RESEARCH-INTENSIVE LEARNING AT BIRMINGHAM.png

Expand all

+ What is it?

Research-intensive learning and teaching involves offering staff and students the unique benefits which may result from a true integration of teaching and research within research-intensive universities (RIUs).

At the first stage, it requires a shift from an often divisive vision of these two dimensions of our practice as separate and often in competition with each other.

Secondly, it requires designing curricula based on past principles (such as research-informed or research-based learning) to allow students to learn through a process of critical enquiry, enabling them to change mindset from that of passive 'receivers' of 'knowledge' to active pursuers and creators of it.

At a third stage, the boundaries between staff and students may be blurred, as learning and advancement of knowledge may occur in mutually beneficial fashion.

Finally, staff and students may end up co-creating new knowledge, and reaping the recognition and benefits which may result from this, such as publication or research success.

The work undertaken here is guided by the principles of Ernest Boyer's ideal of 'scholarship' as articulated in two critical pieces of work: the 1990 book Scholarship Reconsidered, and the findings of the Boyer Commission Report (1998), which outlines a 10-step model for changing curricula.

These principles directly informed and influenced the 2017 U21 position statement, which also underpins the work undertaken here.

Professor Kathy Armour, outlines in this video the principles of RILT, and the challenges we may face.

Video: 10 min 33 sec (click here to watch in segments by question)

+ How do I get started?

It is strongly advised to consult two documents before you get started:

The Boyer Commission Report (1998), especially the section titled "Ten ways to change undergraduate education" starting on page 14.

The U21 position statement (2017) titled "What is the Value Proposition for Students as Learners at Contemporary Research-Intensive Universities?"

Step 1: Skills

As a first step it would be extremely helpful to think of the key skills a practitioner has in your disciplinary area. What does a bioscientist do? What skills does a researcher in philosophy have? Such skills are critical for us as practitioners, and inform the day-to-day work we do with our students, such as teaching and assessment. They form an often implicit measure against which we judge the work of our students and colleagues. Therefore, the first step is to make these skills explicit for ourselves and our students.

It may help to consult other sources and principles in this initial work, such as the level of study, and especially QAA higher education qualification frameworks. Programme and/or module learning outcomes, as well as other external accreditor requirements should also be consulted.

Step 2: Practice

The second step is to see how you can embed and integrate the practice of such skills into your curriculum. If you hope that your students will develop critical thinking, you can (1) show them how you do it, and (2) allow them plenty of opportunities to do it themselves and get feedback on how they're doing.

Consider how your seminars, tutorials and lab sessions allow your students to learn and develop these skills of critical enquiry. Very important: are your students aware of the fact that this is happening? Often we focus on 'learning as content' so much that we neglect to flag to ourselves and our students the skills they gain alongside that content, and critically, that it is precisely what they can do with the content (be it primary data or secondary literature) that is truly the demonstration of learning we expect at this level.

Many colleagues already do this in their teaching, but often neglect to flag to students that this is what they're doing. This is partly because most of us have learned and developed these skills over a number of years, so we don't think of them explicitly.

Step 3: Assessment

A crucial step in any constructively aligned curriculum is to align the learning outcomes with (1) the activities our students carry out during a course and (2) the formative and summative assessment tasks and methods we use. Recent literature on assessment, and especially the work of David Boud, David Carless and Naomi Winstone among others, stresses the importance of formative, 'low' stakes assessment which allows students to practise the skills and knowledge they are expected to develop and learn, and to receive formative, supportive 'feed-forward' which allows them to improve.

Even better would be opportunities for students to 'own' their assessment tasks and approaches to it. Can they have a say in focus of their assessment project? How about the method?

Step 4: Benefits

If done well, the benefits of research-intensive learning can be great for all involved. The relationship between research and teaching does not need to be 'one way'. Rather, it can be mutually beneficial, and an often serendipitous and pleasant outcome from teaching is that it gives us ideas for research. Can students and staff co-create knowledge? Can we structure this model more deliberately and explicitly, rather than rely on good luck? Yes, we can, and we should.

Mike Neary's work at Lincoln placed the emphasis on students as producers, and the process of education as co-creation between staff and students. This is much closer to the ideals expressed by Wilhelm Von Humboldt and John Henry Newman in the 19th century, which positioned the university as a space for the mutual endeavour of pursuit of knowledge and enquiry.

+ How about the literature behind it?

+ Examples

Law School

Dr Julian Lonbay outlines how students on the module Global Legal Services select and pursue their own research projects, and complete assessments in a format of their choice.

Chemical Engineering

Dr Sophie Cox explains how teams of students on the module Product Design Exercise take an evidence-based approach to the design of a product or process, with guidance from researchers.

Biosciences

Colleagues from the MSc programme in Biosciences discuss how students are introduced to a research community from Year 1.

Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences

Lloyd Jenkins explains how undergraduate students in GEES are supported to become 'junior researchers', changing their mindset throughout their degree.

Liberal Arts and Natural Sciences

Julia Myatt and Simon Scott discuss how students on the LANS programme experience various inter- and multi-disciplinary approaches to research.

Political Science and International Studies

George Kyris explains how students on the module Conflict, Statehood and Sovereignty are empowered to select the focus and direction of their research, and consider publication of their work.

Biomedical Sciences

Karl Nightingale and Laura O'Neill explain how the BSc in Biomedical Sciences is a truly integrated, research-intensive programme.

+ Can HEFi help?

HEFi will be running iterations of a curriculum design workshop with a focus on research-intensive learning. This workshop can be adapted in collaboration with programme teams to support curriculum development.

You may also want to consider the curriculum retreat resources and workshops designed by Danielle Hinton.

Please contact Marios Hadjianastasis directly on m.hadjianastasis@bham.ac.uk for a discussion.

+ References and Resources