Search

To explore the affective domains embedded in academic development and teacher practice, a team of academic developers was invited to consider a poem and how it reflects the emotions and feelings underpinning experiences as teachers within Higher Education. We used a method of arts-informed, collective biography to evaluate a poem to draw upon and share memories to interrogate lived experiences. Our research is framed using the lens of pedagogic frailty model to see how affective and discursive encounters are produced and impact us. We contend that collective arts-based and biographical approaches can provide alternative ways for ourselves and teachers to examine their own pedagogic frailty.

The higher education literature on feedback has generally explored spoken feedback delivered on a summative written assignment. In contrast, this study explores spoken feedback as part of the teacher-student dialogue in classroom interaction (i.e. feedback talk). Drawing on a discourse analysis approach we identified linguistic and rhetorical indicators of feedback talk and found a number of common patterns in six seminar events. Interviews with two teachers revealed a perception that feedback was an inherent part of the teaching and learning process and agreement on the significance of feedback talk in supporting relationships. We argue that a recognition and understanding of feedback talk can support the relational dimension of feedback literacy in the micro-moments of learning and teaching. We frame our discussion of feedback talk and teacher feedback literacy within the wider context of learning and teaching and call for a more holistic perspective on feedback.

There is growing recognition that socio-constructivist representations of feedback processes, where students build their own understanding through engaging with and discussing feedback information, are more appropriate than cognitivist transmission-oriented models. In parallel, practice has developed away from hard-copy handwritten or typed feedback comments, towards the provision of e-feedback in learning management systems (LMS). Through thematic analysis of activity-oriented focus groups with 33 undergraduate students, the present study aimed to explore: (1) students' experience of engaging with feedback in the LMS; (2) barriers to students' engagement; and (3) students' perceptions of the potential for technology to ameliorate these barriers. The data reveal particular barriers to engagement created by the LMS environment; grades and feedback are commonly separated spatially, limiting attention to the latter. Additionally, the distributed location of feedback from different tasks limits synthesis of feedback. Nevertheless, students perceived that the LMS environment affords opportunities for addressing such challenges, particularly in relation to the potential for a tool to synthesise feedback information across modules, and to direct students to resources to develop their skills. The findings are discussed in the context of cycles of engagement with feedback, and implications for the principled use of technology in feedback processes are discussed.

The move from elite to mass systems of higher education has been accompanied by concerns relating to the quality of provision and standards, particularly in relation to the increasing proportion of higher grades awarded to students. Bayesian multilevel models were used to investigate the temporal trend of grade attainment in 101 higher education providers across the UK, between the 2009/10 and 2018/19 academic years, to understand if rising grades are due to inflation or a consequence of improvements across the higher education system. The results suggest a much more positive and proactive picture of a higher education system that is engaged in a process of continuous enhancement. The unexplained variables, rather than automatically being labelled as grade inflation, should instead point to a need to investigate further the local institutional contextual factors that inform grade distribution. The deficit lens through which 'grade inflation' is often perceived is a damaging and unhelpful distraction. Measures, such as improved assessment literacy, are suggested as approaches that the sector could adopt to further develop its understanding of grade improvement as opposed to grade inflation.

The concept of recipience is emerging within the literature as a useful idea to inform our understanding of student engagement with feedback. In this paper, the applicability of the concept of recipience is broadened from its origins in the literature on student feedback to consider its role in developing student knowledge structures that are more receptive to development. This will promote cumulative/meaningful learning that is required to construct professional knowledge. By drawing on Legitimation Code Theory, and visualising the morphology of target knowledge structures in relation to their position on the semantic plane (of semantic gravity vs. semantic density), a fresh perspective is offered to inform student learning that can suggest ways of enhancing the quality of student learning. This is achieved by explicitly enabling the construction of a more coherent perspective of the knowledge terrain generated by complex curricula.

External scrutiny of higher education courses is evident globally, but the use of an external examiner from another institution for the purposes of quality assurance has been a distinguishing feature of UK higher education since the 1830s. However, the changing higher education context has led to mounting criticism of the system and the identification of a number of largely unchallenged assumptions underpinning it. One such assumption is that external examiners are assessment literate. This study evaluates levels of assessment literacy demonstrated within the written reports of external examiners. Findings indicate variable levels of assessment literacy and identify aspects of the concept that require attention. Wider questions concerning the conceptualization and future development of the external examining system are considered.

The emerging literature related to feedback literacy has hitherto focused primarily on students' engagement with feedback, and yet an analysis of academics' feedback literacy is also of interest to those seeking to understand effective strategies to engage with feedback. Data from concept map-mediated interviews and reflections, with a team of six colleagues, surface academics' responses to receiving critical feedback via scholarly peer review. Our findings reveal that feedback can be visceral and affecting, but that academics employ a number of strategies to engage with this process. This process can lead to actions that are both instrumental, enabling academics to more effectively 'play the game' of publication, as well as to learning that is more positively and holistically developmental. This study thus aims to open up a dialogue with colleagues internationally about the role of feedback literacy, for both academics and students. By openly sharing our own experiences we seek to normalise the difficulties academics routinely experience whilst engaging with critical feedback, to share the learning and strategies which can result from peer review feedback, and to explore how academics may occupy a comparable role to students who also receive evaluation of their work.

The quality assurance 'regime' that spans the higher education sector internationally is underpinned by a number of unchallenged assumptions. Nowhere is this more apparent than within the external examiner system in the UK, an instrument for the professional self-regulation of higher education. One such assumption is that external examiners are assessment literate. Within higher education assessment literacy is a concept in its infancy, but one that has the capacity to reverse the deterioration of confidence in academic standards. Whilst the concept is becoming integrated into the sectorial vernacular, its fluid and negotiated nature is under-conceptualised. The primary aim of this article lies in investigating the extent of external examiners' assessment literacy and to use this as a base to initiate a discussion surrounding the development of a shared discourse of assessment literacy, thereby providing a tool for greater conceptualisation.

In this study, members of a higher education department explore their research activity and how it influences their practice as academic developers in a research-led institution. While the research activities of the team members appear diverse, they are all underpinned by a shared set of professional values to provide an anchor for these activities. Research-as-pedagogy and the relationship between the discourses of research and teaching are explored using Bernstein's knowledge structures. The authors conclude that differences in research focus (horizontal discourse) provide dynamism across a department and that stability is provided through the underpinning core values inherent in the vertical discourse.

After spending a year working on the development of a new online Master's programme in higher education, members of the development team were interviewed to reveal their thoughts about the nature of the programme. The dialogue of each interview was summarised as a concept map. Analysis of the resulting maps included a modified Bernsteinian analysis of the focus of the concepts included in terms of their semantic gravity (i.e. closeness to context) and the degree of resonance with the underpinning regulative discourse of the programme. Data highlight a number of potential issues for programme delivery that centre around the use of appropriate language to manage student expectations in relation to the process of learning and the emotional responses this can stimulate, as well as the tensions that can be foregrounded between the demands of teaching and research within a university environment.

Assessment is fundamental to student learning and achievement. However, whilst research consistently emphasises the role of assessment in supporting the development of the learner, the reality of assessment processes and practices in higher education is frequently indicated to fall someway short. This article aims to contribute to a shared understanding of the discourse surrounding assessment in higher education in the UK, and presents a synopsis of the role of assessment in curriculum change. Key drivers for change, the inhibitory role of the dominant discourse of assessment and suggestions for future development towards an assessment for learning culture, are considered as a means of giving greater prioritisation to assessment than is currently afforded.

The higher education literature on feedback has generally explored spoken feedback delivered on a summative written assignment. In contrast, this study explores spoken feedback as part of the teacher – student dialogue in classroom interaction (i.e. feedback talk). Drawing on a discourse analysis approach we identified linguistic and rhetorical indicators of feedback talk and found a number of common patterns in six seminar events. Interviews with two teachers revealed a perception that feedback was an inherent part of the teaching and learning process and agreement on the significance of feedback talk in supporting relationships. We argue that a recognition and understanding of feedback talk can support the relational dimension of feedback literacy in the micro-moments of learning and teaching. We frame our discussion of feedback talk and teacher feedback literacy within the wider context of learning and teaching and call for a more holistic perspective on feedback. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of recipience is emerging within the literature as a useful idea to inform our understanding of student engagement with feedback. In this paper, the applicability of the concept of recipience is broadened from its origins in the literature on student feedback to consider its role in developing student knowledge structures that are more receptive to development. This will promote cumulative/meaningful learning that is required to construct professional knowledge. By drawing on Legitimation Code Theory, and visualising the morphology of target knowledge structures in relation to their position on the semantic plane (of semantic gravity vs. semantic density), a fresh perspective is offered to inform student learning that can suggest ways of enhancing the quality of student learning. This is achieved by explicitly enabling the construction of a more coherent perspective of the knowledge terrain generated by complex curricula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The move from elite to mass systems of higher education has been accompanied by concerns relating to the quality of provision and standards, particularly in relation to the increasing proportion of higher grades awarded to students. Bayesian multilevel models were used to investigate the temporal trend of grade attainment in 101 higher education providers across the UK, between the 2009/10 and 2018/19 academic years, to understand if rising grades are due to inflation or a consequence of improvements across the higher education system. The results suggest a much more positive and proactive picture of a higher education system that is engaged in a process of continuous enhancement. The unexplained variables, rather than automatically being labelled as grade inflation, should instead point to a need to investigate further the local institutional contextual factors that inform grade distribution. The deficit lens through which 'grade inflation' is often perceived is a damaging and unhelpful distraction. Measures, such as improved assessment literacy, are suggested as approaches that the sector could adopt to further develop its understanding of grade improvement as opposed to grade inflation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing recognition that socio-constructivist representations of feedback processes, where students build their own understanding through engaging with and discussing feedback information, are more appropriate than cognitivist transmission-oriented models. In parallel, practice has developed away from hard-copy handwritten or typed feedback comments, towards the provision of e-feedback in learning management systems (LMS). Through thematic analysis of activity-oriented focus groups with 33 undergraduate students, the present study aimed to explore 1) students' experience of engaging with feedback in the LMS; 2) barriers to students' engagement; and 3) students' perceptions of the potential for technology to ameliorate these barriers. The data reveal particular barriers to engagement created by the LMS environment; grades and feedback are commonly separated spatially, limiting attention to the latter. Additionally, the distributed location of feedback from different tasks limits synthesis of feedback. Nevertheless, students perceived that the LMS environment affords opportunities for addressing such challenges, particularly in relation to the potential for a tool to synthesise feedback information across modules, and to direct students to resources to develop their skills. The findings are discussed in the context of cycles of engagement with feedback, and implications for the principled use of technology in feedback processes are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emerging literature related to feedback literacy has hitherto focused primarily on students' engagement with feedback, and yet an analysis of academics' feedback literacy is also of interest to those seeking to understand effective strategies to engage with feedback. Data from concept map-mediated interviews and reflections, with a team of six colleagues, surface academics' responses to receiving critical feedback via scholarly peer review. Our findings reveal that feedback can be visceral and affecting, but that academics employ a number of strategies to engage with this process. This process can lead to actions that are both instrumental, enabling academics to more effectively 'play the game' of publication, as well as to learning that is more positively and holistically developmental. This study thus aims to open up a dialogue with colleagues internationally about the role of feedback literacy, for both academics and students. By openly sharing our own experiences we seek to normalise the difficulties academics routinely experience whilst engaging with critical feedback, to share the learning and strategies which can result from peer review feedback, and to explore how academics may occupy a comparable role to students who also receive evaluation of their work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The quality assurance 'regime' that spans the higher education sector internationally is underpinned by a number of unchallenged assumptions. Nowhere is this more apparent than within the external examiner system in the UK, an instrument for the professional self-regulation of higher education. One such assumption is that external examiners are assessment literate. Within higher education assessment literacy is a concept in its infancy, but one that has the capacity to reverse the deterioration of confidence in academic standards. Whilst the concept is becoming integrated into the sectorial vernacular, its fluid and negotiated nature is under-conceptualised. The primary aim of this article lies in investigating the extent of external examiners' assessment literacy and to use this as a base to initiate a discussion surrounding the development of a shared discourse of assessment literacy, thereby providing a tool for greater conceptualisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After spending a year working on the development of a new online Master’s programme in higher education, members of the development team were interviewed to reveal their thoughts about the nature of the programme. The dialogue of each interview was summarised as a concept map. Analysis of the resulting maps included a modified Bernsteinian analysis of the focus of the concepts included in terms of their semantic gravity (i.e. closeness to context) and the degree of resonance with the underpinning regulative discourse of the programme. Data highlight a number of potential issues for programme delivery that centre around the use of appropriate language to manage student expectations in relation to the process of learning and the emotional responses this can stimulate, as well as the tensions that can be foregrounded between the demands of teaching and research within a university environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assessment is fundamental to student learning and achievement. However, whilst research consistently emphasises the role of assessment in supporting the development of the learner, the reality of assessment processes and practices in higher education is frequently indicated to fall someway short. This article aims to contribute to a shared understanding of the discourse surrounding assessment in higher education in the UK, and presents a synopsis of the role of assessment in curriculum change. Key drivers for change, the inhibitory role of the dominant discourse of assessment and suggestions for future development towards an assessment for learning culture, are considered as a means of giving greater prioritisation to assessment than is currently afforded. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Marking in higher education is argued to be under-researched and from a poststructuralist perspective is a largely subjective process based on professional judgement that is grounded in assumptions of mutual understanding of disciplinary standards (Bloxham, 2009). However , within academic development, such mutual understanding may be difficult to achieve as many academic developers have different '…prior disciplinary identities and knowledge… and implicit assumptions about the nature of academic work' (Manathunga 2007, 32). But, if academic developers do not 'own their own disciplinary domain' (Brew, 2003: 170) and the underlying values and traditions of the field are contested, what ramifications might this have for marking? The findings of this empirical research based on semi-structured interviews, illuminates some of the implicit values and beliefs of academic developers that shape how marking is undertaken. The results indicate that subjectivity, rather than compromising the integrity of the grade, has the potential to be used as a tool for illuminating why mismatches between markers occur . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]