mmoloney – Learning & Growing Together

Students as Co-Authors of an Academic Skill Development Program

mmoloney General December 31, 2021 0 Comment

The shared article for this Learning and Growing session on December 17, 2021 was

Students as Co-authors of an Academic Development Service: A Case Study of the Study Skills Service at the University of Bristol

Gamble, S. C., Worth, T., Gilroy, P. & Newbold, S. (2020). Students as Co-authors of an Academic Development Service: A Case Study of the Study Skills Service at the University of Bristol. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 26(2-4), 275-290, DOI: 10.1080/13614533.2020.1784760

This article discussed the benefits and challenges of having students assist with the development of both a program akin to the current Academic Skills Development Program and its delivery.

A summary of this analysis is here, with the ‘Now What’ section discussed during the Learning and Growing session.

What? (Main concepts discussed)

So what? (What are the possible implications of this concept / information?)

Now what? (How are these implications to be actioned?)

· Changing perceptions of study support services from remedial to developmental is a challenge

· “Students as Partners (SaP)” – Discarding the power structure of learners and teachers (narrative style) to be a more collaborative process

· SaP model allows for a more reciprocal process whereby the students have more input on “curricular or pedagogical conceptualisation, decision-making, implementation, investigation, or analysis” (p.4).

· Modelled on similar PAL and PASS programs but focussed on skills development rather than subject specific information

· SaP principles:

a. Foster inclusive partnerships

b. Nurture power-sharing relationships through dialogue and reflection

c. Accept partnership as a process with uncertain outcomes

d. Engage in ethical partnerships

e. Enact partnership for transformation

· Student focus groups were used to identify the content of the curriculum

· Curriculum was informed by input from student focus group (i), input from academic skills team (ii), input from lecturers (iii) and input from research (iv)

· Facilitation of study skill workshops by students was mindful of limitations but the ‘permission to fail’ was built into the equity of the partnership

· Students reported wanting more input from the academic team via this process to avoid the problem of being too general in nature

Challenges

· Equity in partnerships; paying students for academic responsibilities has received criticism for ‘out-sourcing’ academic work to less qualified, lower pay-rate pseudo staff:

“It was accepted that the Advocates’ choices students receiving support which they did not find as useful as that offered by professional staff when delivering their sessions could potentially result in” (p.12)

Opportunities

· The essential skills modules are already created and can be used as a test for the further creation of resources.

· Utilisation of existing peer-learning program to inform development of materials (scoping evaluation of current practises and materials)

· Rethinking deployment of PASS Leaders in addition to PASS sessions

· Focus group (DSL) to devise the structure and content of program (F-to-F and online delivery)

· Focus group of lecturers and academic team members

· Co-development with Study Support and Library

· Understanding the mission (objectives) of the program (reciprocal nature of material development and delivery)

Zoom recording:

Topic: Learning and Growing
Start Time: Dec 17, 2021 10:28 AM

Meeting Recording:
https://charlessturt.zoom.us/rec/share/sUd6vkyr9tEK2MJQVZyy5tSAegDVVKtCTAvWd3-iaMzbK_k4mIZIxh5cFqn4vc9a.kaRWsLyyhfCD_77T

Communities of Practice in Landscapes of Practice

mmoloney General April 26, 2021April 26, 2021Communities of Practice, Landscapes of Practice, Learning and Growing, Networks of Practice, Professional Development, Study Group Australia 0 Comment

On the 16th of April we had an excellent discussion on the Pyrko, Dorfler and Eden (2019) article which focussed on understanding how engaging in communities of practice can be extended beyond functional groups (such as within the confines of the individual study support and library teams) but across broader areas of the organisation (known as the landscape of practice). This engagement allows for incidental learning, reinforcement of shared goals, and the adoption of norms that constitute an organisational culture.

Here is the recording of the discussion.

During the discussion, there was mention of the highly theoretical nature of the article that may have been challenging for those new to concepts within our learning session. I highly recommend this Introduction to Communities of Practice by the seminal authors on the topic (Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner): https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/

Here are some key take-away points from the article:

The social constructivist view of learning whereby knowledge is a product of a social process that allows for group members to draw on others’ performance in their role as a “cue for action” (p.484)
This learning process within a community of practice is largely dependent on the buy-in from members and this often results in differing degrees to which a person interacts meaningfully with
other members, and invests their identity (p.484)
A landscape of practice is the sharing of meaning between different communities, which
may be more challenging than learning within the boundaries of one community of practice: “Learning between different communities requires practitioners to be prepared to go through acts of transformation as they seek to understand how knowledge from another community may fit within the context of their own work, enriching and altering what they know” (p.485).
Taking time to allow for communities of practice to enjoy a shared thinking process is essential for membership to be nurtured, more than would be the case in a simple “deployment of knowledge” from one group member to another (p.489)
It’s essential that mere “islands of practice” (p.494), for example, the Learning and Growing hour, do not stand alone but are the basis of a more integrated approach to improving our program delivery to students and our growth as practitioners.
Attaining, maintaining, and participating in Networks of Practice (this network includes members of a shared field) allow value to be re-invested in the Landscapes of Practice or Communities of Practice.

Please feel free to leave a comment!

Thanks, Monique