Using peer observations as a platform for developing expert students and

enabling student voice

Dr Valerie Hall Professional Development Manager Valerie.Hall@staffs.ac.uk @318Val

Introduction

•My background

•Why this research topic?

•Focus for today

The background: why this topic?

• Student Voice Initiatives

• An opportunity to contribute to knowledge in the poorly-documented area of post-compulsory education: some case studies did exist, mainly in the compulsory-aged sector, but these were largely anecdotal with sparse formal research

• A desire to join the component parts together: students with teaching staff; and students with teaching staff and the organisation

Policy drivers and key texts

• Policy: DfES (2003) 21st Century Skills: Realising our potential;

DfES (2003) Every Child Matters; DfES (2004) Five Year Strategy for

Children and Learners: Putting people at the heart of public services;

DfES (2005) 14 – 19 Education and Skills; Leitch Review (2006);

DfES (2006a) FE White Paper Further Education: Raising skills,

improving life chances; DfES (2006b) Personalising Further

Education: Developing a vision

• Initiatives: LSC (2007) Developing a Learner Involvement Strategy;

QIA (2007; 2008) Exploring the concept of the expert learner

• Case studies: Powney and Hall (1998); Fielding (2004; 2007) and

Rudduck and Fielding (2006); Cockburn (2005); Gunter and

Thomson (2006; 2007); McGregor (2006); Collinson (2007); Forrest

et al (2007); Shuttle (2007); Walker and Logan (2008)

My research questions

1. Why do we ask our learners to tell us what they think? For whose benefit and to what purpose?

2. How do learners’ self-perceptions influence their involvement with learner voice initiatives (perceived trajectories, sense of self and identity)?

3. What are the issues around language, locus of power, tensions and conflict?

4. What are the implications for practice?

The format

• HE in FE curriculum areas were approached with an action research outline for a small-scale study

• A potential area volunteered: initial teacher training (2-year DTTLS course)

• Eight members of staff on the team volunteered to be involved, and two of their respective second year groups were approached with a research outline

• Two volunteer student participants came forward (to observe first year groups): one from each group

• An interpretivist approach used semi-structured interviews (phenomenological perspective)

• Data were coded to relevant theoretical frameworks and concepts to establish themes

How was this done?

• Through peer observations, teaching staff had the opportunity to engage in a learning conversation with students

• Use of a pro-forma to provide a framework for the observations and post-observation dialogue

• This conversation was then used as a developmental vehicle to improve the teaching and learning experience for both staff and students

• It then had the potential to inform practice and organisational developments

The data analysis

•Nvivo (Computer Aided Qualitative Data Analysis Software – CAQDAS)

•Identification of themes – how these link to theoretical frameworks/concepts and the research questions

•How deep and how broad?

Two main theoretical frameworks

• Communities of practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998; 2000)

• Ecological learning systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Boylan, 2005; Hodgson and Spours, 2009)

Two models: similarities and differences

• Defined ‘communities’;

• Boundaries and specific roles (bridging, brokering);

• Legitimate peripheral participation;

• Research focus traditionally on workplace – master/apprentice model.

• Relationships are more fluid, though still inter-connected;

• Each level will interact with the other three – multi-directional;

• Partnership learning – shared frameworks for creative action - collaboration;

• Limited research in this area.

Communities of Practice Ecological Learning Systems

Were they enough?

• Commonalities: Issues around norms, behaviours, language, trust – how these are used; locus of power

• Levels: micro (learner), meso (professional practice), exo (institutional, local, regional) and macro (national)

• ‘Communities’: may become defined as much by whom and what they include/exclude

• Context: compulsory or post-compulsory education – different identities may ‘fit’ contexts better, have different outcomes.

• NO - a new ‘continuum of practice’ was devised to reflect the oscillation between and across the two frameworks

New: a Continuum of Practice From ………. Continuum To……….

Communities of practice Ecological learning systems

Relationships

Sustained mutual relationships – harmonious or conflicting Transitory, more fluid – a functioning unit, collaborative; changing

temporal orientations and relationships to other structures

Working together

Joint enterprise – shared ways of engaging in doing things

together

Interdependent relationships; impact on other areas of work and life

Information exchange

The rapid flow of information and propagation of innovation Bi-directional influences (transactional);actor and environment affected

by engagement

Getting started/progress

Absence of introductory preambles, as if conversations and

interactions were merely the continuation of an on-going process

Routes and outcomes develop within contexts that are changing and

subject to re-evaluation and reflection

Very quick set up of a problem to be discussed New forms of collaboration, self-organising and adaptive

Substantial overlap in participants’ descriptions of who belongs Environment evolves and changes naturally as a result of actions

Knowledge

Knowing what others know, what they can do and how they can

contribute to an enterprise; enactment of particular roles

(master-apprentice)

Strongest influences impact in two directions: mutual interaction,

including peer-to-peer; active decision-making

Identity

Mutually defining identities; value placed upon knowledge and

position within the community; identity ratified and given value

by others

Capacity/influence to shape wider sense of local identities; identity

created through transactions with others

The ability to assess the appropriateness of actions and products Individual actors engage with context

Certain styles recognised as displaying membership; ‘collective’

agency; context engages with ‘actors’

Sense of ‘self’ not as a component within community of practice:

agency

Language

Specific tools, representations and other artefacts Informal, not structured

Local lore, shared stories, inside jokes, knowing laughter;

conforming; dependency

Independent, non-conformist

Jargon and shortcuts to communication as well as the ease of

producing new ones

Language represents the individual, the system level, does not need to

move across

Reification

A shared discourse reflecting a certain perspective on the world Variable and changing orientations; individual perspectives

Power

Hierarchical, value placed upon knowledge and position Devolution of power

Sense of Self

• Self-perceptions and identity: self-concept (Cooley, 1902; Schaffer, 2000; Hughes et al. 2011); self-categorisation (Turner et al. 1994; Greeno et al. 1996; Turner, 1999; Oyserman et al. 2011); self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997a, 1997b)

• Metacognition (Ertmer and Newby, 1996; Entwistle, 2000; Veenman et al. 2006; Kolb and Kolb, 2010)

Teachers who were in observation ‘pairs’

• Reported the process as being ‘liberating’

• Found the opportunity to discuss the observed session with a ‘learner’ provided them with a completely different perspective

• It helped to clarify their thoughts before they provided feedback to the member of staff observed (although feedback was not included in the original research design)

• Were aware of the potential for power imbalance with the student

• Found the pro-forma useful as a framework

• Felt it was important that everyone involved was clear about the purpose of the observation – and mindful of confidentiality

Teachers who were ‘observed’

•Original research had no requirement for formal feedback to be given to the ‘observed’ member of staff, however, this was requested

• Staff were keen to get this feedback – it was not the ‘usual’ peer observation feedback

• This resulted in a very ‘rich’ conversation between the two teachers (observer and observee) and was experienced as more productive than normal ‘peer observation’ feedback

• Staff talked about ‘fresh insights’ and ‘having the mirror held up’

Students in the observation pairs

• Found the opportunity to discuss the teaching and learning to be of great value – they felt involved in the learning process

• They felt that their opinions were valued – and of value

• It encouraged greater reflection on their own learning – this also included some aspects connected to what made them engage/disengage with the teaching, which they recognised in the classroom

• They also felt it was a positive way to improve teaching and the learning experience for other learners

Questions for the institution: how do we become a learning-led, as well as a teaching-led organisation?

• Partnership approach to teaching and learning

• Teacher and learner have a reflective, and reflecting, discussion as perceptions are shared and explored (Schaffer, 2000; Oyserman et al. 2011)

• Pro-forma used as an important supportive ‘scaffold’

• Developmental implications are addressed around the awareness, and expectations, of both staff and learners in relation to this approach (Cockburn, 2005; Donnelly, 2007)

• Responsibility which lies with the ‘partner’ teacher in the relationship: facilitation of the process; enabling the learner in their participation and exploration of their ideas around learning – their metacognitive development

What has happened since?

Follow-on pilot at Staffordshire University

Working with Jo Carruthers (AGL), School of Social Work, Allied and Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences

Paramedics and ODP’s (Operating Department Practitioners)

Paired ‘peer observations’ – students and staff

Forthcoming publication: Hall, V. (2014). Peer Observations as a Vehicle for Engaging with the Student Voice: A Phenomenological Inquiry. In SAGE Research Methods Cases. London, United Kingdom: SAGE Publications, Ltd. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/978144627305013508713

…..over to you

References (1) • Bandura, A. (1997a) Self-efficacy. The Exercise of Control. W. H. Freeman and Company: New York • Bandura, A. (1997b) Social Learning Theory. Prentice-Hall: New Jersey • Boylan, M. (2005) School classrooms: Communities of practice or ecologies of practices? Paper presented at 1st Socio-Cultural Theory in Educational

Research, September 2005 Manchester University, UK. Available from: http://orgs.man.ac.uk/projects/include/experiment/mark_boyland.pdf • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979) The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press: Cambridge

• Cockburn, J. (2005) Perspectives and Politics of Classroom Observation. The Research and Development Bulletin Vol. 3, No. 2, pp 45 – 55

• Collinson, D. (2007) Leadership and the Learner Voice in Researching Leadership in the Learning and Skills Sector: By the Sector, On the Sector, For the Sector Vol. 4, pp 4 – 29

• Cooley, C. H. (1902) Human Nature and Social Order. Charles Scribner: New York

• DfES (2003) 21st Century Skills: Realising our potential CM 5810, Norwich: HMSO Available from: ww.dfes.gov.uk/skillsstrategy/_pdfs/whitePaper_PDFID4.pdf

• DfES (2003) Every Child Matters CM 5860, Norwich: HMSO Available from: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/EveryChildMatters.pdf

• DfES (2004) Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners: Putting people at the heart of public services Cm6272 Norwich: HMSO Available from: www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/5yearstrategy

• DfES (2005) 14 – 19 Education and Skills, CM 6476, Norwich: HMSO Available from: www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/14-19educationandskills/ • DfES (2006a) FE White Paper Further Education: Raising skills, improving life chances Available from: www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/furthereducation • DfES (2006b) Personalising Further Education: Developing a vision Available from:

ww.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/DfES%20Personalisation.pdf • Entwistle, N. (2000) Promoting deep learning through teaching and assessment: conceptual frameworks and educational contexts. Paper presented at

the TLRP Conference, Leicester, November 2000 Available from: http://www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk/publications.html • Ertmer, P. A., and Newby, T. J. (1996) The expert learner: strategic, self-regulated and reflective. Instructional Science. Vol. 24, pp 1 – 24

• Fielding, M. (2004) Transformative approaches to student voice: theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp 295 – 311

• Fielding, M. (2007) Jean Rudduck (1937 – 2007) ‘Carving a new order of experience’: a preliminary appreciation of the work of Jean Rudduck in the field of student voice, Education Action Research, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp 323 – 336

• Forrest, C., Lawton, J., Adams, A., Louth, T., and Swain, I. (2007) The Impact of Learner Voice on Quality Improvement in Leadership and the Learner Voice in Researching Leadership in the Learning and Skills Sector: By the Sector, On the Sector, For the Sector Vol. 4 pp 4 – 29

• Greeno, J. G., Pearson, P. D. and Schoenfeld, A., H. (1996) Achievement and Theories of Knowing and Learning, pp 136 – 153 in Learning and Knowledge (eds) McCormick, R., and Paechter, C. Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd: London.

• Gunter, H. and Thomson, P. (2006) From ‘consulting pupils’ to ‘pupils as researchers’: a situated case narrative British Educational Research Journal Vol. 32, No. 6, pp 839 – 856

• Gunter, H. and Thomson, P. (2007) Learning about student voice. Support for Learning, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp 181 – 188. Blackwell Publishing Ltd: London

References (2) • Hodgson, A. and Spours, K. (2009) Institution for Lifelong Learning: Collaborative Local Learning Ecologies: Reflections on the Governance of

Lifelong Learning in England. Sector Paper 6. • Hughes, A., Galbraith, D., and White, D. (2011) Perceived competence: a common core for self -efficacy and self-concept? Journal of Personality

Assessment. Vol. 93, No. 3, pp 278 – 289 • Kolb, A., and Kolb, D. (2010) On becoming a learner: the concept of learning identity. An essay appearing in Bamford-Rees et al. (eds) Learning

never ends: Essays on adult learning inspired by the life and work of David O. Justice, Chicago, IL: CAEL Form and News. Avai lable from: http://learningfromexperience.com/media/2010/05/on-becoming-a-learner-the-concept-of-learning-identity.pdf

• Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice, pp 111 – 126, in Supporting lifelong learning, Vol. 1, Perspectives on learning (eds) Harrison, R., Reeve, F., Hanson, A. and Clarke, J. (2002) Routledge Falmer: London

• LSC (2007) Developing a Learner Involvement Strategy: A handbook for the Further Education sector Available from: http://www.excellencegateway.org.uk/page.aspx?o=207689

• McGregor, J. (2007) Recognising student leadership: schools and networks as sites of opportunity. Improving Schools. Vol. 10 , No. 1, pp 86 – 101 • Oyserman, D., Elmore, K., and Smith, G. (2011) Self, Self-concept and Identity in Handbook of Self and Identity (eds) Leary, M., and Tangney, J.

(2011) Guildford Press: New York • Powney, J., and Hall, S. (1998) Closing the loop. The Impact of Student Feedback on Students’ Subsequent Learning. Scottish Counci l for

Research in Education. Report No. 90 • Quality Improvement Agency (2007) Pursuing Excellence: the National Improvement Strategy for the Further Education system, Co ventry: QIA

Available from: www.qia.org.uk/pursuingexcellence • Quality Improvement Agency (2008) Exploring the concept of the expert learner. Available from:

http://tlp.excellencegateway.org.uk/tlp/xcurricula/developing-the-expert-learner.html • Rudduck, J. and Fielding, M. (2006) Student voice and the perils of popularity. Educational Review. Vol. 58, No. 2, pp 219 – 231 • Schaffer, H. R. (2000) Social Development. Blackwell Publishers Ltd: Oxford • Shuttle, J.(2007) Learner Involvement in Decision Making in Researching Leadership in the Learning and Skills Sector: By the Sector, On the

Sector, For the Sector. Vol. 4 pp 4 – 29 • Turner, J. C. (1999) Some Current Issues in Research on Social Identity and Self -categorisation Theories pp 6 - 34 in Ellemers, N., Spears, R., and

Doojse, B. (eds) Social Identity: context, commitment, content. Blackwell: Oxford • Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., McGarty, C. (1994) Self and Collective: cognition and social Context. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology. Vol. 20, No. 5, 454-463 • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., and Afflerbach, P. (2006) Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological

considerations. Metacognition Learning. Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp 3 – 14 • Walker, L., and Logan, A. (2008) Learner Engagement. A review of learner voice initiatives across the UK’s education sectors . Available from:

www.futurelab.org.uk • Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge University Press: New York • Wenger, E. (2000) Communities of practice and social learning systems, pp 160 – 179, in Supporting lifelong learning, Vol. 2, Organising learning

(eds) Reeve, F., Cartwright, M. and Edwards, R. (2002) Routledge Falmer: London

The next part of the session will provide delegates with opportunities to:

• Evaluate own practice in relation to ‘student voice’

• Consider how to develop strategies which can engage students in knowledge partnerships

• Recognise implications in relation to students’ self-perceptions

• Explore implications in relation to language, power and relationships

• Identify potential opportunities for own practice and ways forward

Questions for you to consider:

1. What does student voice mean to me?

2. How could I involve my students? What would be the purpose, and what would be the benefit – for staff, for students?

3. How might students’ self-perceptions influence their involvement with such student voice initiatives?

4. What might be the issues around language, locus of power, tensions and conflict?

5. What are the implications for practice?

So, what are you going to do to involve your students in knowledge partnerships?