In this post, Jill Haldane, Philip Davies, and Dr Faith Dillon-Lee from the Centre for Open Learning, share how they used Student Partnership Agreement funding to work with staff and students in collaboration on the redesign of the Academic Language and Literacies course, and to employ students to develop a student-led project. This post belongs to the Student Partnership Agreement 2024 series.
The Centre for Open Learning runs International Foundation Programmes (IFP) for the University of Edinburgh, serving as a pathway to undergraduate study at College Art, Humanities and Social Sciences (CAHSS). Inspired by Murray’s (2024) insights on enhancing inclusion through autonomous learning practices, and guided by both the University of Edinburgh’s Student-Led, Individually Created Courses team and the Feedback and Assessment Principles and Priorities policy (2022), we are redesigning the Academic Language and Literacies course of the CAHSS IFP, which will include a student-led project. We took the opportunity presented by the Student Partnership Agreement (SPA) to engage IFP alumni in the construction of this student-led project.
We invited all IFP alumni from 2018-2023, and seven volunteered from across all years of UG study. They were predominantly Chinese and represented a range of programmes from Law, Psychology, Finance, Economics & Business, and English Literature. Several themes arose from these initial focus groups, including writing and presentation practice, transferability of skills, and criticality and analysis. The focus group spoke of the difficulties they face prioritising tasks, learning independently, group work, and the variety of assessment types required in their degree programmes. As one student put it:
“There’s so many things happening at the same time and tutors […] they would expect sometimes that students are already equipped […] with knowledge, with life skills” (Focus Group 1).
This led to the incorporation of a student-led project in the redesigned IFP. We applied for SPA funding to work with IFP alumni on assessment design, course structure, and the extent of teacher-led guidance IFP students would need to carry out the student-led project. Of the seven students who took part in the initial focus groups, three offered to be paid volunteers, with their time being compensated through the SPA funding.
The project
Firstly, we elicited the alumni’s retrospective thoughts – as IFP students – on the usability of the marking rubric for written assignments. We asked them to comment from their current viewpoint on whether the marking rubric was missing any key skills, abilities, or competencies that are specific required on their programmes. The students reported several key areas, including evidencing research, wording and layout of the rubric.
Next, we moved on to the student-led project. We asked alumni for their blue-sky thoughts on what the syllabus of a student-led project could possibly look like. We used Miro, populating it with the potential basic elements of learning and teaching, and assessment. We asked them to consider projects from their current UG study, as well as any gaps in opportunities and experiences for collaborative, independent group work they thought were missing from their IFPs. Students shared thoughts about interpersonal skills, academic socialisation, equity in assessment, teacher facilitation, and workshops for the student-led project.
Finally, we had an in-person meeting to discuss the students’ ideas expressed on Miro with the aim of gaining a deeper understanding of how the student-led project could link to experiences of the undergraduate student in CAHSS. The consensus was that a student-led project should build in AI literacy to facilitate a multi-modal project with a strong sense of teacher guidance.
Staff and student responses to the project
There was overwhelming consensus among students and staff that the collaboration on course design – brought about by SPA funding – was rewarding on multiple levels. Staff commented that they had learned from their students and that this shaped their approach to course design. Students reported that they felt valued in engaging in the project, and it allowed them to develop key graduate skills, such as critical thinking. Feedback from students included:
Why did you join this project?
- “As I participated in IFP and this experience helped me a lot, I am happy to help it improve further.”
- “To gain work experience.”
What did you hope to gain from this project?
- “Work experience.”
- “It is quite useful for me to acquire more insight into how a programme is structured and made under the cover, and also get a practical experience on it, as I aim to work in the academia in the future.”
Lessons learned
Since the end of the project, we have reflected on aspects of the process that could have been improved, resulting in some recommendations for future projects:
- Consider the time and resource implications of employing students (e.g. costs, Right to Work checks, pay grading). These steps can delay the project starting.
- Decide beforehand what role the project aims to give the students (e.g. reviewers, designers etc.). This is important to the productivity and success of the project, but also the timeline. For example, students can only review a curriculum once it has been developed.
- Create a clear schedule of meetings and events which prioritise working to the availability of the students involved. This can prevent delays, unused hours and disengagement.
Conclusion
We were able to develop new and key insights into the student-led project through engaging with our alumni students. While we would certainly make some changes should we apply for funding again, the project overall has been a huge success. We are now beginning the process of designing the syllabus and materials for the student-led project and look forward to launching it and gathering more insight from future students on its success. In sum, the ability to engage students as practicing thinkers and knowers captures a range of perceptions that can inform both current and future curriculum design.
References
Murray, R. (2024) The Capability Approach, Pedagogic Rights and Course Design: Developing Autonomy and Reflection through Student-Led, Individually Created Courses. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 25:1, 131-150
The University of Edinburgh (2022). Assessment and Feedback Principles and Priorities. Available at: https://www.ed.ac.uk/sites/default/files/atoms/files/assessmentfeedbackprinciplespriorities.pdf (accesses 04.05.2024)
Jill Haldane
Jill is a Lecturer in English Language Education in the Centre for Open Learning. Jill is the Course Organiser for the Foundation Academic Language and Literacies course for the undergraduate International Foundation Programme for the CAHSS. Jill’s current work extends to the School of SPS and Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture in ECA.
Philip Davies
Philip is a Lecturer in English for Academic Purposes. He teaches and course organises across a range of provision within English Language Education and COL. This includes COL’s International Foundation Programme (IFP), pre-sessional EAP, Graduate Writing Centre and various in-sessional provision in collaboration with Schools and programmes. He is a Fellow of HEA.
Faith Dillon-Lee
Faith Dillon-Lee holds a PhD in English Literature, focusing on the psycho- and sociological effects of reading fiction on belief formation. She also holds a Master’s Degree in Applied Linguistics and ELT, with a focus on English Language Teaching and sociolinguistics, and a PGCert HE. She is a Fellow of the RSA and HEA. Faith has extensive experience in teaching English as a Foreign Language, English for Academic Purposes, and Academic Literacies. She is also experienced in curriculum & materials development, student engagement, and education for empowerment. She has worked in Higher Education for over a decade and, prior to this, worked in language schools and on community development projects.
