In Higher Education, 'co-creation', 'students as partners', 'collaborative partnerships', 'staff-student partnerships' all allude to the same thing: working with students on a level instead of instructing them from above. The practice has been around for about a decade (1) and Cook-Sather, Bovill and Felten (2) outline what co-creation is in more detail: “a collaborative, reciprocal process through which all participants have the opportunity to contribute equally, although not necessarily in the same ways… [for] conceptualisation, decision making, implementation, investigation, or analysis.” As part of the Positive Digital Practices project, a key aspect was the involvement of students. Within the University of Bradford’s Positive Digital Communities strand, we wanted students to be involved from the get-go to inform our toolkit. The Higher Education Academy (3) identify the different forms of student partnership and our project fits into the area of ‘subject-based research inquiry’. It does so by researching into what current practice occurs within the university and how we can support staff and students’ practice, and subsequently their experiences. The planning and recruitment phaseIt is important to establish a student: staff partnership model before the work commences to ensure successful implementation (1). To do this, I created a prospective timeline, alongside a project tracker, that would help outline the key responsibilities and targets of the project. This was shared with the students in our first meeting (see Figure 1). Alongside this, key themes from the literature that were relevant to our project goals, and the type of involvement the students would have, were identified (1,4):
These underpinned the way the students were managed and were referred to throughout. It was also important to offer both in-person and online meetings so that the work best suited the students’ needs. We decided on a mix of both meeting types, and we chose Teams as our preferred platform due to familiarity and ease of access. The students’ job title was chosen based on the project goals and the type of involvement the students would have in the project. I felt ‘Students as Active Collaborators’ encompassed the importance of student voice and effective engagement, something Healey, Flint and Harrington agree with (3,5). Our project focusses on the diversity of students and their university experiences, so listening to the student voice is essential for learning what they need and respond to (1). After deciding on the name, we started recruitment processes. We felt it important to pay the students instead of making their involvement voluntary, so that they felt part of the team. We had nine applicants, and of those, we recruited four. The creation and implementation phase As a team, we co-created a mutual agreement of values and expectations for the partnership, so all members were on the same page yet accountable for their actions. Using the above diagram, we then discussed how the next few months would pan out so we could account for deadlines, exams, and dissertation hand-ins. It was crucial that this role did not impede on their studies or other university requirements (6, 7). The students were involved in reading literature, conducting primary research, report writing and resource creation. A summarised list of activities that the students were involved are listed below (this is not exhaustive and does not account for the fortnightly meetings and catch-ups we had throughout their time on the project):
By enabling students, from different academic backgrounds, to be involved in such a project provided a rich and varied collection of resources. It minimised the traditional hierarchies that exist within an institution by removing the barriers between students and staff, and although they were tentative to begin with, by the end they were more than happy to share their views and say when they respectively disagreed with an idea. As Healey, Flint, and Harrington state (3), this improves a student's sense of belonging and helps them identify their place within the institution as not just a consumer but a contributor. The reflection phase To evaluate whether the role was appropriately challenging and was also meeting the students’ expectations, a mid-year, anonymous evaluation was conducted. When asked if they felt they had the opportunity to collaborate on the project, all of them stated yes, with one student going on to say: “Yes, I have had the opportunity to collaborate with different students and colleagues.” Demonstrating that they have had the chance to work with others outside the team too. The key themes that came through when asked what they have enjoyed the most includes interviewing students, creating the resources, and having the opportunity to collaborate with other students who are not on the same course as them. One student stated: “The most important lesson I've learnt is the importance of teamwork.” When asked what impact they think they have had, the main theme was supporting students and staff in the university through the creation of the resources and toolkit. The students also stated that they felt a sense of accomplishment that their hard work and involvement in the project will result in a better experience for staff and students and that their ideas and individual voices have been listened to. A challenge that was overcome throughout the students involvement was the lack of engagement in Teams. Communication was sometimes poor between the students and me, resulting in tasks not being completed by the given deadline. This was likely due to the time of year and the fact they had competing responsibilities such as assignments, exams, and dissertation hand-ins. This was overcome by creating a meeting action log so that they knew who the tasks were for and when they were due. On reflection, I feel both privileged and humbled to have worked with a dedicated, enthusiastic, and hard-working group of individuals who made the last six months fly by. The toolkit we have created is one to be proud of and it could not have been possible without their individual areas of expertise, knowledge, and creative thought. Co-creation is a worthwhile experience that I believe should be conducted much more regularly within Higher Education. References
1 Comment
|
AuthorsBlogs from across the Positive Digital Practices project team Archives
April 2023
Categories |