Challenge

Within the Bachelor of Music (Honours) program, students undertake an independent research project, culminating in an 8000-12000-word dissertation. Students are supported by two compulsory Music Research Design courses (MRD1; MRD2) that run concurrently with their research project (trimester 1 and 2 respectively), developing the research skills they need to implement their projects and complete their dissertations. While MRD1 had undergone much-needed enhancements, MRD2 required further refinement.

In previous iterations of this course, while students appreciated the flexibility, the personalised attention to their projects and the ability to seek feedback in relation to their work, one of the challenges noted is that students are inevitably at different stages of their research each week. This means that the week’s topics and learning activities are inconsistently relevant or meaningful to students throughout the trimester. Other constructive feedback has focused on assessment tasks, such as due date and assessment type, as pressures mount towards submission of their final Honours dissertation. I also noted old assessment tasks with little educational value, being a repeat of MRD1’s formats, and the need to re-evaluate the structure of the course.

These challenges have been intensified by QCGU’s return to a semester calendar, which means that Honours dissertations are now due Friday of week 12 rather than after the trimester has finished. This makes any assessment from week 9 onwards (previously 40% of assessment load) redundant for providing meaningful feedback that can inform students’ final dissertation.

Following my research into student engagement and students as partners, which focuses on working with students instead of for students, I sought to understand how a course convenor can work in partnership with students to plan the learning activities and assessment items for this course in order to increase relevance and ownership of learning. This project relates to the 2019 iteration of MRD2 and was supported by a Griffith AEL (Arts Education Law) Teaching Development Grant.

Approach

Recognising the insights that students and graduates bring to their courses, I invited the current (2019) cohort and 2018 graduates to collaborate in evaluating and enhancing the course. Eight of 11 current students and two of the eight 2018 graduates contacted chose to be involved.

There were two iterations of the planning meeting: one with Popular Music majors; and one with Classical and Composition majors. These meetings were two and a half hours in length and discussed assessment and learning activities. While the graduate students could only be present for the second group, one graduate provided her completed activity sheets prior to the first meeting as a springboard for discussion.

Planning meetings took place prior to trimester two and consisted of:

• SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analyses of the 2018 MRD2 assessment tasks;
• A discussion of potential new assessment opportunities;
• A timeline activity to explore potential due dates;
• A discussion of learning activities.

This resulted in significant changes to the assessment plan and learning activities:

There were also enhancements to the learning activities:

• we removed an evaluation of past dissertations as an assessment item, agreeing it was best suited to class activities;
• we replaced end of trimester presentations with local mid-semester conference poster presentations (QCRC Activate conference), enabling students to connect with the broader QCGU research community and to develop new presentation and networking skills;
• the written thesis reduction remained, but with flexible due dates, where students needed to consider time on task against time to incorporate feedback into their dissertations;
• student presentation panels were replaced with a reflective engagement portfolio connected to further-developed peer review activities and conference attendance during the Activate conference;
• all assessment items were completed by week 9, allowing for a one-week turnaround of feedback and two weeks to implement feedback into their final dissertations.

Two focus groups with students were conducted as part of this project: one after the planning meeting and prior to the course commencing; the other upon completion of the course. These explored student experiences with the collaborative course design process and the course itself, any perceived benefits of the partnership, challenges experienced and any insights for further course development or suggestions for future partnership initiatives.

• active learning was maintained, but the focus on peer review and discussions was increased;
• a stronger alignment was created between class topics and activities and students’ research needs, which was supported by the new assessment tasks and due dates;
• some topics changed or were condensed due to enhancements made in MRD1 (6003QCM) the trimester before;
• students played a more active role in shaping each week’s content;
• a greater emphasis was placed on addressing the challenges of Honours more broadly, including mindsets, procrastination and other productivity challenges and solutions.

Outcomes

This initiative resulted in some wonderful outcomes – both before, during and upon completion of the course. These have been worked into a conference proceeding article currently under review (a link will be made available in due course). In summary:

• assessments were perceived as highly relevant to their Honours dissertations, continuation to postgraduate research and to their development more broadly;
• consensus on course design was achieved through graduate input, providing a student lens which students respected and appreciated;
• students appreciated the transparency around the process as well as the product that was achieved through the planning meeting, and developed big-picture thinking;
• horizontal alignment of workload across the Honours program was appreciated, as was student input on assessment due dates and maintaining a level of flexibility throughout the course;
• students commenced the course with high levels of motivation, which was maintained throughout the trimester;
• students appreciated the high level of peer interactions and peer review embedded in the course and highlighted discussions as one of the most beneficial activities to their learning;
• the poster presentations during Activate was a highlight for students, indicating that students are willing to move out of their comfort zones when the benefits are known;
• student ownership of learning was high, which students attributed to their role in the decision-making process and their increased understanding of the course design process;
• students appreciated the empathy with which I met them, also noting they had increased empathy for course convenors in return;
• the existing rapport we established in T1 with Music Research Design 1 (6003QCM) likely aided students’ engagement, with them used to actively engaging and providing feedback and to my nurturing approach to learning and teaching;
• asking students questions about this process and outcomes invariably led to students comparing this course to undergraduate courses. Students had unfavourable memories of assessments with no apparent purpose, assessment due dates all arriving at once and the perception that convenors lack awareness of students’ holistic workloads. They were unanimous that the partnership approach addressed each of these challenges;
• upon completion of the course students reaffirmed their motivation, sense of ownership, and an appreciation of the process and the outcome. While one student thought the discussions and awareness were most important, over being involved in the decision-making process itself, the other students strongly disagreed, noting it was their involvement and input that meant the most to them.

To see the poster that was presented at Celebrating Learning and Teaching week 2019, click on the PDF attachment in the Media section below.

Enabling Technology

While I originally conceptualised this project as a series of planning meetings, focusing on assessment, class activities and final approvals respectively, student availability between trimesters proved challenging, with only one planning meeting taking place. After the initial planning meeting I therefore created online planning Word documents that students could edit and comment on in their own time, and provided Skype options for further discussions. Interestingly, students expressed a preference for in-person, real-time communication instead of email, files and Skype, which limited their involvement beyond the meeting.

The poster presentations were designed using PowerPoint in a way that was unfamiliar to students. Academic poster templates were readily available online and students took part in a workshop to learn the design expectations of an effective poster. Students described enjoying the creative element and the opportunity to consider their research projects in a visual way.

Implement

I believe we should involve students in discussions about the process of course design and curriculum choices, regardless of whether or not we are partnering with students. How and when this occurs will depend on the individual context of the course, educators and students. At minimum I believe we should involve them in discussions about the process of course design and curriculum choices early in their courses.

If you’re interested in partnering with students in elements of course design, I would recommend first involving them in discussions around their interests, goals, expectations and challenges, making explicit the relevance of their course in light of those discussions. You might then build some space into the assessment for collaboration, such as co-designing essay questions.

Given the great appreciation of horizontal alignment in assessment due dates and workload pressures across the program, I think we as convenors can also do more to discuss our courses with each other and to collaborate when planning assessments. I have started these discussions with colleagues and will continue to educate myself about other courses in the year levels I teach. I think any horizontal alignment can strengthen students’ learning and have a positive impact on their mental and emotional wellbeing.

Next Steps

This initiative has highlighted that curriculum design is less about the educator and more about the students, and that student feelings of involvement, belonging and ownership should not be underestimated. Its success was likely aided by Honours students arguably possessing well-developed levels of maturity and critical thinking skills, supported by pre-existing student-educator rapport.

I am now further convinced of the importance of involving students in the process of course design prior to them undertaking the courses, and not only through formal end of trimester student experience surveys and informal mid-trimester feedback. I will continue to invite students to roundtable course evaluation discussions and explore how to best engage students with this opportunity.

Questions remain about how such an approach to partnerships might unfold with earlier undergraduate courses, especially when cohorts are larger or there is no pre-existing student-teacher relationship. Other strategies for enhancing student belonging, motivation and ownership of learning beyond partnerships requires further thought and research.

Support Resources

• Students as Partners

  Professor Mick Healey is a leader in Students as Partners initiatives. His website houses many resources that may provide further inspiration for students as partners projects you might undertake with your own students.

• International Journal for Students as Partners

  The International Journal for Students as Partners (IJSaP) is a new journal about learning and teaching together in higher education. IJSaP explores new perspectives, practices, and policies regarding how students and staff are working in partnership.

• Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education (special edition)

  This special edition journal explores various creative and diverse partnership practices currently unfolding within Australia.

Contributed by

• Arts, Education and Law
  Queensland Conservatorium
  Dr Leah Coutts
  (07) 373 56345
  l.coutts@griffith.edu.au
  
• Learning Futures
  

Preferred Citation

Coutts, L (2020). Enhancing an honours research course with students rather than for students. Retrieved from https://app.secure.griffith.edu.au/exlnt/entry/9209/view