Critical thinking, argument and analysis: Developing skills for nursing practice Venetia Brown and Dr. Kay Caldwell,
Middlesex University School of Health and Education
Kay Caldwell and Venetia Brown gave a lively and engaging account of their innovative bridging programme, designed to develop the critical and analytical skills of clinical nurses and provide a platform for degree-level study. The programme was commissioned by a large London Trust, with the aspiration that all existing nursing staff would become graduates. The programme was accredited by Work Based Learning with 15 credits at level 6
Kay and Venetia designed a SCORM-compliant e-learning package which would be hosted on the Trust’s platform. The e-learning was ‘sandwiched’ between two workshops delivered by Venetia and students were supported throughout by Venetia and Kay via email. The main aims of the programme were ‘to improve critical analysis skills and how to develop an effective argument’.
After an initial learning needs analysis, students embarked on the programme, which included developing criticality in the context of clinical practice and culminated in a summative assessment requiring students to present a case for an improvement or change in clinical practice based on evidence and argument. The assessment was given authenticity by relating it to the student’s workplace.
Venetia and Kay described some of the challenges they faced, the main one being their lack of any involvement in recruitment of students; the Trust decided who should be on the programme. The diversity of experience and level of educational attainment was another challenge and for students there were all the challenges associated with part-time distance learning: tension between work and study; tension between practical and academic; difficulty with independent learning and feelings of isolation.
Employers’ expectations were high, which led to a possible conflict between preserving the academic integrity of the University (possibly by failing students) and meeting the requirements of the employers (who wanted all students to pass). Venetia and Kay were conscious of the huge impact of failure on the students’ career progression but also of the need to be fair and apply the standards set down by the University.
A final point, made by Kay, was the importance of detailed and constructive feedback for students in this situation. They lack the ‘wraparound’ support of Middlesex students and have no access to the LDU for example. There was some resulting debate as to how we need to develop these critical skills across the board in our students and questions as to how this programme might be adapted for use at the University – watch this space.
Report by Celia Cozens
Friday, 12 July 2013
Track F - Integrating a research project or dissertation
Integrating a research project or dissertation Dr Simon Best,
Middlesex University Business School
In this session Simon explained the rationale behind some changes that were made to the Business Transformation Project, an applied research project which is used as a final assessment for MBAs in Shipping and Logistics, and Oil and Gas. As the modules in these programmes run consecutively rather than concurrently a perception had developed that there was a risk of the modules being isolated from each other and that the students might increase the disconnection that students might feel in a course taught asynchronously.
Rather than treat the project as an entirely separate module at the end of the course, it was decided to embed one unit of the project module into each of the other modules in the programme, two weeks before the end of each module. Students were to keep a planning log which would help them put together ideas for their final project and reflect on the relevance of the material both to the project and other modules on the course. This programme-focused approach is an interesting way of building bridges between modules and preparing students for the research project ahead of time.
Report by Paul Smith
In this session Simon explained the rationale behind some changes that were made to the Business Transformation Project, an applied research project which is used as a final assessment for MBAs in Shipping and Logistics, and Oil and Gas. As the modules in these programmes run consecutively rather than concurrently a perception had developed that there was a risk of the modules being isolated from each other and that the students might increase the disconnection that students might feel in a course taught asynchronously.
Rather than treat the project as an entirely separate module at the end of the course, it was decided to embed one unit of the project module into each of the other modules in the programme, two weeks before the end of each module. Students were to keep a planning log which would help them put together ideas for their final project and reflect on the relevance of the material both to the project and other modules on the course. This programme-focused approach is an interesting way of building bridges between modules and preparing students for the research project ahead of time.
Report by Paul Smith
Track C - A chameleon genre
A Chameleon Genre: an audit of the dissertation at a typical UK University Dr Nick Endacott and colleagues, Middlesex University Learner Development Unit
Undergraduate students at Middlesex are expected to complete a dissertation/research project (or equivalent ‘substantial’ piece of work) in their final year. In order to better develop/embed the required writing/linguistic/analytical/critical skills of these students, the LDU (whose remit this is) need to have a clear idea of what is expected of same students with regard to their dissertations/research projects – or whatever they may be called – and what’s in a name anyway?
Nick Endacott and colleagues in the LDU have undertaken an ambitious project to complete an ‘audit’ of all these projects in all the Schools and most of the disciplines across the University. At present their findings are descriptive, not evaluative, and are based entirely on Module Handbooks (all those that could be got hold of).
The session got underway with some very interesting questions concerning the dissertation ‘genre’. Is it a genre in the straightforward sense, or rather a ‘chameleon genre’, adapting to its environment or is it, as in Peter Medway’s phrase, a ‘fuzzy genre’ with rather blurred edges? The context of different disciplines was discussed. How can expectations of a dissertation be the same across disciplines which are cultural phenomena divided by gulfs of linguistic variation? For the LDU to support students in a discipline they need to be able to unpick the cultural and linguistic expectation (science: analytical, arts: imaginative – simplified but understandable examples).
The initial findings were presented as a series of graphs depicting commonalities and differences in nomenclature (report; essay; portfolio; dissertation; project etc.) and pathways (empirical research; journal article; artefact-based project; combinations of these, etc.) Word length requirements also varied widely which raises other challenges for the LDU – low word limit = concise writing, high word limit = expanded writing etc.
The research is only just beginning and this is the start of a larger on-going project to explore this ‘genre’ and improve the LDU’s ability to develop the students’ skills to meet the demands of the dissertation in whatever form it may take.
Report by Celia Cozens
Undergraduate students at Middlesex are expected to complete a dissertation/research project (or equivalent ‘substantial’ piece of work) in their final year. In order to better develop/embed the required writing/linguistic/analytical/critical skills of these students, the LDU (whose remit this is) need to have a clear idea of what is expected of same students with regard to their dissertations/research projects – or whatever they may be called – and what’s in a name anyway?
Nick Endacott and colleagues in the LDU have undertaken an ambitious project to complete an ‘audit’ of all these projects in all the Schools and most of the disciplines across the University. At present their findings are descriptive, not evaluative, and are based entirely on Module Handbooks (all those that could be got hold of).
The session got underway with some very interesting questions concerning the dissertation ‘genre’. Is it a genre in the straightforward sense, or rather a ‘chameleon genre’, adapting to its environment or is it, as in Peter Medway’s phrase, a ‘fuzzy genre’ with rather blurred edges? The context of different disciplines was discussed. How can expectations of a dissertation be the same across disciplines which are cultural phenomena divided by gulfs of linguistic variation? For the LDU to support students in a discipline they need to be able to unpick the cultural and linguistic expectation (science: analytical, arts: imaginative – simplified but understandable examples).
The initial findings were presented as a series of graphs depicting commonalities and differences in nomenclature (report; essay; portfolio; dissertation; project etc.) and pathways (empirical research; journal article; artefact-based project; combinations of these, etc.) Word length requirements also varied widely which raises other challenges for the LDU – low word limit = concise writing, high word limit = expanded writing etc.
The research is only just beginning and this is the start of a larger on-going project to explore this ‘genre’ and improve the LDU’s ability to develop the students’ skills to meet the demands of the dissertation in whatever form it may take.
Report by Celia Cozens
Track D - Interrogating opportunities to promote student teachers’ professionalism
Interrogating opportunities to promote student teachers’ professionalism through their engagement in critical enquiry on a postgraduate teacher training programme
Shirley Allen and colleagues,
Middlesex University School of Health and Education.
This session was facilitated by a group of staff members in the form of a workshop. Facilitators reported on their activities as a community of practice engaged in negotiating practice, meaning and identity to make their voices and that of their students heard. In this session the facilitators explained how certain events such as the re-accreditation of teacher training programmes and the move to e-assessment prompted them to interrogate opportunities for student engagement in critical enquiry. We experienced such opportunities in the form of activities which included group-based lateral thinking puzzles that emphasised the socio-constructivist approach to teaching and learning that the team had adopted.
The importance of ‘talk’ emerged as a central theme whereby students could explore critically their learning at University and the challenges of school placements. In fact, at the end of the session we had an opportunity to digitally record some of our talk using “talking tins”. This was in part a demonstration of how students might capture ‘talk’ to meet the requirements of e-assessment and to include as evidence in the new two part assessment alternative to the dissertation: Part 1 requires students to compile a portfolio of children’s learning experiences they have observed or taught in school and critically analyse and reflect on these experiences. In Part 2, students will discuss current theoretical and methodological approaches to learning, with a particular focus on socio-constructivist theory.
Report by Tarek Zoubir
This session was facilitated by a group of staff members in the form of a workshop. Facilitators reported on their activities as a community of practice engaged in negotiating practice, meaning and identity to make their voices and that of their students heard. In this session the facilitators explained how certain events such as the re-accreditation of teacher training programmes and the move to e-assessment prompted them to interrogate opportunities for student engagement in critical enquiry. We experienced such opportunities in the form of activities which included group-based lateral thinking puzzles that emphasised the socio-constructivist approach to teaching and learning that the team had adopted.
The importance of ‘talk’ emerged as a central theme whereby students could explore critically their learning at University and the challenges of school placements. In fact, at the end of the session we had an opportunity to digitally record some of our talk using “talking tins”. This was in part a demonstration of how students might capture ‘talk’ to meet the requirements of e-assessment and to include as evidence in the new two part assessment alternative to the dissertation: Part 1 requires students to compile a portfolio of children’s learning experiences they have observed or taught in school and critically analyse and reflect on these experiences. In Part 2, students will discuss current theoretical and methodological approaches to learning, with a particular focus on socio-constructivist theory.
Report by Tarek Zoubir
Track A - Shaping dissertation research in dance & music theatre
Shaping dissertation research in dance and music theatre: critical approaches and shifting methodologies,
Lise Uytterhoeven,
Dr. Francis Yeoh,
Josephine Leask,
Laura Robinson,
Julia Gleich,
Mark Harris,
London Studio Centre
Five team members from London Studio Centre presented on a dissertation module which forms part of recently validated (Hons) Theatre Dance degree programme. They commented on a number of recent case studies in terms of the methodological challenges they pose.
The dissertation is viewed as integral to enabling students to demonstrate their graduate-ness in this programme of study, in terms of developing key graduate skills. These include organising the student’s own learning, researching and evaluating a range of information, communicating complex insights, independent working and problem solving.
The ground work to prepare students for the final year dissertation is embedded in their earlier modules through various activities - allowing the students to develop skills in areas such as, planning, translating, evaluating, editing and communicating.
Recent methodological shifts in the wider field of dance studies had encouraged students, in conjunction with their tutors, to develope tailor-made research methodologies. These methodologies however, have presented new challenges.
The points raised included: some recent developments in dance studies require insights from other disciplines such as theatre studies, cultural studies, psychology anatomy/physiology or sociology. There is a lack of well documented resources, especially in contemporary developments, which leads to some case studies not been successful.
It is hard to ensure that the research been undertaken is linked to a career path.
If you would like to see the full presentation please click here
Report by Betty Sinyinza
Five team members from London Studio Centre presented on a dissertation module which forms part of recently validated (Hons) Theatre Dance degree programme. They commented on a number of recent case studies in terms of the methodological challenges they pose.
The dissertation is viewed as integral to enabling students to demonstrate their graduate-ness in this programme of study, in terms of developing key graduate skills. These include organising the student’s own learning, researching and evaluating a range of information, communicating complex insights, independent working and problem solving.
The ground work to prepare students for the final year dissertation is embedded in their earlier modules through various activities - allowing the students to develop skills in areas such as, planning, translating, evaluating, editing and communicating.
Recent methodological shifts in the wider field of dance studies had encouraged students, in conjunction with their tutors, to develope tailor-made research methodologies. These methodologies however, have presented new challenges.
The points raised included: some recent developments in dance studies require insights from other disciplines such as theatre studies, cultural studies, psychology anatomy/physiology or sociology. There is a lack of well documented resources, especially in contemporary developments, which leads to some case studies not been successful.
It is hard to ensure that the research been undertaken is linked to a career path.
If you would like to see the full presentation please click here
Report by Betty Sinyinza
Track B - Work based projects as dissertations
Work based projects as dissertations: where’s the theory, where’s the practice? Ruth Miller and Alan Beadsmoore, Middlesex University School of Health and Education
Video of the session
An informative and thought provoking session, Ruth and Alan started with the similarities and differences between traditional dissertations and the contextualised projects that form part of work based learning professional practice programmes. One of the differences (referred to throughout the conference) was that students carrying out professional practice projects are internal inquirers as opposed to external researchers. The introduction of the student perspective via 3 students, who joined them for the session, broadened the session, enabling a deeper exploration of some of these differences.
As these students are based in the work place, leading projects that aim to make a change to something within their practice, a tripartite agreement between the students, the university and also the employer, is another distinguishing factor of these projects. The relationship between the student and university is more advisory than supervisory - a fundamental that students have to get to grips with – especially at undergraduate level.
The students Sandra, Jane and Irene (from left to right in the picture with Alan), gave a brief overview of their projects; BSc Mental Health “Developing a smoking cessation programme”, BA Professional Practice Early Years “Supporting children’s communication and language skills” and MSc Nursing Studies “Evaluating a stress reduction programme for nurses”, respectively. This prompted a flurry of questions from the floor, such as; what was it like being an insider researcher and how easy was it to achieve the level of independence required for inquiry? What were the advantages and disadvantages of inquiry inside an organisation – for example is the topic influenced by management? How did they manage to apply theory and relate it to their practice? What preparation did they have for selecting research methods? and How did they go about marrying the tension between tacit knowledge (what you just know) and academic theory?
For more questions and the varied answers from each of the students (including the final one “would they do it all again?”) – watch the video of the session (above).
Report by Louise Merlin
Video of the session
An informative and thought provoking session, Ruth and Alan started with the similarities and differences between traditional dissertations and the contextualised projects that form part of work based learning professional practice programmes. One of the differences (referred to throughout the conference) was that students carrying out professional practice projects are internal inquirers as opposed to external researchers. The introduction of the student perspective via 3 students, who joined them for the session, broadened the session, enabling a deeper exploration of some of these differences.
As these students are based in the work place, leading projects that aim to make a change to something within their practice, a tripartite agreement between the students, the university and also the employer, is another distinguishing factor of these projects. The relationship between the student and university is more advisory than supervisory - a fundamental that students have to get to grips with – especially at undergraduate level.
For more questions and the varied answers from each of the students (including the final one “would they do it all again?”) – watch the video of the session (above).
Report by Louise Merlin
Opening keynote - Carole-Anne Upton & Ifan Shepherd
Weighing it up: Research and the Undergraduate Dissertation in Media and Performing Arts Professor Carole-Anne Upton and The Dissertation: Skylark or Albatross? Professor Ifan Shepherd
This year’s conference was opened by two keynote speakers drawn from within the University, these were Carole-Anne Upton, Professor of Theatre and Dean of the School of Media and Performing Arts and Ifan Shepherd, Professor of GeoBusiness at Middlesex University, and Director of Professional Practice Programmes in the Business School. They offered us complimentary and contrasting views and reflections on the role of the dissertation and other enquiry based modes, based the on their extensive experience of working with students in Higher Education; Carole-Anne focussed predominantly on undergraduate research and enquiry with Ifan concentrating on practice within the postgraduate area. It was clear that neither of them came to bury the dissertation but in fact, to praise the principles and values that it offered students with some caveats, words of warning and challenges to the audience.
Carole-Anne was concerned with the mystique that surrounded the dissertation with its language often residing in the language of traditional research and the ways that this impacted on both staff and students. She questioned the extent to which undergraduate research could really qualify as research and whether enquiry based learning was a more accurate title for this activity. Another challenge to teachers centred around the need and drive to increasingly support our students through the dissertation process that often meant that successful students continued to be successful but simply acted to identify failing students earlier without necessarily being able to improve their engagement. This in itself challenged the central principle of ‘extended independent enquiry’ that underpins the honours nature of the dissertation. Carole-Anne concluded that the dissertation certainly wasn’t dead but that it is possible overburdened; there is a need for us to be more explicit about its nature and role as a genuine act of research.
Ifan offered us some historical perspectives on the nature of Masters qualifications and the role of the dissertation as a ‘licence to research’, which has brought us to its current and continuing use within both practice and more theoretically driven programmes of study. He drew our attention to the consistent failure rates within Masters dissertations and questioned whether we were complicit in this failure by trying to pack mastery of subject and mastery of research within the confines of one-year Masters programmes. This was compounded by the expectations of originality that had previously been the domain of doctoral study in times gone by. Ifan offered us both sticking plasters and some more radical solutions that might help students’ approach to research; from asking students to evidence the actual impact of their reading on their dissertation rather than the generic literary review to rethinking the relationship between practice as research and the opportunities of being an insider researcher rather than an outsider looking in.
These perspectives on dissertation practices and problems offered a really useful opening to the conference that enabled conference participants to go to their workshop sessions with many of the key issues well and truly ‘outed’, in the words of Nicky Torrance and certainly at the forefront of their minds.
Report by Mike Seignor
Carole-Anne was concerned with the mystique that surrounded the dissertation with its language often residing in the language of traditional research and the ways that this impacted on both staff and students. She questioned the extent to which undergraduate research could really qualify as research and whether enquiry based learning was a more accurate title for this activity. Another challenge to teachers centred around the need and drive to increasingly support our students through the dissertation process that often meant that successful students continued to be successful but simply acted to identify failing students earlier without necessarily being able to improve their engagement. This in itself challenged the central principle of ‘extended independent enquiry’ that underpins the honours nature of the dissertation. Carole-Anne concluded that the dissertation certainly wasn’t dead but that it is possible overburdened; there is a need for us to be more explicit about its nature and role as a genuine act of research.
Ifan offered us some historical perspectives on the nature of Masters qualifications and the role of the dissertation as a ‘licence to research’, which has brought us to its current and continuing use within both practice and more theoretically driven programmes of study. He drew our attention to the consistent failure rates within Masters dissertations and questioned whether we were complicit in this failure by trying to pack mastery of subject and mastery of research within the confines of one-year Masters programmes. This was compounded by the expectations of originality that had previously been the domain of doctoral study in times gone by. Ifan offered us both sticking plasters and some more radical solutions that might help students’ approach to research; from asking students to evidence the actual impact of their reading on their dissertation rather than the generic literary review to rethinking the relationship between practice as research and the opportunities of being an insider researcher rather than an outsider looking in.
These perspectives on dissertation practices and problems offered a really useful opening to the conference that enabled conference participants to go to their workshop sessions with many of the key issues well and truly ‘outed’, in the words of Nicky Torrance and certainly at the forefront of their minds.
Report by Mike Seignor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)