SVP's

Bates, T., 2019. Teaching in a Digital Age: Guidelines for Designing Teaching and Learning. 2nd ed. Vancouver: Tony Bates Associates Ltd.

Bell, M., 2011. Peer Observation Partnerships in Higher Education. 2nd ed. Sydney: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA).

BERA (British Educational Research Association), 2018. Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. 4th ed. London: BERA.

Brookfield, S.D., 2017. Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brookfield, S.D., Rudolph, J. and Yeo, E.Z., 2019. The power of critical thinking in learning and teaching. An interview with Professor Stephen D. Brookfield. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 2(2), pp.76-90.

Bryman, A., 2016. Social Research Methods. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BSA (British Sociological Association), 2017. Statement of Ethical Practice. [online] Available at: https://www.britsoc.co.uk/media/24310/bsa_statement_of_ethical_practice.pdf [Accessed 30 October 2024].

Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2013. Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L., 2011. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Crenshaw, K., 1991. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp.1241-1299.

Denzin, N.K., 1978. The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Finlay, L., 2002. Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Research, 2(2), pp.209-230. DOI: 10.1177/146879410200200205.

Freire, P., 1968. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.

Geertz, C., 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.

Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, F.P., 2018. Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. 12th ed. Boston: Pearson Education.

Levychin, L., 2018. Cultural Intelligence in Higher Education: A Framework for Inclusivity. Journal of College Student Development, 59(4), pp.489-505.

Patton, M.Q., 1999. Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34(5), pp.1189-1208.

Piaget, J., 1973. To Understand is to Invent: The Future of Education. New York: Viking Press.

QAA, 2023. The Inclusive Education Framework. [online] Available at: https://www.qaa.ac.uk/membership/collaborative-enhancement-projects/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/the-inclusive-education-framework [Accessed 20 December 2024].

Thomas, C., 2022. Overcoming identity threat: Using persona pedagogy in intersectionality and inclusion training. Social Sciences, 11, p.249. DOI: 10.3390/socsci11060249.

Thomas, D.C., 2022. Cultural Intelligence: Living and Working Globally. 4th ed. Oxford: Routledge.

Vygotsky, L.S., 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Weimer, M., 2013. Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

The research methodology used in this study was primarily qualitative, supported by quantitative elements, to assess the effectiveness and impact of a student-led learning format. The following methods and approaches were applied to gather data and generate insights: 

1. Survey Methodology: I created a structured survey with a mix of closed and open-ended questions. The closed questions used a Likert scale (e.g., strongly agree to strongly disagree) to quantify attitudes and outcomes. The open-ended ones were there to dig deeper into personal reflections, challenges, and suggestions for improvement. 

Target Audience: The survey went out to the 24 students who participated in the session. The group was intentionally diverse, representing different cultural and academic backgrounds. 

Data Collection: The survey was given after the session to allow students to reflect. It asked about: 

• Engagement and participation 

• Inclusion and diversity of perspectives 

• Group dynamics 

• Theoretical application 

• Confidence-building 

• Interest in new initiatives (e.g., a podcast) 

• Peer feedback 

• Preparation and autonomy 

• Creativity 

Analysis: For the closed questions, I looked at the trends (e.g., percentage of students agreeing). For the open-ended responses, I used thematic analysis to pull out common themes and insights. 

2. Researcher Observations: I was both a participant and an observer during the session, taking notes on student interactions, group dynamics, and overall engagement. 

Methodology: 

• Participant Observation: I joined in and watched how students interacted, especially during discussions and presentations. 

• Non-participant Observation: I also stepped back at times to observe without direct involvement, which gave me a clearer picture of group behaviours. 

Data Collection: I kept detailed field notes throughout, focusing on things like: 

• How engaged students were 

• Confidence levels (or lack thereof) 

• How groups coordinated (or didn’t) 

• Creative strategies used in presentations 

• Moments of noticeable learning or realisation 

• How peer feedback played a role 

Analysis: I looked for recurring patterns in my notes, particularly those that either backed up or challenged what the survey data was showing. 

3. Triangulation Method: Triangulation helped me combine the survey and observation data for a fuller picture. The idea was to validate the findings by comparing different perspectives. 

How I Applied It: 

• Comparison: For example, if most students said they were highly engaged in the survey, I checked this against my own notes about their participation levels. 

• Convergence: Many findings overlapped (e.g., confidence-building and creativity), which reinforced their validity. 

• Divergence: Where things didn’t align—like when some students reported discomfort in the survey but seemed engaged in my observations—I noted these differences and thought about possible explanations, like group dynamics or preparation levels. 

4. Reflexive Approach: Throughout the study, I tried to stay aware of my own biases. I kept asking myself whether my perspective as a tutor might be shaping how I interpreted what I was seeing or hearing. 

5. Methodological Strengths and Limitations 

Strengths: 

• Using both surveys and observations gave me a richer, more rounded view of the session. 

• Observations provided real-time insights that a survey alone wouldn’t have captured. 

• The methods were student-focused, prioritising their voices and experiences. 

Limitations: 

• Self-Reporting Bias: Students might have given socially desirable answers in the survey. 

• Sample Size: With only 24 participants, the findings might not apply to a larger cohort. 

• Researcher Interpretation: My dual role as observer and tutor means my perspective might have influenced how I interpreted events. 

6. Summary of Methodological Integration: By combining surveys with direct observations, I was able to triangulate both quantitative and qualitative data. The surveys provided measurable trends, while my observations added depth and nuance. Together, these methods offered a well-rounded understanding of the session, highlighting both the outcomes and the learning process. 

These insights not only helped me understand the impact of the student-led format but also provided actionable takeaways for improving future sessions. 

Incorporating insights from both survey results and researcher observations, these recommendations address identified challenges and leverage the strengths of the peer-led learning approach: 

1. Sustain and Expand the Format 

The format fosters active participation, engagement, and creativity, though initial hesitancy and varying student needs were observed. 

Recommendation: 

• Integrate peer-led sessions more frequently into the curriculum to maintain engagement. 

• Alternate between structured sessions and flexible formats to balance creativity with tailored support for diverse student needs. 

2. Provide Additional Support for Group Dynamics and Time Management 

Challenges with group coordination, uneven participation, and occasional dominance by more confident students were identified. 

Recommendation: 

• Offer pre-session workshops focused on group dynamics, time management, and conflict resolution. 

• Assign defined roles within groups to ensure balanced participation, shared accountability, and smoother coordination. 

3. Tailored Support for Less Confident Students 

Less confident students demonstrated hesitancy in contributing at the start, though they gained confidence over time. 

Recommendation: 

• Provide optional coaching or preparatory resources, such as role-playing or confidence-building exercises, to support these students. 

• Use structured discussion prompts to create opportunities for quieter students to contribute. 

4. Explore the Podcast Initiative Strategically 

Interest in a student-led podcast exists, with a small, engaged group eager to participate. However, broader interest requires clearer understanding of the initiative’s purpose and benefits. 

Recommendation: 

• Clearly articulate the podcast’s objectives, benefits, and time commitments to students. 

• Pilot the initiative with the 29% interested, documenting their experiences to attract additional participants. 

• Provide mentorship, technical resources, and structured guidance to ensure the pilot’s success and scalability. 

These recommendations aim to enhance the student-led approach’s effectiveness while addressing areas for improvement and exploring new opportunities, such as the podcast initiative. 

1. Survey Questionnaire

2. Survey Results (Response table & takeaways)

3. Observation notes: a summary

4. Triangulation and Takeaway Summary

1. Ethical Action Plan & Tutor Feedback

Tutor feedback:

” General Notes – Some great elements to this. It just needs a little narrowing down to become a realistic small scale action-focused research project. I hope the notes below help. Forgive the formatting- I am not used to writing notes on PDFs.  

Specific feedback 

Section 1- some lovely ideas and really building on previous work. Try to be more specific about the scope of activity that falls within the ARP timeline. You mention multiple podcasts, symposiums etc. Can you define what action you will be able to take realistically. For example if a symposium what will that look like? How big? Online or face to face? By defining these parameters you are able to properly determine workload and plan your timeline realistically. Think about framing a question at this point (or single sentence) – this will really help you narrow scope and determine what’s most important. 

Section 2: Some great reading here but I think you are still considering how to proceed with specific evaluative and analytical methods and tools. Some of your reading might be around suitable methods and tools. 

Section 3- See section 1. Also think about the level of participation students will have and write the rationale to that in your research design. It is Ok if you limit participation to certain parts for time constraints, for example. 

Sections 4-6 you mention consent forms but haven’t yet clarified he data to be collected. Have a think about what ‘data’ looks like in terms of this activity and how specifically you will collect it? How big will the sample be? How will you analyse it? “ 

2. Participant Information Sheet & Consent Form

Qualitative Methods. Qualitative approaches, such as focus groups, reflective journals, and interviews, are well-suited for evaluating the impact of participatory and inclusive teaching practices. These methods allow for an in-depth understanding of student experiences and perspectives. For example, reflective journals can provide insights into how students perceive their roles in collaborative activities and how these experiences influence their learning. 

Surveys and Questionnaires. Surveys can be used to collect quantitative data on student satisfaction, engagement, and perceived inclusivity. When designing surveys, it is essential to include open-ended questions to capture nuanced feedback. This mixed-methods approach ensures a comprehensive evaluation of the intervention. 

Observation and Peer Review. Observation of student-led sessions can provide valuable insights into group dynamics, participation levels, and the effectiveness of the format. Peer reviews, involving colleagues observing and providing feedback, can further enhance the reliability of the evaluation process. 

Ethical Considerations. When collecting data, it is crucial to address ethical considerations, such as obtaining informed consent, ensuring anonymity, and being sensitive to power dynamics. This is particularly important when working with diverse student populations, as their experiences may intersect with issues of marginalisation and inequity. 

Reflections on data collection methods emphasise the importance of using a mixed-methods approach to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions. 

References

Bell, M. (2011). Peer Observation Partnerships in Higher Education. 2nd ed. Sydney: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA).

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE Publications.

BERA (British Educational Research Association) (2018). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. 4th ed. London: BERA.

Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BSA (British Sociological Association) (2017). Statement of Ethical Practice. [online] Available at: https://www.britsoc.co.uk/media/24310/bsa_statement_of_ethical_practice.pdf [Accessed 30 Oct 2024].

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education. 8th ed. London: Routledge.

Creswell, J.W. and Poth, C.N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D. and Christian, L.M. (2014). Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Swaffield, S. (2008). “Critical Friendship, Dialogue and Learning in the Context of Leadership for Learning,” School Leadership & Management, 28(4), pp. 323–336.

Tripp, D. (2012). Critical Incidents in Teaching: Developing Professional Judgement. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

The evolving demands of higher education underscore the need for inclusive and participatory teaching practices. As a lecturer and unit leader within the Leadership & Management programme at FBS, the challenge lies in diversifying content delivery formats to foster inclusivity, enhance accessibility, and promote student autonomy. This literature review examines key theoretical frameworks and pedagogical approaches relevant to this theme while reflecting on data collection methods to evaluate the impact of the proposed interventions. 

Theoretical Frameworks for Inclusive and Participatory Learning 

1. Paulo Freire’s Dialogical Approach 

Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1968) challenges traditional, hierarchical models of education where teachers are the sole providers of knowledge, and students passively receive it. Freire advocates for a dialogical method where learning is co-constructed through active participation. This aligns with the objective of diversifying teaching formats, moving away from tutor-led sessions to more collaborative approaches. Freire’s emphasis on critical dialogue provides a foundation for embedding inclusivity, allowing students from diverse backgrounds to share their perspectives and challenge normative interpretations of knowledge. 

2. Brookfield’s Four Lenses Framework 

Brookfield (2017) provides a reflective tool to evaluate teaching practices through four perspectives: self-reflection, student feedback, peer input, and academic literature. This framework supports iterative improvement in pedagogical approaches, ensuring that interventions remain relevant and impactful. For example, using Brookfield’s lens of “student perspectives,” feedback can be systematically gathered to refine student-led activities, enhancing their inclusivity and accessibility. 

3. Crenshaw’s Theory of Intersectionality 

Crenshaw’s (1991) work on intersectionality highlights the overlapping and interconnected systems of oppression that marginalised groups experience. Applying this theory to teaching practices underscores the importance of creating spaces where diverse voices are not only heard but also valued. This resonates with the project’s aim to democratise knowledge and reduce barriers for students from underprivileged backgrounds by promoting collaborative, cost-effective learning formats such as podcasts and symposiums. 

4. Cultural Intelligence and Community Building 

Levychin (2018) and Thomas (2022) argue that cultural intelligence—the ability to function effectively in diverse cultural contexts—is essential in fostering inclusive learning environments. By designing student-led sessions, educators can cultivate a sense of belonging and collaboration, enabling students to engage with course materials in ways that reflect their unique cultural contexts and lived experiences. 

5. The Inclusive Education Framework (QAA, 2023) 

The QAA’s Inclusive Education Framework (2023) underscores the importance of creating inclusive learning environments that cater to diverse student needs, ensuring equal access to learning opportunities. It advocates for adopting inclusive teaching strategies that remove barriers to learning, promoting accessibility, and creating a culture of inclusion within the educational experience. This framework is crucial for guiding the design and evaluation of inclusive teaching practices, reinforcing the necessity of integrating inclusive principles into curriculum design and pedagogical approaches. It supports the ongoing refinement of teaching strategies to reflect diversity and inclusion, making it an essential tool for assessing the effectiveness of proposed interventions. 

Diversifying Content Delivery: Best Practices and Challenges 

6. Student-Centred Pedagogy 

Student-centred learning, as discussed by Weimer (2013), emphasises active participation and autonomy. Strategies such as flipped classrooms and peer-led discussions have proven effective in enhancing engagement and critical thinking. By adopting these strategies, we educators can empower students to take ownership of their learning, which is particularly important in fostering inclusivity. However, the challenge lies in ensuring that all students feel equally equipped to participate, which requires careful scaffolding and support. 

7. Digital Tools and Accessibility 

The integration of digital tools, such as podcasts and collaborative platforms, offers opportunities to make learning resources more accessible. According to Bates (2019), digital media can bridge the socio-economic gap by providing cost-effective alternatives to traditional resources. However, it is crucial to ensure that digital formats are inclusive, taking into account factors such as access to technology and digital literacy. 

8. Collaborative Learning and Inclusivity 

Johnson and Johnson (2018) highlight the benefits of collaborative learning in building a sense of community and fostering critical thinking. Group activities, such as student-run symposiums, allow individuals to contribute in ways that align with their strengths, accommodating diverse preferences and capabilities. This approach not only enhances learning outcomes but also promotes inclusivity by valuing the contributions of all participants. 

The literature review informing this project explored theoretical and practical approaches to diversifying content delivery formats in higher education. Drawing predominately on Freire’s dialogical methods, Brookfield’s reflective framework, and Crenshaw’s intersectionality theory, the proposed interventions aim to create inclusive, collaborative learning environments. Additionally, the QAA’s Inclusive Education Framework (2023) provides a crucial framework for ensuring that these practices are aligned with broader educational goals of inclusivity.  

By fostering critical thinking, cultural intelligence, and community building, this project seeks to address the challenges of accessibility and inclusivity within the Leadership & Management programme at FBS. 

References

Bates, T. (2019) Teaching in a Digital Age: Guidelines for Designing Teaching and Learning. 2nd ed. Vancouver: Tony Bates Associates Ltd. 

Brookfield, S. D. (2017) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Brookfield, S. D., Rudolph, J., & Yeo, E. Z. (2019). The power of critical thinking in learning and teaching. An interview with Professor Stephen D. Brookfield. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 2(2), 76-90. 

Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241-1299. 

Freire, P. (1968) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum. 

Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, F. P. (2018) Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. 12th ed. Boston: Pearson Education. 

Levychin, L. (2018) ‘Cultural Intelligence in Higher Education: A Framework for Inclusivity’, Journal of College Student Development, 59(4), pp. 489-505. 

QAA (2023) The Inclusive Education Framework. [online] Available at: https://www.qaa.ac.uk/membership/collaborative-enhancement-projects/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/the-inclusive-education-framework [Accessed 20 December 2024]. 

Thomas, D. C. (2022) Cultural Intelligence: Living and Working Globally. 4th ed. Oxford: Routledge. 

Thomas, Cate. (2022). Overcoming Identity Threat: Using Persona Pedagogy in Intersectionality and Inclusion Training. Social Sciences 11: 249. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11060249 

Weimer, M. (2013) Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

This project aims to open a new space for students and academic staff to collaborate, offering opportunities for enhancing inclusivity from multiple perspectives. Firstly, fostering critical thinking, encouraging students to question and challenge existing norms, and promoting participatory learning where both teachers and students are active participants in knowledge construction (Freire, 1968). This creates a space for community building where diversity is embedded, generating a culture of belonging and collaboration and cultivating cultural intelligence (Levychin, 2018; Thomas, 2022).   

This artefact also promotes a learning approach from individuality and individual interpretation of the theories, the examples, the industry and the world we study and exist in, which supports academic and industry decolonisation and democratisation, as very often extracurricular contents mean extra costs for students and/or are subject to normative interpretations (race, social background, gender). In that way, this collaborative approach to content planning and session delivery also considers Crenshaw’s (1991) theory of intersectionality to its core. It advocates for the recognition of and response to the intersecting forms of oppression experienced by marginalised groups, since it draws on a person-centred approach which require us as a society, social system, university and classroom to respect, value and honour individuality beyond social categories.  

This project follows Brookfield’s (2017) Four Lenses framework, which encompasses self-reflection, students’ perspectives, colleagues’ viewpoints, and insights from literature to critically examine teaching practices and enhance active learning engagement. Brookfield’s work highlights the importance of self-directed learning, power dynamics, critical theory, and race relations in education.   

The proposed intervention has also been inspired by Freire’s (1968) “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” work, which emphasises the importance of transforming traditional educational structures from oppressive, hierarchical models in which teachers deposit knowledge into passive students, to empowering dialogical processes.

References

Bates, T. (2019) Teaching in a Digital Age: Guidelines for Designing Teaching and Learning. 2nd ed. Vancouver: Tony Bates Associates Ltd. 

Brookfield, S. D. (2017) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241-1299. 

Freire, P. (1968) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum. 

Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, F. P. (2018) Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. 12th ed. Boston: Pearson Education. 

Levychin, L. (2018) ‘Cultural Intelligence in Higher Education: A Framework for Inclusivity’, Journal of College Student Development, 59(4), pp. 489-505. 

QAA (2023) The Inclusive Education Framework. [online] Available at: https://www.qaa.ac.uk/membership/collaborative-enhancement-projects/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/the-inclusive-education-framework [Accessed 20 December 2024]. 

Thomas, D. C. (2022) Cultural Intelligence: Living and Working Globally. 4th ed. Oxford: Routledge. 

Weimer, M. (2013) Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Inspired by the Voicing Fashion podcast project, and more specifically the plan for concept trial, I have run a pilot of a student-run session for which students designed, planed and delivered the session, owning the content plan based on a given brief, and with the guidance and assistance of tutees. Students organised themselves in groups, designed a working plan and adopted different roles within the process of preparing and sharing the contents with the rest of the class. As students owned the end-to end process, there is a wide range of roles and responsibilities which accommodates a diversity of profiles and preferences. For example, a student who might not feel comfortable speaking in public or being recorded can contribute to content planning and preparation. 

Timeline 

Session 1 (Week 1) 

1. Idea & Brief Introduction 

• The project is introduced, including its purpose and objectives. 

• A detailed brief is shared with the students, outlining expectations and deliverables. 

2. Group Formation & Topic Allocation 

• Students are organised into groups. 

• Each group selects or is assigned a specific topic from the curriculum. 

3. Role Allocation 

• Roles are assigned within groups to accommodate diverse preferences and strengths. Role allocation is decided and agreed by students and assisted by tutors as needed. 

• Content Researchers: Focus on gathering and preparing material. 

• Content Planners: Structure the session and organise the flow. 

• Presenters/Facilitators: Lead discussions and present the content to the class. 

• Support Roles: Technical setup, documentation, or support for facilitators. 

4. Early Research & Planning 

• Groups begin preliminary research on their assigned topic. 

• Teams develop a working plan to prepare content for the session. 

• Initial guidance is provided to ensure students understand their roles and tasks. 

Session 2 (Week 2) 

5. Group Presentations & Delivery 

• Each group presents their planned session to the rest of the class. 

• Students take complete ownership of delivering the content, with the tutor acting as a facilitator or observer. 

6. Feedback & Reflection 

• Groups receive feedback from peers and the tutor on their session. 

• Reflection activities are conducted to encourage students to evaluate their learning process, collaboration, and the effectiveness of their session.