engagement. Higher Education Policy 30 (1) 5-21.
Manor, C., Bloch-Schulman, S., Flannery, K., and Felten, P. (2010) Foundations of student-faculty partnerships in the scholarship of teaching and learning: Theoretical and developmental considerations. In C. Werder and M. Otis (Eds.) Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning (pp.81-95). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Marquis, E., Puri, V., Wan, S., Ahmad, A., Goff, L., Knorr, K., Vassileva, I., and Woo, J. (2016). Navigating the threshold of student-staff partnerships: A case study from an Ontario teaching and learning institute. The International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 4–15.
McEnery, T., and Hardie, A. (2011). Corpus Linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McFarlane, B. and Tomlinson, M. (2017) Critiques of Student Engagement. Higher Education Policy 30, (5-21)
McKinney, K., Jarvis, P., Creasey, G., and Herrmann, D. (2010). In Werder, C. and Otis, M. M. (Eds). Engaging student voices in the student of teaching and learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
McLean, M. (2008) Pedagogy and the University. Critical Theory and Practice. Continuum Studies in Education, London.
Meacham, M., Castor, M., and Felten, P. (2013). Partners as newcomers: Mixed-role partnerships as communities of practice. Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 10. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss10/5
Mercer-Mapstone, L., Dvorakova, L.S., Matthews, K.E., Abbot, S., Cheng, B., Felten, P., Knorr, K., Marquis, E., Shammas, R., and Swaim, K. (2017) A Systematic Literature Review of Students as Partners in Higher Education. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1 (1)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary Online
Meyer, J. H. F., and Land, R. (2006). Overcoming barriers to student understanding. London: Routledge.
Mitchell, C., Theron, L., Stuart, J., Smith, A. and Campbell, Z. (2011) Drawing as research method. In Theron, L., Mitchell, C., Smith, A. and Stuart, J. (Eds) Picturing Research: Drawing as Visual Methodology. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Chapter 2, 19-36.
Moore-Cherry, N., Healey, R., Andrews, W., and Nicholson, D. (2016). Inclusive partnership: Enhancing student engagement in geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 40(1), pp 84-103
Naidoo, R. and Williams, J. (2015) The neoliberal regime in English higher education: charters, consumers and the erosion of the public good. Critical Studies in Education, 56: 2, 208-223.
Neary, M. (2008) Student as producer – risk, responsibility and rich learning environments in higher education. Articles from the Learning and Teaching Conference 2008. Ed: Joyce Barlow, Gail Louw, Mark Price. University of Brighton Press. Centre for Learning and Teaching
Neary, M. (2010). Student as producer: A pedagogy for the avant-garde? Learning Exchange, 1(1).
NUS (2012) A manifesto for partnership [Internet]. London: National Union of Students. Available online at: www.nusconnect.org.uk/campaigns/highereducation/partnership/a-manifesto-for-partnerships/
Olssen, M and Peters, M. (2005) Olssen, M. and Peters, M.A (2005) Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: from the free market to knowledge capitalism, Journal of Education Policy, 20:3, 313-345
Oxford English Dictionary Online
Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Petrides, K. (2010), Trait Emotional Intelligence Theory. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 136-139. DOI: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01213.x
Robinson, C. (2012) Student engagement: What does this mean in practice in the context of higher education institutions? Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 4, 94-108.
Robinson, C., and Taylor, C. (2014) “Editorial: Ethics and student Engagement: Exploring practices in Higher Education”. Student Engagement and Experience Journal, 3(2).
Salovey, P., and Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality 9(3): 185-211. https://doi.org/10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG
Scullion, R., Molesworth, M., and Nixon, E. (2011). Arguments, responsibility and what is to be done about marketisation. In M. Molesworth, R.Scullion, and E. Nixon (Eds.), The marketisation of higher education and the student as consumer (pp. 227-236). Oxon: Routledge.
Solomonides, I. (2013). A relational and multidimensional model of student engagement. In E. Dunne and D. Owen (Eds.), The student engagement handbook: Practice in higher education (pp. 43-58). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
Stein, S., and Book, H. (2013). The EQ Edge: Emotional Intelligence and Your Success (third edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1994) Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview, in Handbook of Qualitative Research, (Eds) Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S., Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Thomas, L., Hill, M., O’Mahony, J., and Yorke, M. (2017). Supporting student success: Strategies for institutional change: What Works? Student Retention and Success programme. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/hub/download/what_works_2_-_full_report.pdf
Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. York: Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/studentengagementliteraturereview_1.pdf
Turner, V. (1974). Dramas, fields, and metaphors: symbolic action in human society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Turner, V. (1995) Liminality and communitas. In The ritual process: Structure and antistructure (pp. 94–130). New York: Walter de Gruyter.
van Manen, M. (1990). Researching the lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. New York: State University of New York Press.
Vuori, J. (2104) Student engagement: buzzword or fuzzword? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. 36(5). 509-519
Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2nd edition.
Weller, S. and Kandiko Howson, C.B. (2014) SRHE Research Scoping Study Award: Final Report May 2014: Students as co-developers of Learning and teaching: Redefining expertise and student voice through student participation in professional development. University of the Arts and Kings College London.
Wenger, E. (2006). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. Retrieved from http://www.ewenger.com/theory/
Werder, C., Ware, L., Thomas, C. and Skogsberg, E. (2010) Students in Parlour talk on teaching and learning, in Werder, C and Otis, M (Ed),(2010) Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning, Stylus, Sterling, Virginia
Woolmer, C. (2016) Staff and Students Co-creating Curricula in UK Higher Education: Exploring Process and Evidencing Value (unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
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).