The Research in Teaching Environment (RiTE) Initiative

Final Report

Date of completion: 20th September 2010

Completed by: James Wilkinson

Title of Project:

Evaluation of the ‘CLEAR’ Approach: Combined Learning for Employability and Research,an approach which integrates project management, creativity and cross-cultural team management, and where the tutor provides leadership by example to develop students’ research and team management skills.

(the original title was ‘Evaluation of the ‘Apprenticeship Model…’. This was changed to the ‘Combined Learning for Employability and Research’ Approach. This was to make clearer what the approach was for, and also because the previous title overemphasised the importance of the idea of ‘apprenticeship’, which was in fact only one of several integrated approaches.)

1

Contents

Page

1. Project aims and purpose 3

2. Project Outline2.1. Stage 1 4

2.2. Stage 2

2.3. Stage 3

3. Main findings3.1.- 3.3. Skills, Knowledge and Personal Attributes needed

for research, as identified by Research Methods tutors

3.4. Concerns identified by Research Methods tutors 6

3.5. Stage 1 student responses 7

3.6. Participant observations

3.7. Link to theory 9

3.8. Summary of the CLEAR Approach

3.9. Stage 3 findings (post-intervention) 11

3.9.1. Disconfirming evidence

3.9.2. Reported benefits of the CLEAR Approach

3.9.3. Comparison of cohorts before and after CLEAR (fig.1) 13

4. Evaluation of the project:4.4. Strengths 14

4.5. Weaknesses

4.6. Potential

4.7. Limitations 15

5. Main outcomes (publications/ conferences/ dissemination etc)

6. References 16

2

Appendix 1 : Summary conceptual framework for the CLEAR Approach 19

Appendix 2 : Dynamic representation of the CLEAR Approach 20

NoteThe CLEAR Approach, which is the subject of this evaluative research, continued to

evolve during this project. In particular, the research permitted greater engagement

with relevant literature to provide fuller theoretical underpinning, and findings from

the early stages of the research further informed the approach. For this reason, the

approach is not described until page 9. The approach is also summarised in the two

appendices on pages 19 and 20.

1. Project aims and purpose

This project had the following two main aims:

1.1. To better understand pedagogical issues relating to teaching, learning and

assessment for research and employability education;

1.2. to evaluate the ‘Combined Learning for Employability and Research

(CLEAR) approach, as applied on the Work Related Learning and

Research (WRLR) module (HND Business)

Two further aims related to dissemination and the production of learning

materials:

1.3. To disseminate research outcomes in the form of papers in journals and

presented at conferences; and

1.4. To produce learning materials allowing the approach to be applied by

other practitioners

2. Project outline

3

Before and during students’ experience of the CLEAR approach, the first aim was

pursued using a mix of approaches and at different stages:

2.1. Stage 1

participant observations, based on field notes written after WRLR classes, and

drawing on previous years’ experiences with the module;

interviews with three TVU research methods tutors;

value grids, designed following the tutor interviews, were completed by 14

participants and used as a basis for interviews with students.

interviews with eight of the total 15 WRLR students, prior to their experience with

the CLEAR approach. These were transcribed and organised to facilitate analysis,

and to provide baseline data for comparison with Stage 4 interviews.

Observations and interview transcripts from the above activities were reduced and

organised using a grounded, hermeneutic, editing style, as described by Addison in

Crabtree and Miller (1999).

2.2. Stage 2

Core categories identified in Stage 1 were next analysed with reference to relevant

literature.

2.3. Stage 3

interviews with eight of the total 15 WRLR students, shortly after their experience

with the CLEAR approach. These were transcribed and analysed in association and

comparison with the previous sets of data.

4

3. Main findings

Findings from the Stage 1 interviews with tutors and from the author’s participant

observations yielded a set of skills, knowledge and personal attributes which tutors

emphasised as being needed for research. Interviews also revealed a range of

concerns linked to the above skills, knowledge and attributes, and relating to

students’ readiness to undertake research. There were also concerns relating to

pedagogical issues. Several of these mirror students’ comments and can be linked to

the Stage 2 analysis and linking to theory.

3.1. SkillsResearch skills- Finding and evaluating sources of information and using these to focus

research

- Handling complexity and uncertainty

- Producing a synthesis of ideas

- Writing critically and academically

- Reasoning and presenting arguments

- Editing and frequently improving written text (writing and re-writing)

- Selecting, justifying and applying data collection methods

Generic, transferable, employability skills- Self management

- Time management

- Project management

- (if working in groups): team / group management

3.2. Knowledge and understanding- Knowledge of the process(es) of research

- Research methods

- Analytical methods

- Sufficient subject knowledge to be specific

- Ethics

5

3.3. Personal Attributes- Patience / perseverance

- Diligence – especially with reading

- Ability to take criticism

- Autonomy / self-managing

- Motivation

- Confidence

3.4. Tutor ConcernsTutors expressed a range of concerns relating on the one hand to the students and

on the other to issues linked to the necessary skills development. From the general

tone of what tutors were saying, as well as from specific examples that they gave,

many of their concerns can be interpreted as relating to a range of student

shortcomings:

- lacking sufficient knowledge to be specific

- not reading enough (a key factor and linked to the previous point:

conversely, ‘good’ students were those who do read and who use the

knowledge thus acquired to inform their research focus and methods)

- lacking confidence

- lacking motivation

- difficulty working independently / autonomously

- procrastination

- poor time management

- lacking project management skills and knowledge

- poor self management

- lacking awareness of the need to edit and re-write work

From the tutors’ comments, it is possible to interpret many of these issues as being

interconnected. For example, issues concerning procrastination, autonomy, self and

time management and insufficient reading may relate to confidence and motivation,

as is illustrated by the following comment:

Tutor 2: “What I feel I know enough about is to give them the guidance and structure

to do it, and they should then be able to go and research it and take it from there, but

6

they don’t. You know, you’d like them to come back next week and say: “Ok, this

week, now I’ve got something, come on smart ass: let’s see you pick holes in this!”

And that’s what you want from them, but they don’t seem to have that innate

confidence, knowledge, and ability to want to do that or be prepared to do that”.

Concerning skills development, there was broad agreement among the three tutors

that such development needs to start earlier in students’ programmes, as is

illustrated by the following comment:

“…they arrive at this point, Level 6, with a lack of confidence, a lack of

knowledge, a lack of skills in many cases, and we do cram it in there. And

what we do, I think, is actually really good, … , but it is still a hell of a load to

give some of these students and I suspect if you did a full research methods

programme at Level 5 it might bring about a different situation, with students

coming to this in a completely different state of preparation”. (Tutor 2)

Tutors were also concerned about the practice of teaching research methods in the

abstract, before students needed to apply what they were learning. Tutor 2

suggested that a ‘drip-by-drip’ approach could help students if they were required

immediately to apply the skills and knowledge they had been learning to their own

research.

3.5. Stage 1 Student Responses

Many of the students’ responses reflected similar concerns to those expressed by

the tutors. These related to:

- Getting started

- Studying independently: several said they preferred being told what to

do rather than having to find out for themselves

- Being unclear about academic elements, such as drawing on ideas

from different authors, being critical, dealing with controversy,

7

producing a synthesis of ideas, and developing a conceptual

framework for research.

Working in groups is also a key feature of the WRLR module, and here opinions

were mixed. Some professed enthusiasm for group work while others said they

preferred working on their own. Many had had the negative experience of working

with colleagues who did not contribute. A few also said they did not feel confidence

in expressing their views openly, or that their motivation was adversely affected if

they felt that their opinions were not being listened to by others in the group. Two of

the eight students mentioned that they were afraid to ask for help, both from other

team members and from the tutor.

3.6. Participant ObservationsMany of my own participant observations mirrored concerns expressed by both the

tutors and the students. These related, on the one hand, to research related skills

and their development:

- overreliance on lectures and virtual learning platforms to deliver

research capability does not appear to provide sufficient skills

development.

- Students either do not take in or have difficulty learning and applying

the complex skills required for critical analysis, for explaining and

justifying research methodology and methods, and for developing

coherent, reasoned arguments.

- Linked to these difficulties, many fail to grasp the purpose and process

of engaging critically with the literature and the need to devote

sufficient time for reading.

On the other hand, there were also issues related to generic, transferable,

employability skills gaps relating to:

8

- self, time and project management

- communication problems

- group management problems, such as dealing with free-riders and

sometimes conflict.

3.7. Link to theory

Discourse on research and employability education reflects similar concerns

reported by colleagues working in different disciplines and from across the Higher

Education sector. These concerns include leaving research-based learning until the

final year of the degree (e.g. Healey and Jenkins 2009), transmission-based

approaches (e.g. Elton 2001; Laurillard 2002); learner passivity and dependence on

‘certainties’ provided by authorities (e.g. Boyer Commission 1998; Ramsden 2008;

Baxter Magolda 2010); and insufficient development of generic skills and attributes

relating to self, group and project management, as well as confidence and the

related, counterproductive impact of high stakes assessment (Knight and Yorke

2003). Moreover, some of the strategies intended to address these concerns are

themselves questioned. Student-centred approaches may be poorly thought through

and applied, and fail to provide sufficient challenge (Furedi, in Gill 2008), and with

social forms of learning, these risk students losing sight of individual responsibility

(Sanger 2010).

3.8. The CLEAR Approach

As a response to the above concerns, the ‘Combined Learning for Employability and

Research’ (CLEAR) approach seeks to integrate pedagogical practices that promote

learning which is:

- experiential and reflective (e.g. Laurillard 2002);

9

- inquiry based (e.g. Justice, Rice, Warry, Inglis, Miller and Sammon

2007; Spronken-Smith, Walker, O'Steen, Matthews, Batchelor and

Angelo 2008);

- socially constructed (e.g. Lave and Wenger 1991); and

- situated with reference to cultural discourses and involving a process of

enculturation which transforms tutor and student identities (e.g.

Wenger 1998; Quay 2003).

In order to achieve such learning, the CLEAR Approach draws on the cognitive

apprenticeship model proposed by Collins, Seely Brown and Newman (cited by

Woolley and Jarvis 2007). However, this includes not only showing students

examples of best practice, but also rough drafts and subjecting these to students’

scrutiny, with the aim of developing their understanding of the process, confidence

and critical skills.

To develop more generic, employability related competences, students also learn

management techniques relating to project and time management (e.g. Sola and

Wilkinson 2008) and are introduced to theory relating to cohesion (e.g. Rathje 2007),

inclusivity and creativity (e.g. Ceserani and Greatwood 1995), uncertainty and

anxiety management (Gudykunst 2004) to help them manage their own feelings

towards unfamiliar others, and emotional intelligence (Goleman 1995).

For the past two years, the CLEAR approach has been used on the WRLR module.

Students work in groups to develop a research proposal and reflect on the

experience, both during the project and afterwards, using Gibbs’ ‘reflective learning

cycle’ (DAR 2009) and the above theory. To help them to monitor progress of the

research-related elements, students are referred to the ‘inquiry process’ and ‘inquiry

paper checklist’ proposed by Justice et al. (2007, p.203 and 214). (This last element

is in fact an innovation prompted by the project’s findings (see 3.9.1. below) and has

not yet been used).

For a summarised conceptual framework and dynamic representation of the CLEAR

Approach, see Appendices 1 and 2 on pages and .

10

3.9 Stage 3 Findings (post ‘CLEAR’ intervention student interviews)

With one exception, comments from the eight students interviewed shortly after

completion of the module were predominantly positive.

3.9.1. Disconfirming evidenceThe one student whose comments were not positive said they had found various

elements confusing, in particular undertaking the literature review and discussing

research methods:

“…there were so many sources … and we didn’t know what was right and

wrong and sometimes ended up concluding the wrong things and then not

knowing what things needed changing.”

“…the research methods we used were quite difficult ... ‘cause nobody had

done this sort of thing before, ....”

These comments may relate to issues already mentioned, such as confidence and

also to some of the procrastinating tendencies of the student’s group colleagues

which had hampered progress. The make-up of student groups is indeed a problem,

and another student expressed frustration at the difficulty of achieving high grades

when working with weak students. Whatever the underlying problems, this highlights

the need for tutors to monitor student progress, and also to give students the tools

needed to monitor progress themselves. To this end, students will in future be

referred to the ‘inquiry process’ and ‘inquiry paper checklist’ designed by Justice et

al. (2007, p.203 and 214).

3.9.2. Benefits of the CLEAR Approach

11

Positive responses predominantly emphasised benefits relating to generic,

employability skills, notably group and project management, as well as to the

development of personal attributes such as confidence, empathy and assertiveness.

These benefits are illustrated by the following comments:

- on managing group projects : “I know how to structure my group work...using pie charts and Gantt charts…”

- on confidence“group work, that was my big problem, …(but now) I feel more confident”

- on group problem solving, empathy and assertiveness: “ Before the module I used to be, well, ‘their problem is their problem, not

really my issue’ but now I … kind of look at the problem and kind of try and

help.”

“…(doing the module) help(ed) me understand other people’s situation better

and at the same time not let them walk all over you…”

- on handling conflict“…whenever I put my idea or opinion forward she would find fault in it and

give it no value…. When things became excruciating, I confronted her.

When we discussed the matters she realised that she was in the wrong and

agreed to take on board other people’s opinion… it made me feel much better

and we were able to work smoothly”

In addition to these generic, group working skills and attributes, several students

commented on the value of reflection. Interestingly, this related not simply to learning

benefits, but also to practical problem-solving, an issue commented on by more than

one student:

“…when we did those log books every week I really liked doing that ‘cause it

… made you think about …the positive and negative aspects, and how you

could improve on them, so it was, like, problem solving, how we can sort of

solve our own problems”.

12

This problem-solving benefit can also be inferred from comments made when

students were asked to say how the WRLR module differed from other modules they

had studied:

“In ...(another module), ... we did not do that (i.e. keep a learning log) and

most of the group work was really messy and people did not turn up and no

one really wrote how they felt or what issue they had, like, no problems were

solved.”

Having to reflect on progress on a weekly basis also appeared to help students apply

the theory they were learning:

“ It worked well because it helped me learn, like, where I had gone wrong or if

there were issues and how to deal with them using theory and learning about

theory, ’cause in (another module) although we used theory quite a lot, like,

let’s say ‘group work theory’ and ‘learning theory’ we did not really implement

them in practice, and with work related learning we implemented them in

practice.”

Reported benefits also related to social forms of learning, which also helped them to

appreciate the value and the need for reading:

“…when I was working with the other girls, like K and M, that was really good,

‘cause I think they had more knowledge, they knew more…. We would always

come in to do research in the library and just check out books and see what

we could get, so… I think I have learnt from them how they do research…

actually go to the sources and even, like, I don’t know, just reading books and

stuff and I think that helped quite a lot, ‘cause it just broadened my knowledge

a bit.”

3.9.3. Comparison of Cohorts before and after CLEARFinally, comparison of cohort grades for two years prior to adoption of the CLEAR

approach, and the two subsequent years suggest that performance has improved, as

is illustrated in the following graph:

13

Fig. 1. Graph showing grades achieved on the module before full integration of the CLEAR approach (in blue), and since (in pink/red).

4. Evaluation of the project – strengths/weaknesses/potential/limitations4.1. Strengths

This project has achieved its main aims. Interviews with tutors and students have

yielded rich, qualitative data which, combined with literature comparisons and

analysis have added to understanding concerning research and employability

education. Interviews with students before and after experience with CLEAR have

14

made it possible to observe the distance travelled by students, as well as to identify

scope for further improvements of the approach.

4.2. WeaknessesCertain data collection methods could have been improved upon. The value grid

questionnaires, intended to provide prompts for discussion during Stage 1

interviews, were not always completed correctly by students, some of whom

appeared to have been confused as to how to complete them. This meant that time

was wasted during interviews clarifying student responses, rather than discussing

the issues that the various value statements raised. Partly for this reason, Stage 3

interviews comprised more open questions, and while this allowed students to

respond more freely and thus generated a good amount of commentary, much of this

related to more generic, employability-related skills and attributes (such as group

management and confidence). With hindsight – I should have sought to elicit more

responses concerning learning related specifically to research methods and related

skills and knowledge.

4.3. Potential

Findings from this study suggest that the CLEAR approach assists students to grasp

concepts relating to research methods and to understand the purpose and process

of literature review, whether in placing their work in relation to current thinking, in

producing a conceptual, analytical framework for research, or in explaining and

justifying methods and methodology choices. In addition, the approach appears to be

especially beneficial in developing employability skills and attributes, in particular

group, self, time and project management, and confidence.

4.4. Limitations During the last two years, cohort sizes on the HND Business programme (about 15)

have been relatively small compared to earlier years (20 to 25). One might argue,

therefore, that improvements in student performance could be due simply to smaller

class sizes and related student-staff ratios. A further limitation may also relate to

differences in the academic abilities of students in different years which might also

be a reason why students in recent years have performed better.

15

5. Main outcomes (publications/ conferences/ dissemination etc)

This study has permitted a fuller theoretical underpinning for the CLEAR approach

(for a summarised conceptual framework and dynamic representation see pages 17

and 18). I have also presented a paper at the international Scholarship of Teaching

and Learning Conference, May 2010 in London, and a paper and poster at the TVU

Teaching Conference in June 2010. I am currently preparing a paper for publication

in the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education.

In addition to this dissemination activity, I have used the study leave made possible

through the RiTE project to add to my own qualifications, by embarking on the MA in

Research and successfully completing five modules: Writing for Research and

Publication; Research Methods; Quantitative Research Methods; Qualitative

Research Methods; and Developing a Research Project. On several of the

assignments for these modules I was able to undertake activity relevant to the RiTE

project. These included writing a literature review relating to the CLEAR approach,

and also an article for publication.

Signature: James Wilkinson Date:

20.09.2010

References

Baxter Magolda, M. (2010) ‘ A tandem journey through the labyrinth’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, [online], 2.http://www.aldinhe.ac.uk/ojs/index.php?journal=jldhe&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=61&path%5B%5D=37 [accessed: 7 June 2010].

Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, The. (1998).Reinventing undergraduate education: a blueprint for America’s researchUniversities. Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook. [Online]. Available from:http://naples.cc.stonybrook.edu/Pres/boyer.nsf/673918d46fbf653e852565ec0056ff3e/d955b61ffddd590a852565ec005717ae/$FILE/boyer.pdf. Accessed 19.05.10.

16

Ceserani, J. and Greatwood, P. (1995). Innovation and Creativity. London: Kogan Page

Crabtree, B. and Miller, W. (1999) Doing qualitative research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

DAR (Distributed Action Researchers.(2009). Gibbs reflective cycle. [online]http://distributedresearch.net/wiki/index.php/Gibbs_reflective_Cycle. [accessed 10.06.10.Dörner, K. (1996). The Logic of Failure: Recognizing and Avoiding Error in Complex Situations. New York: Metropolitan Books (Hardcover) and Perseus Books (Pocketbook Edition).

Elton, L. (2001). Research and Teaching: conditions for a positive link. Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp.43-56. [Online]. Available from: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=15&sid=981d2906-1a98-4a96-86bf-8ff0c48b777c%40sessionmgr13&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=afh&AN=4139859. Accessed 10.05.10.

Gill, J. (2008). A matter of opinions. In The Times Higher Education. [Online]. Available from: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=404642. Accessed 10.05.10.

Goleman, D (1995) Emotional Intelligence, Bloomsbury Publishing plc, London.Graves, S. and Maher, A. (Eds). (2008). Developing graduate employability: case studies in hospitality, leisure, sport and tourism. Newbury: Threshold Press Ltd.

Gudykunst, W. (2004). Bridging Differences, 4th Edition. London:Sage.

Healey, M. and Jenkins, A. (2009) Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. [Online]. Available from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/ourwork/ipp/Issue1_publications. Accessed 5.05.10.

Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S. and Sammon, S. (2007). Inquiry in Higher Education: Reflections and Directions on Course Design and Teaching Methods. In Innovative Higher Education (2007) 31. [online] 201-214.http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&as_q=justice+rice&as_epq=inquiry+in+higher+education&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=10&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=active. [Accessed 9 June 2010]

Knight, P. and Yorke, M. (2003). Assessment, Learning and Employability. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill Education.

Laurillard, D. (2002) Rethinking teaching for the knowledge society. In Educause Review. January/February 2002. [Online]. Available from: http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0201.pdf. Accessed 24.05.10.

17

Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mackay, H. (1994). Why don’t people listen? Solving the communication problem.Sydney: Pan.

Quay, J. (2003). Experience and Participation: Relating Theories of Learning, inThe Journal of Experiential Education; Fall 2003; 26, 2; Academic Research Librarypg. 105-112. [Online]. Available from: http://staff.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/~jquay/QuayJEE26(2)2003.pdf. Accessed 19.05.10

Ramsden, P. (2008). The Future of Higher EducationTeaching and the Student Experience. Report for the Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills. [Online] Available from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20090506151308/http://www.dius.gov.uk/higher_education/shape_and_structure/he_debate/~/media/publications/T/teaching_and_student_experience_131008. Accessed 19.05.10.

Rathje, S, (2007) Intercultural Competence: The Status and Future of a Controversial Concept, Language and Intercultural Communication, Vol 7:4, 2007

Sanger, L. (2010). Individual knowledge in the internet age. In Educause Review, vol. 45, 2 (March/April 2010), pp14-24. [Online]. Available from: http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume45/IndividualKnowledgeintheIntern/202336. Accessed 26.10.05. Accessed 26.10.05.

Schön, D. (1991). The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action. Adershop: Avebury.

Sola, N. and Wilkinson, J. (2008). Developing intercultural competence. 4th international conference on education in a changing environment. Conference proceedings. [online]. www.ece.salford.ac.uk/proceedings/papers/04_07.pdf. [accessed 7.06.10]

Spronken-Smith, R., Walker, R., O'Steen, W, Matthews, H., Batchelor, J. and Angelo, T. (2008) Reconceptualising inquiry-based learning: synthesis of findings. Higher Education Academy. [Online]. Available from: http://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/project/inquiry-based-learning/resources/books/reconceptualising-inquiry-based-learning-synthesis-fi. Accessed 3.05.10.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of learning: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Woolley, N. and Jarvis, Y. (2007). Situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship: a model for teaching and learning critical skills in a technologically rich and authentic learning environment. In Nurse Education Today, 27, 73-79.

18

Appendix 1: Combined Learning for Employability and Research (CLEAR): conceptual framework and summary of teaching and learning activities

STUDENT(S)

INDIVIDUAL LEARNING SOCIAL LEARNING

Students construct knowledge and understanding, engaging responsibly in the learning process, contributing their fair share to group work,keeping weekly learning journals and producing a final reflective assignment.(Laurillard 2002)

Students co-construct knowledge and understanding, offering each other constructive, critical feedback and working together in groups (Lave and Wenger 1991); applying project management and creativity techniques and applying theory relating to emotional theory (Goleman 1995) and cultural discourse (Quay 2003; Sola and Wilkinson 2008). This includes:

inquiry based learning

involves: the inquiry process; structured inquiry

taking responsibility;

engaging with issue; guided inquiry

developing good question(s);

determining info. needed; open inquiry

accessing information;

evaluating information; (Spronken-Smith

synthesising a coherent whole; et al. 2008)

inquiry paper checklist.

(Justice et al. 2007)

building cohesion(Rathje 2007) and an atmosphere of creativity (Ceserani and Greatwood 1995); mindfulness (Langer 1989); andmanaging uncertainty and anxiety towards different others (Gudykunst 2004).

TUTORS

Facilitate a supportive, non-threatening environment, encouraging students to see them less

as authoritative experts, more as equal partners, sharing authority and expertise (Baxter

Magolda 2010); model supportive, collegial behaviour and share both good and bad examples

of practice, provide coaching and scaffolding, assist articulation of knowledge and reflection

on experience, and encourage exploration of ideas and problem-solving processes (Collins et

al. cited by Woolley and Jarvis 2007); design assessment which includes tasks that are ‘low

stakes’ and formative, and provide feedback (Knight and Yorke 2003).

19

Fig. 1. Combined Learning for Emloyability and Research: a CLEAR approach (dynamic representation)

20

Academic PracticeGraduate / employability

attributesResearch capability

Lifelong learning skills

Individual Learning

Ontology / Pedagogiesconstructivism; reflective / experiential,inquiry based learningActivitiesresponsible contribution to group workreflection on individualand participative learning

Social LearningOntology / Pedagogiessocial constructivism; learning related to cultural discourses; inquiry based learningActivitiesgroup work peer assessment and feedback

The Tutorfacilitates entry to community of practice via

inquiry based learning and cognitive apprenticeshipshowing examples of own practice

The Student