student feedback and leadership - Office for Learning and Teaching

Part B: Building Leadership Capacity
Introduction
Part B presents the experience of the three Action Research Teams established
as part of this project to create a shared sense of purpose between members
in using student feedback. As outlined in Part A the three ARTs represented
each of the three academic Colleges (Business, Design and Social Context and
Science, Engineering and Technology) of the University. These three disciplinary
areas identified low levels of student satisfaction in some areas and volunteered
to become part of this project as follows:
––
School of Economics, Finance and Marketing, College of Business
(Case Study 1).
Four courses were chosen from primarily core first year courses
in Business Statistics, Marketing Principles, Macroeconomics, and Prices
and Markets. These courses are common to a number of undergraduate
Business degrees with a total of 1000-1500 students (onshore) per year
in lecture cohorts. The issue chosen was courses with large enrolments
and low student satisfaction.
––
School of Property, Construction and Project Management,
College of Design and Social Context (DSC) (Case Study 2).
Two courses were chosen, one a final year course in Construction
Management with 85 students and the other a first year course
in Computer Aided Drafting with 21 students. The issue chosen
was teaching capabilities in course delivery, including how teaching
capabilities were affected by the quality of the learning environment
which has affected student satisfaction.
––
School of Mathematical and Geospatial Sciences, College of Science
Engineering and Technology (SET) (Case Study 3).
Two courses in mathematics are taught as ‘service’ courses across
a broad range of Programs, each with 220 students from mixed
disciplines. The issue chosen was service teaching large classes
which affect student satisfaction.
The ARTs were supported by small incentive grants to assist their activities.
Each ART retained ownership of their contribution to the project activities.
While the focus of these case studies is on actions taken by the ARTs
aimed at improving student feedback, they each demonstrate leadership
capacity building in the design, implementation and assessment of strategies
implemented. Each of the case studies demonstrate the need for holistic
change leadership to improve student learning and teaching as summarised
in the R.E.A.L.I.S.E.D Change Management Model presented in Part One.
In each case study action by individual academics (and teams of academics)
to change their teaching practice requires an interlinked supportive process.
Change in teaching practices introduced in the case studies includes:
––
Use of technology to provide students with instant feedback on their
understanding of key concepts and individual performance relative
to peers and to provide additional commentary and feedback
to students on key points raised in lectures and by students.
––
Introduction of ‘drop-in’ sessions to supplement lectures and tutorials.
Page 85