top of page
Writing on the Board

Practical exercises

Authentic work experiences

White Structure

Critical thinking

​by Simon Moss

Introduction

Because of the prospect that artificial intelligence will usurp many roles, skills that cannot be readily assumed by AI are likely to become increasingly valuable in the future.  Scholars tends to maintain that critical thinking, broadly defined, is likely to be one of the skills that will be most cherished in the future (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). 

 

Scholars often assume that critical thinking can be taught (e.g., Halpern, 1998; Hernstein et al.,1986)—a vital goal of tertiary institutions.  Nevertheless, as research indicates, attendance at tertiary institution does not always enhance critical thinking (e.g., Stedman & Adams, 2012; Willingham, 2008).  And many of the programs that are designed to enhance critical thinking primarily revolve around exercises in which students practice using evidence and data to assess hypotheses and to derive conclusions.

 

Definition of critical thinking

Many scholars have attempted to define the hallmarks of critical thinking.  For example, some researchers define critical thinking as an act of reflection and contemplation in which individuals decide which propositions to believe and which activities to pursue (e.g., Ennis, 2011).  Similarly, some individuals define critical thinking as a capacity to evaluate statements, propositions, and arguments effectively (e.g., Lawson, 1999). 

 

Instead, some commentators apply the term critical thinking to encompass a sequence of operations, in which individuals generate hypotheses about a topic and then design, perform, and analyze investigations—from casual reading or contemplation to systematic experiments—that assess these hypotheses (e.g., Dell'Olio & Donk, 2007).  This conceptualization has encouraged scholars to identify the key skills that underpin critical thinking.  For example, as Liu and Pásztor (2022), critical thinking may entail several constellations of skills.  First, individuals need to analyze arguments, pose questions, identify assumptions, and judge the credibility of sources to clarify issues or problems.  Second, individuals need to establish and verify hypotheses, utilize verbal reasoning, recognize uncertainty, and apply creativity to propose the potential solutions to problem.  In addition, individuals need to analyze data and generate inferences from these data to finalize and evaluate their decisions.

​

Similarly, Facione (2020) distinguished six facets of critical thinking. Specifically, people who think critically can

 

  • interpret or understand the significance of situations.  They can extract the key theme or message from text.  They can paraphrase someone.  They can categorize various objects. 

  • analyze or extract relationships between concepts. They can identify the similarities and differences between objects or approaches.  They can identify which evidence supports or refutes a claim. They can organize concepts hierarchically.

  • evaluate the validity or credibility of statements.  They can decide which of two or more arguments are more consistent with the evidence or which of two speakers is more credible, for instance

  • infer conclusions or actions from the relevant data. They can collate the relevant information and then decide how to proceed or which options they could pursue

  • explain their reasoning.  That is, they can describe their methods or results.  They can clarify how they derived a conclusion or recommendation from these results, and so forth

  • they can monitor and to adapt cognitive operations, sometimes called meta-cognition.  They can revise both how they generated a conclusion and can revise this conclusion if needed.

 

Measurement of critical thinking habits or styles

Researchers have developed a variety of methods to measure critical thinking tendencies and skills.  For example, Facione and Facione (1992) developed a seminal measure—the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory—to measure the habits or attributes that enable individuals to develop and apply critical thinking skills.  These habits or attributes include truth-seeking, open-mindedness, the anticipation of possible consequences, proceeding systematically, confidence in the power of reasoning, inquisitive to learning, and mature judgment.

 

Measurement of critical thinking skills

Rather than merely assess the attributes, habits, or practices that promote critical thinking, some instruments actually measure critical thinking skills.   Some examples include

 

  • the Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (Watson, 1980) that measures the recognition of assumptions, deduction, inference, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments.

  • the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione, 1990a) measures analysis, evaluation, inference, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning

  • the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment tests verbal reasoning, argument analysis, hypothesis testing, contemplation of likelihood and uncertainty, as well as reaching decisions and solving problems (Butler et al., 2012)

  • the SHL Critical Reasoning Test Battery:

  • the Cornell Critical Thinking Assessment, and

  • the Cappfinity Critical Reasoning Test:

  • the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (Stein, Haynes, & Redding, 2016)

 

To demonstrate the Watson and Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, in some questions, individuals need to identify the assumption that is implicit in a statement.  For instance, participants might receive the statement “only people earning a high salary can afford a fast car”.  They would need to determine the assumptions this statement implies, such as fast cars tend to be more expensive than other cars or wealth is primarily dependent on salary.  To answer the question, participants would choose one of several alternatives.

 

To measure the capacity of individuals to evaluate arguments, participants receive a topic of debate, such as “Should the government pay student’s tuition fees?”.  Next, they would receive various arguments and need to decide which of these arguments are relevant to the debate.  For instance, “Many students cannot afford to study otherwise” might be a strong argument to support this topic, but “Finland pays tuition fees” might not be a strong argument.

 

To gauge the ability of individuals to apply deductive logic, candidate receive some information and need to decide the conclusions they can derive from this passage.  To illustrate, if informed that heart disease can increase the likelihood of dementia and that exercise reduces the likelihood heart disease, participants would need to decide whether lifestyle choices can affect the probability they will be diagnosed with dementia later in life. 

 

To measure the ability of participants to generate inferences, candidates will again receive various snippets of information.  Next, they need to decide whether some conclusion is true, possibly true, possibly false, or false. 

 

Interventions to improve critical thinking: Problem-based learning

Many studies have explored the effect of problem-based learning on critical thinking.  When students participate in problem-based learning, they work, usually in groups, to solve multifaceted problems, with no definitive boundaries or solutions.  To solve these problems, students are encouraged to analyze the feature and limitations of the issue, clarify the goals the team want to achieve, collect ideas or resources to solve the problem, integrate these ideas and resources, and reflect on the experience (Lin et al., 2010). These activities overlap with the various facets of critical thinking and thus should reinforce these facets and promote critical thinking. 

 

Teachers commonly use one of two formats to foster problem-based learning.  First, one variant revolves around scenarios, in which the problem is an actual issue that students attempt to solve rather than a fictional or contrived matter (Lave & Wenger, 1991).  The second variant revolves around cases, generated from actual life, but translated into a script that students discuss in class.  This second variant is studied more frequently.  

 

Liu and Pásztor (2022) conducted a meta-analysis to ascertain the people and circumstances whose critical thinking benefits most from problem-based learning.  As this meta-analysis revealed, problem-based learning is more likely to enhance critical thinking skills in students who have almost completed their degree, living in Western nations, studying one of the sciences, and collaborating in groups of more than 10 individuals. Furthermore, problem-based learning over many weeks is especially likely to enhance these critical thinking skills.  In contrast, problem-based learning is more likely to enhance critical thinking habits or attributes—the tendencies that promote critical thinking—when the students were studying medicine or studying online and contributing to these scenarios over a moderate, but not excessive, duration.  These results indicate that problem-based learning may enhance critical thinking, but instructors should be cognisant of how to construct the cases and classes appropriately. 

​

Decision-based learning

Some research indicates that decision-based learning—a technique that some instructors use to teach students how to solve problems—can enhance the critical thinking of students.   To illustrate decision-based thinking, students are exposed to a decision tree.  This decision tree summarizes the key choices that a specialist on the topic, such as statistics, might reach to solve a problem.  To illustrate, as the yellow pathway in the following figure shows, data analysts might first decide whether they need to compare groups, such as males and females.  Is so, the analysts might then need to decide whether they want to examine multiple outcomes at a time.  If not, they might next decide whether they need to control variables, and so forth.  However, rather than describe the entire decision tree holistically

 

  • the instructor first presents only one problem to solve.  The instructor then applies the decision tree to solve this problem—but only presents enough information to justify each choice. 

  • the instructor then applies the same procedure to solve additional problems, seeking the contributions of students to reach each choice

  • once the students are familiar with the decision tree, the instructor gradually removes branches and presents more problems.  The students must thus internalize the decision tree to help solve these problems

  • finally, the instructor presents some problems in which the choices are ambiguous.  The students must thus adapt the decision tree to help solve these problems

 

Plummer et al. (2022) showed this technique does not only enhance learning but also improves critical thinking in general.  That is, if students were exposed to decision-based learning, they performed especially well on exam questions that overlap with tests of critical thinking.  The effect size was large.    

 

Arguably, decision-based learning shows how specific principles or choices are relevant only in particular conditions—at specific points in the decision tree.  This capacity to apply principles only under specific conditions, called conditional knowledge, enhances critical thinking. 

 

Interventions to improve critical thinking: Team-based learning

Silberman et al. (2021) examined whether a similar program—in which teams collaborate to solve problems—can enhance critical thinking in pharmacy students.  Team-based learning comprises three phases.  First, during the preparation phase, and before class, students must study relevant study materials, such as textbooks and videos.  Second, during the readiness assurance process, students complete a multiple-choice test to assess knowledge on these marterials.  Next, students complete the test again, but as a team.  They can receive immediate feedback after each question.  Because students answer these questions as a team, they need to utilize principles to defend their answers—and thus learn to evaluate the strength of arguments effectively.  And, because the teams receive immediate feedback, they can review and discuss their reasoning to enhance their critical thinking skills.  Third, during the application phase, students apply the skills they have learned to address significant problems in teams.  Taken together, this approach teaches students how to challenge assumptions, integrate evidence, and apply other critical thinking skills.   

 

Participants completed a measure of critical thinking, the Health Science Reasoning Test, before and after the program—separated by two years.  This test assesses the extent to which students exhibit skills in analysis, interpretation, inference, explanation, evaluation, and induction as well as numeracy, and deduction. The program did improve critical thinking, especially in participants whose scores before the program were below average.

 

Interventions to improve critical thinking: Inquiry-based learning

Sutiani (2021) developed a set of learning materials that encourage inquiry-based learning, combined with scientific literacy, ultimately to foster the critical thinking skills of students.  The study demonstrates these materials can indeed improve critical thinking skills.

 

In essence, the program comprised nine phases.   In essence, the materials offer guidance to students on how to conduct a laboratory experiment to generate a scientific discovery and report.  In particular, students

 

  • observe some relevant chemistry phenomenon and identify a problem to solve

  • pose questions this phenomenon elicits

  • formulate hypotheses and plan, as well as implement, an investigation to explore theses hypotheses

  • analyze the results, decide whether the results support the hypotheses, and propose initial conclusions

  • integrate these conclusions with past knowledge, theories, and concepts

  • present the findings, facilitate discussions, and review the conclusions

  • apply insights to solve various problems in everyday life

 

Interventions to improve critical thinking: Concept mapping

Concept mapping is another method that has been applied to foster critical thinking. To illustrate, Bilik et al. (2020) showed that concept mapping increases the motivation of nursing students to engage in critical thinking. 

 

A concept map is a diagram that displays circles, called nodes, that are connected with arrows, called arcs.  The nodes tend to represent concepts.  In health settings, concepts might include symptoms, attributes, and events that affect health.  The lines tend to represent relationships between concepts.  Next to each arc are some words that describe the relationship, such as “increase”, “entails”, or precedes”.  The concepts tend to be arranged hierarchically.  More inclusive concepts, such as “illness”, are positioned towards the top.  Most specific concepts, such as “skin rash”, are below. Typically, individuals utilise concept maps to resolve or to explore specific questions, such as “what are the causes of this illness?”. 

 

In this study, some nursing students were randomly allocated to a condition in which they learned to apply concept mapping. To learn about this method, students received a presentation, accompanied with PowerPoint, about the relevance of concept maps to nursing, how to construct concept maps, variations of concept maps, practice of concept maps with various cases, and so forth.  The researchers showed that education about concept maps did enhance the motivation of individuals to apply critical thinking, as gauged by the Critical Thinking Motivational Scale (Valenzuela et al., 2011).

 

The Critical Thinking Motivational Scale comprises questions that assess the perceived capacity of individuals to learn critical thinking effectively and the perceived value of critical thinking.  Typical items include “I am able to learn how to think in a rigorous way” and “For me, it is important to learn how to reason correctly”.

 

Interventions to teach critical thinking: Variations across disciplines

Some researchers argue that teachers can explicitly teach critical thinking (Cargas et al., 2017).  For example, Cargas et al. (2017) developed a program that primarily involved a set of exercises to practice and a standard rubric to guide and to assess performance on these exercises.  The exercises varied across the disciplines.  To illustrate, in the Social Sciences, the task revolved around the safety of genetically modified organisms on human health.  In particular, the researchers extracted excerpts from a respected journal, a popular magazine, a person on the internet who claims to be a specialist, and several book chapters the reviewed one experiment but reached different conclusions.  The aggregate of these excerpts comprised fewer than 20 pages but comprised both solid and weak arguments from scientific and other sources.   

 

To complete the task, the students reiterated the main conclusion each author reached, analyzed the evidence that supported each conclusion, and evaluated the conclusions.  Finally, the students attempted to synthesize findings across the excerpts and propose a conclusion about the safety of genetically modified organisms.  After completing the task, the instructor also prompted students to reflect upon their use of critical thinking.

 

In the Life Sciences, the students reviewed a clinical case study instead, generated hypotheses, identified which data they should collate to assess the hypotheses, analyze and evaluate the data, integrate these findings to generate a conclusion, and reflect upon the skills and thoughts they applied to reach this conclusion. 

 

Although the tasks varied across disciplines, instructors applied a common rubric both to assess performance and to communicate expectations to students.  For exmaple, students received elevated marks if the students

 

  • generate three or more hypotheses or possible explanation of the observations or data

  • specifies the observations or data that may be helpful to assess the hypotheses or explanations

  • distinguishes observations or data that are relevant to the hypotheses or explanations from observations or data that are irrelevant to the hypotheses

  • delineates two or more results, findings, or patterns of data that could support or refute the hypotheses

 

Cargas et al. (2017) then tested the critical thinking skills of students before and after they completed a set of these exercises.  Specifically, participants completed the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (Stein, Haynes, & Redding, 2016).  Participation in these exercises improved critical thinking skills in some, but not all, disciplines.   In addition, these exercises improved competence in the discipline in which these students were enrolled: chemistry.

 

Perceptions of which teaching strategies foster critical thinking

Some research was designed to uncover the range of strategies that instructors utilize to purportedly enhance the critical thinking skills of students.  For example, Westerdahl et al. (2022) conducted a scoping review to collate the teaching skills that educators utilize to enhance the critical thinking of nursing students—and the perceptions of these strategies, from the perspective of educators and students.   This review showed that, to foster critical thinking

 

  • teachers often utilised techniques that encourage students to construct their knowledge; these techniques, collectively referred to as a facilitative approach, includes problem-based learning, case studies, scenarios and vignettes, concept mapping, and reflective writing

  • both students and educators felt the atmosphere during class discussion should be collaborative and respectful rather than judgmental or threatening

  • both students and educators felt classes should revolve around realistic or actual scenarios, discussed in smaller groups

 

Controversies about critical thinking

According to Liyanage et al. (2021), academics often express assumptions about the critical thinking skills of particular cultural and ethnic communities, paradoxically without the requisite critical evaluation of this assumption.  Yet, because Western tertiary institutions feel compelled to develop and assess the critical thinking skills of students, they might develop procedures that ultimately mirror the rote learning they deride in many non-Western cultures. 

 

References

  • Bilik, Ö., Kankaya, E. A., & Deveci, Z. (2020). Effects of web-based concept mapping education on students' concept mapping and critical thinking skills: A double blind, randomized, controlled study. Nurse education today, 86.

  • Cargas, S., Williams, S., & Rosenberg, M. (2017). An approach to teaching critical thinking across disciplines using performance tasks with a common rubric. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 26, 24-37.Facione, P. A. (2020). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment.

  • Dell'Olio, J. M., & Donk, T. (2007). Models of teaching: Connecting student learning with standards. Sage Publications.

  • Ennis, R. (2011). Critical thinking: Reflection and perspective Part II. Inquiry: Critical thinking across the Disciplines, 26(2), 5-19.

  • Facione, P. A. (2020). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment.

  • Facione, N. C., & Facione, P. A. (1996). Externalizing the critical thinking in knowledge development and clinical judgment. Nursing Outlook, 44(3), 129-136.

  • Facione, P. A., & Facione, N.C. (1992). California critical thinking disposition inventory.  California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA.

  • Facione, P. A., Sanchez, C. A., Facione, N. C., & Gainen, J. (1995). The disposition toward critical thinking. The Journal of General Education, 44(1), 1-25.

  • Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Disposition, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American psychologist, 53(4).

  • Hart, C., Da Costa, C., D'Souza, D., Kimpton, A., & Ljbusic, J. (2021). Exploring higher education students’ critical thinking skills through content analysis. Thinking skills and Creativity, 41.

  • Hernstein, R. J., Nickerson, R. S., de Sanchez, M., & Swets, J. A. (1986). Teaching thinking skills. American Psychologist, 41(11).

  • Kim, H. K. (2003). Critical thinking, learning and Confucius: A positive assessment. Journal of philosophy of education, 37(1), 71-87.

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Learning in doing: Social, cognitive, and computational perspectives. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, 10.

  • Lawson, T. J. (1999). Assessing psychological critical thinking as a learning outcome for psychology majors. Teaching of Psychology.

  • Lin, C. F., Lu, M. S., Chung, C. C., & Yang, C. M. (2010). A comparison of problem-based learning and conventional teaching in nursing ethics education. Nursing ethics, 17(3), 373-382.

  • Liu, Y., & Pásztor, A. (2022). Effects of problem-based learning instructional intervention on critical thinking in higher education: A meta-analysis. Thinking Skills and Creativity.

  • Liyanage, I., Walker, T., & Shokouhi, H. (2021). Are we thinking critically about critical thinking? Uncovering uncertainties in internationalised higher education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39.

  • Marin, L. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking skills and creativity, 6(1), 1-13.

  • Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Ascd.

  • Plummer, K. J., Kebritchi, M., Leary, H. M., & Halverson, D. M. (2022). Enhancing critical thinking skills through Decision-Based Learning. Innovative Higher Education.

  • Silberman, D., Carpenter, R., Takemoto, J. K., & Coyne, L. (2021). The impact of team-based learning on the critical thinking skills of pharmacy students. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 13(2), 116-121.

  • Stedman, N. L., & Adams, B. L. (2012). Identifying faculty's knowledge of critical thinking concepts and perceptions of critical thinking instruction in higher education. Nacta Journal, 56(2), 9-14.

  • Stein, B., Haynes, A., & Redding, M. (2016, April). National dissemination of the CAT instrument: Lessons learned and implications. In Proceedings of the AAAS/NSF envisioning the future of undergraduate STEM education: research and practice symposium.

  • Sutiani, A. (2021). Implementation of an inquiry learning model with science literacy to improve student critical thinking skills. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 117-138.

  • Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley & Sons.

  • Valenzuela, J., Nieto, A., & Saiz, C. (2011). Critical thinking motivational scale: A contribution to the study of relationship between critical thinking and motivation.

  • Westerdahl, F., Carlson, E., Wennick, A., & Borglin, G. (2022). Bachelor nursing students´ and their educators´ experiences of teaching strategies targeting critical thinking: A scoping review. Nurse Education in Practice.

  • Willingham, D. T. (2008). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? Arts Education Policy Review, 109(4), 21-32.

White Structure

The teaching-research nexus

​by Simon Moss

Introduction

Many tertiary institutions, especially universities, conduct significant levels of teaching and research.  Consequently, many scholars, administrators, students, and other individuals are interested in the relationship or interplay between teaching and research—sometimes broadly called the teaching-research nexus.

.

Scholars vary on how they define or conceptualize this nexus between teaching and research.  To a significant extent, this variation depends on how they define research (Wuetherick, 2009). For example, when alluding to this nexus, some commentators assumed or argued that excellence in research would somehow translate to excellence in teaching, although studies tend to challenge this assumption (Hattie & Marsh, 1996)

 

Wuetherick (2009) differentiated five manifestations of this nexus between teaching and research.  First, research can inform teaching.  For example, academics can discuss their research activity and research knowledge in their classes.  Second, in classes, students should learn about research methods and how research can inform the construction of information, knowledge, and wisdom. Third, classes can revolve around attempts to apply research to solve problems, epitomized by problem-based learning and inquiry-based learning (see Slapcoff, 2014).  Fourth, students can complete actual research as part of their degree, epitomized by dissertations and theses.  Finally, academics may conduct research on how to teach more effectively, referred to as the scholarship of teaching and learning. How this nexus is manifested primarily depends on the capabilities or values of academics and the distribution of resources (Coate et al., 2001).

 

Scholars have also developed other taxonomies to classify this interplay between teaching and research (see also Musthafa & Sajila, 2014). Griffiths (2004), for instance, differentiates four approaches that differentiate how research can inform the curriculum: research-led, research-oriented, research-based, and research-informed.  When the curriculum is research-led, teachers choose the content that is strongly informed by their research interests and activity.  When the curriculum is research-oriented, the teacher imparts research skills primarily to clarify how knowledge is shaped and developed. Students learn to question and explore knowledge. When the curriculum is research-based, the activities primarily revolve around research and inquiry.  Rather than deliver content, the teacher and students collaborate to explore and inquire about issues.  Finally, when the curriculum is research-informed, teachers utilize research to optimize the methods and pedagogies they apply to teach the content.  

 

Relationship between teaching performance and research performance

Discussions about the nexus between teaching and research imply that excellence in one of these domains could translate to excellence in the other domain.  To assess this assumption, many studies have explored the association between teaching performance and research performance.

 

For example, Barrett and Milbourne (2012) explored the association between research performance and teaching performance.  To measure research performance, the authors utilized a ranking scheme, called the Excellence in Research for Australia in 2010.  To measure teaching performance, the researchers utilized the Learning and Teaching Performance Fund measures, partly derived from the Graduate Destination Survey and Course Experience Questionnaire, coupled with student completion rates and student retention rates.  Research performance was not significantly related to subjective measures of teaching, such as satisfaction with satisfaction with overall quality of the courses and satisfaction with generic skills acquired and indeed was inversely associated with perceptions of good teaching.  Yet, research performance was positively associated with completion rates--that is, the proportion of units completed successfully—and retention rates.

 

Hattie and Marsh (1996) conducted a meta-analysis to explore this association between teaching performance and research performance.  As this meta-analysis revealed, measures of teaching performance are only negligibly associated with measures of research performance.  Therefore, proficiency in research does not predict, but does not preclude, proficiency in teaching.

 

To explain this finding, Hattie and Marsh (1996) suggested that perhaps two accounts might explain how teaching performance and research performance affect one another—but these two accounts generate opposing results and thus nullify each other.  According to the first account, some capabilities might benefit teaching and research.  Staff who have developed these capabilities will thrive in teaching and research; staff who have not developed these capabilities will not perform effectively in either of these domains.  This account, therefore, predicts a positive association between teaching and research.

 

According to the second account, the demands on academic staff are steep.  Therefore, staff cannot dedicate enough time to complete all their tasks to the level they desire.  Some academics will dedicate more of their time to teaching—and thus thrive in teaching but not research.  Other academics will prioritize research and thus thrive in research but not teaching. This account predicts a negative association between teaching and research.  Because these two accounts operate in parallel, the positive association and negative association between teaching and research tend to nullify one another.

 

Interestingly, this low correlation between teaching performance and research performance overlaps closely with the expectations of students.  That is, Stappenbelt (2013) conducted a survey and facilitated discussions with students about the association between teaching and research. In general, students did not feel that research activities were relevant to teaching.  They did not generally feel that research conducted by academics weas relevant to their learning.  When discussing which characteristics of teachers they admire, students tended to refer to communication ability, subject knowledge, interest in student learning, enthusiasm, approachability, and organisational skills rather than research capabilities.

 

Benefits of research activity on class performance

Many scholars and academics presuppose that participation in research activity will benefit the learning of students.  Yet, the empirical literature has uncovered some benefits and drawbacks of this participation in research activity.  For example, in one study, described by Wuetherick (2009), half the students who engaged in research activity—such as contributed to a research project or attended a research seminar—felt this participation facilitated their learning.  For example, this activity stimulated their interest and exploration of a topic. 

 

Yet, about a quarter of these students felt that research activity may have impeded their learning. For example, according to these students, some instructors or lecturers prioritize research to the detriment of teaching.  These instructors are not as available to students, skim content that is not as related to their research, and do not always communicate as effectively about the content of this course.

 

Other research, conducted by Seymour et al. (2004), was more sanguine about the benefits of undergraduate research activity on these students.  In this study, undergraduate science were granted opportunities to engage in research projects during vacation time. These students tended to report greater confidence in their skills, because they felt like a legitimate scientist, improved critical thinking, enhanced capacity to solve problems, and better communication skills. Some of these students felt this experience had clarified their career goals as well, potentially enhancing their motivation.  

 

Determinants of the nexus between teaching and research

Many of the conditions, circumstances, and practices of tertiary institutions shape the degree to which research activity facilitates teaching activity or vice versa.  Even how academics define or conceptualize their role can affect this interplay between teaching and research.  As Colbeck (1998) observed, for example, academics who perceived their teaching roles and research roles as integrated rather than separate were more likely to conduct activities that facilitated both teaching and research simultaneously.

 

The culture and regulations of institutions, regions, and nations may also affect the nexus between teaching and research.  To illustrate, one study explored differences in this nexus between two nations: UK and Canada (Turner et al, 2008).  Specifically, this study reported the likelihood that university students had attended research seminars or contributed to research projects.  Canadian students were more likely than UK students to have engaged in this research activity, suggesting the nexus might be stronger in Canada. 

 

Some of the implicit assumptions of national or workplace cultures may stifle the nexus between teaching and research.  For example, as Brew (2010) underscores, some academics do not respect the intellectual and scholarly capacity of students—even referring to older, experienced students as kids. Consequently, these academics may not be as inclined to consider students as partner in exploration and inquiry.

 

Occasionally, the variations across national or workplace cultures are not as subtle.  For example, the explicit objectives of funding bodies can also affect the integration of teaching and research.  To illustrate, National Science Foundation—the primary US agency that funds basic research—explicitly supports research that “strengthen… science education programs at all levels”.  In contrast, equivalent agencies in Australia, such as the Australian Research Council and National Health and

Medical Research Council, do not prioritize research that benefits undergraduate students or enables these students to participate in research activity.

 

Similarly, McKenzie et al. (2018) also feel that government schemes that prioritize research ranking tends to impede the nexus between teaching and research. For example, institutions tend to receive higher ranks if a subset of their researchers are extraordinary.  Institutions are thus motivated to recruit staff who are exemplary researchers or efficient teachers rather than both. 

 

The practices that institutions apply to appraise and to manage performance also affect the nexus between research and teaching.  For example, in some institutions, line managers assess the degree to which academics have attempted to integrate their teaching and research.  In many institutions, however, line managers do not assess this integration but consider or appraise teaching and research as separate activities (Taylor, 2008). Therefore, academics do not feel they receive any incentive to integrate these domains.    

 

Besides the management of individuals, the management of courses may also shape the nexus between research and teaching.  To illustrate, in some universities, when they propose or justify a course, staff must clarify how research has guided or informed the teaching (Taylor, 2008).

 

These attempts to encourage academics to integrate teaching and research may be more effective in some disciplines than in other disciplines.  For example, as Taylor (2008) revealed, this integration between teaching and research was not as pronounced or conspicuous in medicine or other health professions compared to the natural sciences and social sciences.  The reason is that health students must fulfill demanding professional codes, regulations, and requirements.  This steep demand may override the perceived significance of recent advances in research.  Likewise, Colbeck (1998) suggests that academics cannot as readily integrate teaching and research in disciplines in which the curriculum must be relatively similar across institutions.

 

Examples of this nexus between teaching and research

Some research is designed to illustrate specific examples of how teachers utilize research to enhance student learning. For example, Boyd et al. (2010) presented case studies that illustrate these activities.  As this research showed, some teachers demonstrate how research skills are central to specific careers, such as the media.  These teachers show how many of the activities of professionals overlap closely with research skills. Other teachers utilize the latest research to challenge the preconceptions of students and motivate greater exploration and inquiry. 

 

Practical implications

Scholars have proposed a range of strategies to enhance the capacity of academics to integrate teaching activity and research activity.  First, staff could receive more training on how to integrate these skills effectively (Taylor, 2008)—and performance appraisals and other measures could be applied to encourage staff to embrace this training.

 

Second, institutions need to introduce more flexible schedules and timetables to enable staff to allocate their time to teaching and to research optimally (Taylor, 2008).  For example, academics might want to conduct research at particular times—perhaps because particular faculties or collaborators are available at these times—but teaching demands preclude this activity. 

 

Third, academics can engage their students in their research, sometimes to facilitate their own research productivity.  For examples, students may complete assignments in which they need to read the publications of their teacher and offer feedback or suggestions.  Or students might contribute to ideas that are related to a research centre (for examples, see Boyd et al., 2010)

 

Similarly, Brew (2010) identifies other approaches that enable students to facilitate the research endeavors of academics.  Students can gather pilot data to inform grant applications or journal articles, can test the suitable of equipment or techniques, or can facilitate the development of online resources that benefit future research projects. 

 

Fourth, institutions can also introduce funding and awards schemes to promote the integration of teaching and research.  For instance, the University of Sydney introduced a competitive grants scheme to support research on teaching and learning (Brew (2010). 

 

References

  • Arvanitakis, J., & Matthews, I. (2014). Bridging the divides: an interdisciplinary perspective on the teaching-research nexus and community engagement. Adelaide Law Review, The, 35(1), 35-54.

  • Barrett, G. F., & Milbourne, R. (2012). Do excellent research environments produce better learning and teaching outcomes? Economic Record, 88, 70-77.

  • Boyd, W. E., O'Reilly, M., Bucher, D., Fisher, K., Morton, A., Harrison, P. L., ... & Rendall, K. (2010). Activating the teaching-research nexus in smaller universities: Case studies highlighting diversity of practice. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 7(2).

  • Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. New York: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

  • Brew, A. (2010). Imperatives and challenges in integrating teaching and research. Higher Education Research & Development, 29(2), 139-150.

  • Cherastidtham, I., Sonnemann, J., & Norton, A. (2013). The teaching-research nexus in higher education. Grattan Institute, Melbourne, Australia.

  • Coate, K., Barnett, R., & Williams, G. (2001). Relationships between teaching and research in higher education in England. Higher Educational Quarterly, 55(2), 158–174

  • Colbeck, C. C. (1998). Merging in a seamless blend: How faculty integrate teaching and research. Journal of Higher Education, 69, 647-671

  • Dooley, K., Bender, S., Ferris, G., Frankham, B., Munt, A., & Schleser, M. (2020). Immersive media practices in the classroom: models of the teaching research nexus in an Australian context. Media Practice and Education, 21(4), 241-260.

  • Douglas, A. S. (2013). Advice from the professors in a university Social Sciences department on the teaching-research nexus. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(4), 377-388.

  • Duff, A., & Marriott, N. (2017). The teaching–research gestalt: the development of a discipline-based scale. Studies in Higher Education, 42(12), 2406-2420.

  • Eley, D. S., & Wilkinson, D. (2015). Building a teaching-research nexus in a research-intensive university: rejuvenating the recruitment and training of the clinician scientist. Medical teacher, 37(2), 174-180.

  • Geschwind, L., & Broström, A. (2015). Managing the teaching–research nexus: Ideals and practice in research-oriented universities. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 60-73.

  • Ghourchian, N. G., Jaafari, P., Ganeni, M., & Shayan, S. (2014). Teaching-Research Nexus in the World’s Top Universities: a Review Study with Presenting a Conceptual Model. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 14(8), 715-730.

  • Griffiths, R. (2004). Knowledge production and the research-teaching nexus: The case of the built environment disciplines. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 709–726

  • Hattie, J., & Marsh, H. W. (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 66(4), 507-542.

  • Horta, H., Dautel, V., & Veloso, F. M. (2012). An output perspective on the teaching–research nexus: an analysis focusing on the United States higher education system. Studies in Higher Education, 37(2), 171-187.

  • Jones, S. (2013). Beyond the teaching-research nexus: the Scholarship-Teaching-Action-Research (STAR) conceptual framework. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(3), 381-391.

  • Lips, H. M. (1999). Issues of power and risk at the heart of the teaching/research nexus. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23(1), 215-217.

  • Marsh, H. W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Complementary, antagonistic, or independent constructs? The journal of higher education, 73(5), 603-641.

  • McKenzie, A., Griggs, L., Snell, R., & Meyers, G. D. (2018). The myth of the teaching-research nexus. Legal Education Review, 28.

  • Musthafa, M. M. A., & Sajila, K. M. (2014). Reconsidering the teaching–research nexus in higher education. Higher Education for the Future, 1(2), 123-138.

  • National Science Foundation. (2001) GPRA strategic plan. Retrieved October 5, 2004, from

  • Neumann, R. (1992). Perceptions of the teaching-research nexus: A framework for analysis. Higher Education, 23(2), 159-171.

  • Neumann, R. (1996). Researching the teaching-research nexus: A critical review. Australian journal of education, 40(1), 5-18.

  • Robertson, J., Bond, C. (2001). Experiences of the relation between teaching and research: What do academics value? Higher Education Research and Development, 20(10), 5–19.

  • Seymour, E., Hunter, A.B., Laursen, S.L., & Deantoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Wiley InterScience

  • Slapcoff, M. (2014). The inquiry network: a model for promoting the teaching-research nexus in higher education. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(2), 68-84.

  • Stappenbelt, B. (2013). The effectiveness of the teaching-research nexus in facilitating student learning. Engineering Education, 8(1), 111-121.

  • Taylor, J. (2007). The teaching: research nexus: a model for institutional management. Higher education, 54(6), 867-884.

  • Taylor, J. (2008). The teaching–research nexus and the importance of context: A comparative study of England and Sweden. Compare, 38(1), 53-69.

  • Turner N, Wuetherick B, and Healey M. (2008). International perspectives on student awareness, experiences, and perceptions of research. International Journal for Academic Development. 13,. 199-211.

  • Wuetherick, B. (2009). Unpacking the teaching-research nexus and its influence on academic practice. Academic Matters. www.nsf.gov/publs/2001/nsf0104/strategy.htm

White Structure

ePortfolios

by Simon Moss

Introduction

Although these platforms vary appreciably, ePortfolios enable students to collect, arrange, and integrate artefacts—such as essays, reflections, graphics, images, videos, and hyperlinks—they have either created or located.  Students can use these ePortfolios to

 

  • develop a narrative or plan about their strengths, goals, and skills they want to develop to reach these goals

  • collaborate with peers or other individuals

  • demonstrate their progress to their teachers

  • display their capabilities and qualities to potential employers. 

 

To illustrate, in one class on educational psychology, preservice teachers needed to summarize the various theories they learned in this course and upload these summaries into an ePortfolio.  Next, these students needed to consider how they could apply these theories in practice and how these theories shape their teaching philosophy (Ciesielkiewicz, 2019).             

Many tertiary education institutions have purchased software that enable students to construct these ePortfolios, also called webfolios or efolios.  This software includes Brightspace, Chalk & Wire, Pebblepad, Portfolio Village, and Yola.  In addition, some of this software, such as Mahara, myEdu, Pathbrite, and Seelio, are free.  Other software, such as FolioSpaces, are free unless users prefer the premium versions.      

 

Definitions of ePortfolios

Although scholars have not reached consensus on the definition of this term, ePortfolios are typically platforms that enable students to

 

  • maintain a digital repository of items, artefacts, or resources—including texts, graphics, images, sounds, and videos (Abrami & Barrett 2005; Lorenzo & Ittleson 2005)

  • utilize this repository to demonstrate their skills, qualities, achievements, and values to other people (Lorenzo & Ittleson 2005), such as potential employers or accreditation bodies, as well as to themselves

  • share and exchange ideas, information, and resources with other individuals, including peers (Lorenzo & Ittleson 2005)

  • organize, coordinate, and integrate these artefacts (Abrami & Barrett 2005) and to reflect on their learning experiences (Lorenzo & Ittleson 2005)

 

These ePortfolios can be used and configured to fulfill distinct purposes, such as assessment, presentation, learning, personal development, and collaboration.  ePortfolios are not confined to tertiary education.  In primary and secondary school, ePortfolios are often referred to as digital portfolios, digital storytelling, and a range of other terms.  In business, ePortfolios are often referred to as personal development planning records, career management tools, and performance management tools (Hallam & Creagh, 2010).

 

History of ePortfolios

Farrell (2020) traced the evolution of ePortfolios from the 1970s to 2020.  During the 1970s, portfolios, already common in art, drifted into higher education, partly to escape the constraints of standardized testing.  In English classes at Brigham Young University in Utah, students would insert some of their best work into a manila folder.  An educator who was not the teacher of this class would then read and evaluate this portfolio of work.   

 

Rather than conceptualize portfolios as an alternative to standardized tests, proponents of competency-based approaches perceived this tool as an opportunity that enables students to document and to demonstrate the competencies they have developed, like a rich CV.   In contrast, proponents of constructivist theories—such as situated learning, transformational learning, and reflective learning—felt that portfolios could help students reflect on their learning and construct their own knowledge about a topic. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the use of portfolios diversified.  Portfolios extended into many disciplines, such as science, engineering, nursing, and medicine, and was popular in many nations, from Norway and Finland to Australia.

 

Around the 1990s, as technology burgeoned in education, digital variants of these portfolios first surfaced.  Institutions attempted to locate digital tools that enabled students to store and to present their portfolios in a digital form.  In essence, these platforms, such Docex on Macs, were primarily attempts to store portfolios in digital versions of filing cabinets—until Barrett (1994) suggested that students could maintain two electronic portfolios: a portfolio of all the progress that students forge as well as a portfolio of the best work, integrating the competency-based and constructivist approaches.

 

Then, in a special issue of a journal, Computers and Composition, dedicated to electronic portfolios, Purves (1996) suggested that portfolios might comprise a series of artefacts, such as texts or videos, that students construct, arrange, and link, to generate a network of products.  These portfolios were not only stored digitally but were also connected to the world wide web and thus accessible to other audiences.     

 

However, only after 2000 did electronic portfolios become widespread in tertiary education.  Open-source platforms, such as Sakai, and commercial alternatives, such as as Taskstream and Chalk & Wire, surfaced during this time.  Some governments attempted to accelerate this change.  In 2006, for example, the Tertiary Education Commission in New Zealand funded a project that generated Mahara, an ePortfolio platform that all education institutions in the nation could utilize. Huge communities of practice, such as the Association for Authentic Experiential and Evidence Based Learning, promoted the application of ePortfolios.

 

After 2010, the applications of ePortfolios became more nuanced and advanced as the emphasis shifted from technology to pedagogy.  Rather than isolated to particular courses, students were encouraged to use ePortfolios to document and reflect on a greater range of artefacts collected during developmental experiences, such as journals and photos collected while studying overseas, volunteering, and mentoring (Eynon & Gambino 2017).  Furthermore, ePortfolios have become increasingly relevant to the nexus between study and career.  Students use ePortfolios to demonstrate their skills and to attract jobs; workers use ePortfolios to document their professional development.  Indeed, some job sites and platforms enable applicants to upload their ePortfolio (see Yu, 2012).

 

Since about 2014, other emerging technologies—such as MOOCSs, digital badges, and blockchain—shaped the application of ePortfolios (Ambrose et al., 2016; Weller, 2018). For example, one study, at Notre Dame University, revealed how ePortfolios could be integrated with digital badges and MOOCs.  Specifically, after completing MOOCs, students may receive a digital badge, signifying the completion of this course.  However, employers are often uncertain about the precise skills or capabilities of students who have attained these digital badges. ePortfolios could represent a solution to this problem, demonstrating the repertoire of insights and abilities the student has developed.  Blockchain might enable students to integrate these digital badges and demonstration of learning in a more secure platform (Weller, 2018). 

 

Benefits of ePortfolios: Overview

Many scholars have delineated some of the potential or actual benefits of ePortfolios in tertiary education.  To illustrate, ePortfolios enable students to reflect upon their studies, development, and careers.  Indeed, educators will often invite students to answer questions that prompt these reflections.  Students, for example, might be asked to consider which topics or concepts are hardest to understand and to identify strategies to facilitate this understanding.  Or students might be prompted to consider how these topics might be relevant to their everyday lives or future career.  Furthermore, students might be encouraged to contemplate the flaws or limitations of the topics they learn.  These reflections are pivotal to personal development.  To illustrate

 

  • students who record their reflections in an ePortfolio are more likely than peers who do not use an ePortfolio to receive higher marks on the final examination (Händel et al., 2020) or overall course (López-Crespo et al., 2022).

  • arguably, these reflections may help students uncover strategies they can apply to facilitate their development

  • accordingly, after students construct an ePortfolio, their confidence to excel in their studies, called academic self-efficacy, tends to improve (López-Crespo et al., 2022)

  • alternatively, these reflections may enable students to integrate the materials they have learned

  • indeed, research shows that ePortfolios help students appreciate the relationships between the various concepts they have learned (Syzdykova et al., 2021)

 

These benefits of ePortfolios on learning may translate to career success.  Indeed

 

  • after students utilized an ePortfolio, they are more likely to contemplate their future careers (Blom et al., 2014);

  • employers are more likely to hire students who present an ePortfolio of their work (Ambrose & Chen, 2015).

 

Admittedly, the benefits of ePortfolios greatly depend on how the platform is configurated and the activities that students are encouraged to undertake.  That is, ePortfolios benefit learning, performance, and career progress only if they are designed effectively and attract engagement.  Students are more likely to use ePortfolios regularly and immerse themselves in this platform if

 

  • the tasks they complete and the artefacts they produce seem relevant to the future careers of these students (Harapnuik et al., 2022)

  • students are granted enough autonomy to decide how to utilize this ePortfolio (Harapnuik et al., 2022)—even if this autonomy is supplemented with some guidance or samples.

 

Many benefits of ePortfolios were substantiated in an extensive program, called the C2L of College to Learning project, launched in 2011.  Although LaGuardia Community coordinate this program, 24 colleges and universities across the United States participate in this community of practice.  The aim of this community is to explore and document the application of ePortfolios.  The project has engendered a website, called the Catalyst for Learning, that displays and stores insights, strategies, and data that emanated from C2L and can be utilized by other institutions around the globe.  As Eynon and Gambino (2017) outlined in their seminal book, this project uncovered a range of key findings.  For example

 

  • at Pace University in New York, the likelihood that students would withdraw from university was 26% if they had not used ePortfolios and only 13% if they had used ePortfolios.  Similar finding were observed at Queensborough Community College

  • at Rutgers University Douglass Residential College, after students utilized ePortfolios over nine semesters, the grade point average increased from 3.2 to 3.5

 

Perhaps, because of the purported benefits of ePortfolios, this platform or approach has, since 2017, been deemed one of the eleven high impact practices—interventions that engage the students in purposeful activities, foster persistence in response to challenges, facilitate learning, and prepare individuals to live a responsible and rewarding life (Watson et al., 2016).  Other high impact practices include communities of practice, field experiences, collaborative assignments, undergraduate research, and capstone projects.   

 

Benefits of ePortfolios: Underlying theories

Researchers have proposed a variety of theories or accounts to explain the benefits of ePortfolios to student development.  First, as many scholars maintain, ePortfolios, if coupled with suitable governance and opportunities, inspire students to reflect upon their learning. Research has indeed demonstrated how ePortfolios, if structured appropriately, foster reflection, and how reflection generates knowledge, learning, and wisdom (e.g.,Yancey, 2009)

 

Similarly, Zubizarreta (2009) formulated the learning portfolio model.  According to this perspective, students tend to learn deeply whenever three key features of ePortfolios—reflection, documentation and collaboration—are integrated.  In essence, in collaboration and consultation with peers and mentors, students iteratively shift between the construction of a reflective narrative and the selection or documentation of evidence to substantiate this narrative.   

 

In contrast, Buchem et al. (2020) invoked the notion of control and psychological ownership to explain some of the potential benefits of ePortfolios.  Specifically, during 1980s and 1990s, scholars championed the importance of learner control (for a review, see Buchem et al., 2020).  According to these scholars, learners often feel more engaged when granted opportunities, within specific limits, to choose the sequence of exercises or activities, the pace at which content is delivered, the content that is displayed, and the level of support or feedback they receive.  Subsequent to this time, control was more related to granted students opportunities to customize learning according to their qualities, needs, and goals.  Students could shape the aims of their studies, the tools they use to achieve these goals, the strategies they apply to learn, and the degree to which they can interact with peers on these pursuits.  

 

After 2010, researchers explored the nexus between this sense of control and ePortfolios. If the tasks are designed appropriately, ePortfolios can foster this sense of control. Studies showed this sense of control was vital to ePortfolios and explained some of the merits and effects of this platform (Shroff et al., 2013).    

 

This sense of control may foster a state called psychological ownership, comprising five dimensions (Pierce et al., 2001).  These dimensions include

 

  • a sense of responsibility, in which individuals feel they are assigned the responsibility to protect and to enhance some object, such as an ePortfolio

  • a sense of self-identity, in which individuals feel the object, such as the ePortfolio, feels like an expression of themselves

  • a sense of accountability, in which individuals feel accountable for this object

  • a sense of self-efficacy, in which individuals feel they can reach their goals and overcome challenges around this object—such as the feeling they can improve their ePortfolio

  • a sense of belongingness, in which the object feels part of who they are

  

According to Buchem et al. (2020), if individuals experience this sense of ownership, especially a feeling of self-identity, after they construct their ePortfolio, they tend to regulate their learning activities more effectively.   That is, because individuals experience this sense of ownership over the ePortfolio, they assume the role to improve this platform.  They set learning goals, they implement strategies to sustain motivation and to fulfil these goals, and they evaluate their progress, correcting their strategies if necessary.  Buchem et al. (2020) did indeed show, after administering a survey to students who had constructed ePortfolios, that a sense of control promotes psychological ownership, and this psychological ownership is associated with the capacity to regulate learning effectively. 

 

Practices that enhance the benefits of portfolios: Six phases to transform learning ePortfolios to career ePortfolios

Nino and Hicks (2021) integrated the insights of past research on ePortfolios to develop a model, comprising six phases, that transform learning ePortfolios to career ePortfolios. Collectively, these phases are called the 6A ePortfolio Model, because the six phases—acceptance, assessment, appraisal, adaptation, application, and alliance—begin with A.  These phases tend to overlap and proceed iteratively over an extended time.  One of the phases, alliance, underpins all the other phases.  

 

The first phase, acceptance, comprises activities that inspire students to accept and to embrace, rather than to resist, ePortfolios.  Specifically, educators need to demonstrate how these ePortfolios are helpful to the career development of students.  Students, for example, might first receive data and information about the benefits of ePortfolios, such as trends on the number of employers who consider ePortfolios during hiring decisions. Next students could be prompted and encouraged to write a personal mission statement about their career and life aspirations, to identify experiences, both within and outside the curriculum, to develop relevant skills and networks, and to collect artefacts that could be relevant to this mission.

 

To facilitate this phase, and indeed all phases, educators also need to consider the notion of alliance.  For example, to promote acceptance, institutions should

 

  • enable students in some classes to share their ePortfolios with students in other classes, to act as role models

  • enable alumni to share their ePortfolios to students, demonstrating the longevity of these artefacts

  • consult with alumni and potential employeres on how to improve the design and implementation of ePortfolios

  • help academics and educators translate the traditional assessments into more authentic variants that utilize ePortfolios, to promote acceptance in these individuals as well

 

The second phase, assessment, revolves around integrating the formative and summative assessments of a course into ePortfolios.  Without this assessment, ePortfolios often persist merely as repositories of artefacts and not as integrated works that can facilitate careers.  That is, assessments should help students collate knowledge, products, and resources into an ePortfolio that demonstrates their capabilities to potential employers.  These assessments should either

 

  • overlap with activities that workers complete in their job

  • help students locate suitable employers

  • help students impress potential employers

 

As examples of assessment tasks

 

  • students might need to upload a project management flowchart to demonstrate both the projects they completed as well as their project management skills    

  • students might explore the websites of companies to analyze mission statements

  • students might need to create a short video that outlines their brand—an activity that both facilitates development but could eventually attract employers—or catalogues their distinct skills

 

Furthermore, all these assessment tasks should prompt students to reflect on their development—an activity that is unnatural to many individuals (Strampel & Lewis, 2016).  To promote this reflection, students could receive questions that employers might ask in job interviews.  Then, to attract feedback, students should be granted opportunities to assess the ePortfolios of one another, with the support of a rubric. 

 

Alliance is vital to assessment as well.  Educators and teachers should also collaborate with career services—because these services might provide advice on suitable artefacts to include as well as help students communicate their ePortfolios to potential employers.  Alumni can be invited to discuss how they utilized the assessments in their ePortfolios in their future careers.

 

During the third phase, appraisal, students do not merely reflect on their artefacts but holistically appraise their ePortfolios—to clarify their strengths, shortcomings, career goals, and subsequent activities they need to initiate to reach these goals. These activities may include both academic courses as well as other extracurricular experiences. Institutions need to arrange venues, resources, or opportunities beyond specific classes or courses, that inspire students to appraise their development, either individually or collectively.  These resources or opportunities may include presentations that explore the benefits and variants of appraisal or regular consultations with career specialists.

 

During the fourth phase, adaptation, students purposefully and iteratively revise and customize the format, appearance, and content of ePortfolios to accommodate specific employment opportunities.  To illustrate, they might delete content that is relevant only to assessments or personal reflections.  They might embed their LinkedIn profile and other professional social media. And they might utilize a design that is more relevant to professional settings.  Finally, they might modify the underlying technologies or platforms they use as well, depending on their experience and preferences. Alliances with career services and potential employers can benefit this phase as well. During the final phase, application, students utilize and present these career ePortfolios to seek and to secure jobs. 

Practices that enhance the benefits of portfolios: Self-regulation exercises

Despite the potential and observed benefits of ePortfolios, many scholars have recognized and underscored some of the caveats that teachers and institutions need to consider.  In essence, as many researchers argue, ePortfolios are useful to this tool is relevant to academic goals and embedded in a design that is consistent with theories on pedagogy and motivation (González-Mujico, 2020). 

 

For example, to develop knowledge, understanding, and wisdom, students need to motivate themselves and to regulate their behavior.  For example, to regulate their behavior, students need to set goals around which topics to learn, which actions to complete, and which methods to apply every day.  They need to monitor their progress, seek feedback, and correct errors.  And they need to apply other strategies to maintain or to boost their effort and motivation.  According to González-Mujico (2020), activities that help students regulate their behavior should be embedded in ePortfolios

 

González-Mujico (2020) explored this possibility in an empirical study.  In particular, 120 undergraduate international students, learning English in the UK, utilized ePortfolios during only a confined period of six weeks.   In this course, students presented and wrote a research paper.  The tasks they needed to complete to write this paper were documented in an ePortfolio. 

 

Specifically, besides the research project, students needed to develop a narrative in which they first contemplated the person they would like to become in the future—academically, professionally, and personally.  To achieve this goal, they completed an exercise, called the self-tree, in which they consider why they chose this course, why they perceive this course as important to their future, the strengths they will gain from this course, obstacles that might preclude these goals, and the opportunities this course might unearth.  They uploaded their answers to the ePortfolio.  Next, students identified activities they could initiate to fulfill their future goals—and then translated these activities to weekly plans that were also uploaded to the ePortfolio. Finally, the students presented a speech and written document about their progress on their research project, both of which were recorded in their ePortfolio.  The ePortfolio did indeed enhance motivation and self-regulation, as measured by several questionnaires, administered before and after the classes.

 

Practices that enhance the benefits of portfolios: Role modeling

According to some educators, teaching in the field of health and education, ePortfolios may be more effective if staff also maintained and thus modeled ePortfolios as well (Kirby et al., 2022).  That is, according to these participants, if staff do not use these ePortfolios, several problems might unfold.  First, staff might not be able to help students create these ePortfolios effectively.  Second, students may be more likely to doubt the benefits of this platform. 

 

Practices that enhance the benefits of portfolios: Learning analytics

According to some researchers, ePortfolios should be complemented with learning analytics.  To illustrate, in one study, conducted by Pospíšilová and Rohlíková (2023), students completed a variety of tasks, uploaded the products of these tasks in an ePortfolio in Mahara, and organized these products to generate a coherent narrative.  Students could access instructions and resources from Moodle.  The educators utilized the learning analytics in both Mahara and Moodle to decide how to assist students.  For example, the educators could use these analytics to gauge the degree to which students access specific resources and the duration they dedicate to particular tasks.  Occasionally, these analytics indicated that particular students were not engaging with Moodle or the ePortfolios.  In response

 

  • the educators arranged interviews with these students to identify potential obstacles or concerns

  • the educators attempted to address obstacles they identified, such as ambiguous instructions

 

Concerns about ePortfolios: Ethical considerations

Many scholars have discussed some of the ethical challenges of ePortfolios.  For example, one study, conducted by Kirby et al. (2022), was partly designed to uncover some of the unintended consequences of ePortfolios in health and education classes.  Educators from seven Australian universities completed a survey or participated in an interview. The educators referred to a range of concerns and discussed the measures they introduced to manage these concerns. 

 

First, educators discussed the possibility that students, when disseminating their ePortfolios, could disclose sensitive information that was supposed to be confidential.  Consequently, students were forewarned about this possibility.  Students were often encouraged to obscure faces, remove information that could identify a person, and to use pseudonyms, especially when the individuals are member of vulnerable communities, such as children or patients of hospitals.  For example, students often completed workshops about the relevant legislation and received marking rubrics that specify which information should be confidential.

 

Nevertheless, some, but not all, educators were concerned that student were not invariably attuned to which individuals may be members of vulnerable communities and which information was sensitive and private.  Workshops may not be sufficient to appreciate the nuances and sensitivities of this information or to accommodate the rules of numerous platforms, such as Facebook.  Furthermore, breaches of confidentiality are often inadvertent, such as when students forget to password protect their work.

 

Concerns about ePortfolios: Limited support

One concern about ePortfolios that many educators raise is the limited support they receive on how to design and to implement this platform (e.g., Nagle et al., 2019).  That is, educators seldom receive guideline, templates, or instructions they can follow to design suitable tasks and to introduce these ePortfolios into their class.  Accordingly, these ePortfolios are not always configured or promoted effectively, culminating in resistance from students and staff and a dissociation between the platform and the other features and strategies of this course.

 

References

  • Abrami, P., & Barrett, H. (2005). Directions for research and development on electronic portfolios. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(3).

  • Alexiou, A., & Paraskeva, F. (2019). Examining self-regulated learning through a social networking ePortfolio in higher education. International Journal of Learning Technology, 14(2), 162-192.

  • Ambrose, A. G., Anthony, E., & Clark, G. C. (2016). Digital badging in the MOOC space. Educause Review.

  • Ambrose, G. A., & Chen, H. L. (2015). 360° Folio networking: Enhancing advising interactions and expanding mentoring opportunities with ePortfolios. Theory Into Practice, 54(4), 317-325

  • Barrett, H. C. (1994). Technology-supported assessment portfolios. Computing Teacher, 21(6), 9-12.

  • Blom, D., Rowley, J., Bennett, D., Hitchcock, M., & Dunbar-Hall, P. (2014). Knowledge sharing: Exploring institutional policy and educator practice through ePortfolios in music and writing. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 12(2), 138–148.

  • Buchem, I., Tur, G., & Hoelterhof, T. (2020). The role of learner control and psychological ownership for self-regulated learning in technology-enhanced learning designs. Differences in e-portfolio use in higher education study programs in Germany and Spain. Interaction Design and Architecture Journal, 45, 112-132.

  • Buyarski, C. A., & Landis, C. M. (2014). Using an ePortfolio to assess the outcomes of a first-year seminar: Student narrative and authentic assessment. International Journal of ePortfolio, 4(1), 49-60.

  • Chatham-Carpenter, A., Seawel, L., & Raschig, J. (2010). Avoiding the pitfalls: Current practices and recommendations for ePortfolios in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 38(4), 437-456.

  • Ciesielkiewicz, M. (2019). The use of e-portfolios in higher education: From the students' perspective. Issues in Educational Research, 29(3), 649-667.

  • Ciesielkiewicz, M. (2019). The use of e-portfolios in higher education: From the students' perspective. Issues in Educational Research, 29(3), 649-667.

  • Eynon, B., & Gambino, L. M. (2017). High-impact ePortfolio practice: A catalyst for student, faculty, and institutional learning. Stylus Publishing, LLC.

  • Farrell, O. (2020). From portafoglio to eportfolio: The evolution of portfolio in higher education. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2020.

  • González-Mujico, F. (2020). The impact of ePortfolio implementation on motivation, self-regulation and academic language development: The learners’ and the teachers’ perspectives. The Asian ESP Journal, 16(3), 209-42.

  • Gordon, J. A., & Campbell, C. M. (2013). The role of ePortfolios in supporting continuing professional development in practice. Medical Teacher, 35(4), 287-294.

  • Hallam, G., & Creagh, T. (2010). ePortfolio use by university students in Australia: A review of the Australian ePortfolio Project. Higher Education Research & Development, 29(2), 179-193.

  • Händel, M., Wimmer, B., & Ziegler, A. (2020). E-portfolio use and its effects on exam performance–a field study. Studies in Higher Education, 45(2)

  • Harapnuik, D. & Thibodeaux, T. (2020). Factors that contribute to eportfolio persistence in an online program. In D. Schmidt-Crawford (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1106-1111). Online: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

  • Kirby, M. M., Downer, T., Slade, C., Fisher, M. B., Isbel, S. T., Siddiqui, Z. S., ... & Wilson, C. B. (2022). A call to action for eProfessionalism: developing the use of ePortfolio with emerging health and education practitioners. Journal of Computing in Higher Education.

  • López-Crespo, G., Blanco-Gandía, M. C., Valdivia-Salas, S., Fidalgo, C., & Sánchez-Pérez, N. (2022). The educational e-portfolio: preliminary evidence of its relationship with student’s self-efficacy and engagement. Education and Information Technologies, 27(4), 5233-5248.

  • Lorenzo, G., & Ittelson, J. (2005). An overview of e-Portfolios. Educause Review.

  • Lu, H. (2021). Electronic portfolios in Higher Education: A review of the literature. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 2(3), 96-101.

  • McWhorter, R. R., Delello, J. A., Roberts, P. B., Raisor, C. M., & Fowler, D. A. (2013). A cross-case analysis of the use of web-based ePortfolios in higher education. Journal of Information Technology Education, 12, 253-286.

  • Morreale, C., Zile-Tamsen, V., Emerson, C. A., & Herzog, M. (2017). Thinking skills by design: Using a capstone eportfolio to promote reflection, critical thinking, and curriculum integration. International Journal of Eportfolio, 7(1), 13-28.

  • Nagle, L., O’Connell, M., & Farrelly, T. (2019). A gap in governance: acknowledging the challenges of organic ePortfolio implementation. Educational Media International, 56(4), 328-342.

  • Ngui, W., Pang, V., & Hiew, W. (2020). Designing and Developing an e-Portfolio for Second Language Learners in Higher Education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 10(5), 362-366.

  • Nino, M., & Hicks, S. (2021). The 6A ePortfolio Model: Professionalizing Learning in Higher Education. International Journal of ePortfolio, 11(2), 95-107.

  • Nguyen, L. T., & Ikeda, M. (2015). The effects of ePortfolio-based learning model on student self-regulated learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), 197-209.

  • Pellerin, M., Branch-Muelller, J., Nicholas, P., & Wei, W. (2018). The integration of eportfolios in higher education, and students’ perceptions. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 29(4), 529-544.

  • Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of management review, 26(2), 298-310.

  • Pospíšilová, L., & Rohlíková, L. (2023). Reforming higher education with ePortfolio implementation, enhanced by learning analytics. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107449.

  • Purves, A. (1996). Electronic portfolios. Computers and Composition, 13(2), 135–146.

  • Shepherd, C., & Bolliger, D. (2014). Managing communication and professional development in online graduate programs with electronic portfolios. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 17(2), 72-80.

  • Shroff, R. H., Trent, J., & Ng, E. M. (2013). Using e-portfolios in a field experience placement: Examining student-teachers' attitudes towards learning in relationship to personal value, control and responsibility. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2).

  • Simatele, M. (2015). Enhancing the portability of employability skills using e-portfolios. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 39(6), 862-874.

  • Slade, C., & Downer, T. (2020). Students’ conceptual understanding and attitudes towards technology and user experience before and after use of an ePortfolio. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32(3), 529-552.

  • Strampel, K., & Lewis, A. (2016). Personal development planning and ePortfolios in Speech Pathology: Staff and student perceptions. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 7(1), 22-41

  • Syzdykova, Z., Koblandin, K., Mikhaylova, N., & Akinina, O. (2021). Assessment of E-portfolio in higher education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(2), 120-134.

  • Thibodeaux, T., Harapnuik, D., Cummings, C., & Dolce, J. (2020). Graduate Students' Perceptions of Factors That Contributed to ePortfolios Persistence beyond the Program of Study. International Journal of ePortfolio, 10(1), 19-32.

  • Watson, C. E., Kuh, G. D., Rhodes, T., Light, T. P., & Chen, H. L. (2016). ePortfolios–The eleventh high impact practice. International Journal of ePortfolio, 6(2), 65-69.

  • Weller, M. (2018). Twenty years of Edtech. Educause Review, 53(4), 34-48.

  • Wilson, C. B., Slade, C., Kirby, M. M., Downer, T., Fisher, M. B., & Nuessler, S. (2018). Digital ethics and the use of ePortfolio: A scoping review of the literature. International Journal of ePortfolio, 8(2), 115-125.

  • Yancey, K. (2009). Reflection and electronic portfolios. In D. Cambridge, B. Cambridge and K Yancey (Eds.), Electronic Portfolios 2.0 (pp. 5–17). Stirling, VA: Stylus.

  • Yancey, K. B. (2015). Grading ePortfolios: tracing two approaches, their advantages, and their disadvantages. Theory into Practice, 54(4), 301-308.

  • Yu, T. (2012). E-portfolio, a valuable job search tool for college students. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 29(1), 70–76.

  • Zubizarreta, J. (2009). The learning portfolio: Reflective practice for improving student learning. (2nd ed.) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

White Structure

Constructivism

by Simon Moss

Introduction

Constructivism, in the field of education, is a pedagogical approach that recognizes the inclination of students to construct knowledge themselves.  That is, students are not merely passive receptacles that absorb information.  Instead, when students are exposed to information or events that deviate from their preconceptions, they modify their existing beliefs, striving to accommodate this dissonance.  Consequently, rather than merely presenting information, teachers need to understand the existing beliefs of students, to identify discrepancies between these beliefs and the information the teachers want to impart, and to arrange experiences that enable students to recognize and to resolve these discrepancies.

 

History of constructivism: Response to logical positivism

Constructivism, although often applied as a pedagogical approach, emerged as an epistemic philosophy—that is, a theory on how we know what we know and how we determine which beliefs are true.  In particular, constructivism was a response to logical positivism.  Logical positivism, emanating from the early work of Wittgenstein and embraced by the Vienna Circle, revolves around the belief that propositions are meaningful only if some observation demonstrates the claim is true, called verificationism (Ayer, 1936).  All scientific terms should be equated to observable facts only, called foundationalism (Carnap, 1928).  In essence, logical positivism was the basis of most scientific pursuits since the early 1900s.

 

Yet, in the mid 1900s, many philosophies began to question logical positivism.  First, as Popper (1934) underscored, the notion that only verifiable claims are meaningful cannot be verified and, thus, cannot be regarded as meaningful.  Second, many philosophies challenged the notion of observable facts, recognizing the values, culture, and experiences of individuals shapes how they describe and interpret observations (Quine 1969; Kuhn 1970). 

 

Constructivism emerged as an alternative to logical positivism.  The underlying premise is that knowledge does not comprise only beliefs that have been verified by an objective set of observations. Instead, people iteratively and reflectively construct this knowledge themselves.  However, the precise details of constructivism—such as whether cultures or individuals constructs this knowledge, how cultures or individuals construct this knowledge, or the degree to which knowledge is constructed—varies across the multiple versions of constructivism (Nola, 1997).

 

History of constructivism: Variants of epistemic constructivism

Scholars have differentiated many variants of epistemic constructivism.  Indeed, Matthews (2000) identifies 18 versions, many of which correspond to different benefits and drawbacks (Richardson, 2003).  Van Bergen and Parsell (2019), however, argue that most, if not all, these variants can be reduced to three main schools: radical, social, and psychological constructivism.

 

According to radical constructivism, a position that overlaps with the work of Ernst von Glasersfeld (1987, 1995), each individual constructs his or her own personal knowledge.   One individual might develop or form a specific belief from personal experiences.  Another individual might develop or form the opposite belief.  Both beliefs, however, are equally legitimate.  In this sense, the world comprises no truths outside the person.   

 

According to social constructivism, social communities, rather than individuals, each construct knowledge.  That is, which claims are regarded as true are the beliefs that are generally adopted by the community.  Claims that are not adopted by the community tend to be deemed as untrue.  Yet, distinct communities might espouse beliefs that seem contradictory.  This theory, hence, prioritizes the learning of communities over the learning of individuals.  This perspective aligns to the notion of paradigms in science, as Kuhn 1970 promulgated.   

 

Finally, psychological constructivism delineates how individuals construct beliefs and establish which beliefs are true.  According to this perspective, people construct knowledge from their existing beliefs of the world.  Therefore, the experiences of individuals that shape these beliefs will determine which beliefs or knowledge they construct in response to information and events.  This position emanated from the work of Piaget (1970, 1973). 

 

History of constructivism: Variants of pragmatic constructivism

Constructivism is not only an epistemic theory—a theory that clarifies how individuals decide which beliefs are true—but also a pragmatic approach.  That is, scholars espouse constructivism to delineate how students learn and, therefore, how instructors should teach.

 

Again, according to Van Bergen and Parsell (2019), to apply constructivism to pedagogy, scholars should still differentiate the radical, social, and psychological variants.  To illustrate, according to radical constructivism, knowledge is entirely personal.  From this perspective, instructors cannot impart knowledge or even guide the acquisition of knowledge—but merely arrange a space that enables students to construct their own knowledge.  In this sense, instruction is futile.  

 

According to social constructivism, and epitomized by Vygotsky (1978), the social community in which students learn is vital.  That is, students should learn in a social environment, partly to develop the social tools they need to understand the explicit and implicit knowledge of their community.

 

According to moderate variants of psychological constructivism, educators should apply theories of learning and development to inform their teaching practices.  In particular, educators should appreciate how the existing beliefs, attitudes, and values of individuals will shape the knowledge they construct in response to the information they receive.  Thus, to guide students effectively, educators must be mindful of how the experiences and motivations of students will affect the beliefs they construct in courses and other settings.   

 

Some proponents of this model imply that students should be granted opportunities to direct their own learning.  They may be able to choose the topic, the activities, the learning approaches, the assessments, and other features. These opportunities purportedly enable students to construct their own knowledge.  Instructors should not, according to this perspective, impose knowledge onto students—imparting content as definitive facts to learn.  

 

Implications of constructivism: Teaching strategies

Constructivism has either inspired or vindicated many respected teaching strategies. That is, many diverse teaching strategies all revolve around constructivist principles (for a review, see Jančič & Hus, 2019).  These strategies include

 

  • problem-based learning in which teams of student are invited to solve a complicated and multifaceted problem—and must decide which information to acquire and apply to solve this problem

  • experiential learning, in which, students experience some relevant setting or episode, designed to magnify or enrich the cognitions or thoughts of students about a topic with the sensory or emotional sensations of this experience

  • project-based learning in which students manage a project from the inception of an idea to the final product

  • research-based learning and inquiry-based learning in which individuals conduct research or explore some research question, often using scientific methods

  • practical learning in which students learn during practical work experiences

 

Implications of constructivism: Technologies

A variety of technologies can also facilitate the construction of knowledge (for an example in computer programming, see Bakar et al., 2019).  For example, Nandhakumar and Govindarajan (2020) developed a digital tool that enabled students to store the information, principles, and values they learn as well as retrieve, update, and integrate this content when necessary—called database-oriented learning or DBOL.  This tool was purported to facilitate the construction of knowledge.  Relative to their peers, students who were granted access to this tool performed better on tests that assessed memory, understanding, and application of the learning materials. 

 

Furthermore, Massaty and Budiyanto (2020) propose that robotics is a technology that enables students to manipulate or experience specific topics directly—and, therefore, is consistent with the principle of constructivism.  The authors also conducted a systematic review, showing that students who are granted the opportunity to use robotics experienced greater self-efficacy, and this self-efficacy should inspire students to construct knowledge themselves.

 

In addition, some of the traditional learning management systems, such as Moodle, were intentionally developed to apply some of the principles of social constructivism, analogous to the recommendations that Vygotsky (1978) proposed—such as scaffolding, knowledge construction, active learning, and social interaction.  Unfortunately, as Finnegan and Ginty (2019) revealed, Moodle does not facilitate these principles to a significant extent.  In particular, when students use Moodle, knowledge construction, active learning, and social interaction, are limited as surveys of final year business students and lecturers, coupled with focus groups, revealed.

 

Several impediments could explain this finding.  First, students often feel too inhibited to share their perspectives candidly, compromising social interaction.  Second, students and staff do not receive enough training in Moodle to utilize the features of this platform optimally.  Other tools, such as Whatsapp, might facilitate the inclination of students to share and construct knowledge together (Al-Qaysi et al., 2021).

 

Implications of constructivism: Curriculum

Despite the diverse variants of constructivism, most commentators who espouse this word maintain that students should be granted opportunities to construct knowledge.  They tend to advocate teaching methods in which students explore problems and challenges themselves, such as problem-based learning or inquiry-based learning.

  

Nevertheless, as O’Connor (2022) underscores, fewer scholars discuss how constructivism might shape the curriculum—that is, which topics and content should be taught.  That is, commentators tend to assume that whether educators apply direct guidance or more constructivist approaches should not affect the curriculum or topics that are taught.  However, the pedagogy of teachers does affect the priorities of educators—and, therefore, may guide the curriculum too.   

 

Muller (2009) illustrates this concern adeptly.  According to Miller, when educators want to impart knowledge about a specific discipline—a more direct and traditional approach—they should learn overlapping concepts, called conceptual coherence.  In contrast, when educators want to develop the professional skills of students—perhaps more aligned to problem-based learning and constructivism—they should learn about overlapping contexts, such as particular setting.  This example shows how the pedagogy that teachers adopt may affect the range of topics they should teach.   

 

Effects of constructivism in education: Concerns

Many researchers and scholars have raised concerns about constructivist pedagogies.  That is, many teachers who adopt these pedagogies tend to eschew direct guidance and instead embrace other approaches, such as problem-based learning, experiential learning, and inquiry-based learning.  Yet, some research has demonstrated the benefits of more guidance instead.

 

In a review that Kirschner et al. (2006) conducted, the overarching message was that minimal guidance from educators tended to compromise learning, increasing the time that students need to learn the material.  Minimal guidance, according to these authors, is effective in students who have developed extensive knowledge about a topic.

 

Specifically, according to Kirschner et al. (2006), constructivist approaches, such as problem-based learning, impose heavy demands on working memory.  That is, working memory is primarily utilised to explore and to envisage solutions, compromising the consolidation of knowledge into long-term memory.  Consequently, many commentators feel the importance of disciplinary knowledge has been underestimated in recent years (see Muller, 2009)

 

Besides these cognitive challenges, constructivist pedagogies may obscure the sense of purpose in learning.  As O’Connor (2022) revealed, in a series of case studies, many students perceived constructivist approaches, such as activity-based learning, as unnecessarily busy.  Learning did not seem to revolve around a more precise sense of purpose.  In settings in which the interactions between teachers and students are impeded, such as online and asynchronous classes, these problems were especially apparent.

 

Effects of constructivism in education: Rejoinders

Many studies demonstrate that some of the approaches that emanate from constructivism, such as problem-based learning, are not as effective as proponents assert and may be detrimental in some circumstances.  Yet, other researchers have challenged the legitimacy of these conclusions.

 

To illustrate, Schmidt et al. (2009) argue that past meta-analyses, designed to explore the effects of problem-based learning, combined many distinct programs, some of which do not apply the approach effectively.  To overcome this limitation, Schmidt et al. examined the efficacy of problem-based learning in one Dutch medical school at Maastricht University.  This course prioritized the attempts of students to solve problems over the acquisition of subject matter.  These students were compared to graduates of other Dutch medical schools.  The graduates who had been exposed to problem-based learning demonstrated better interpersonal skills in medical settings, were more satisfied with the curriculum, were more likely to complete the course, and had accrued greater medical knowledge.

 

References

  • Ahmad, S., Sultana, N., & Jamil, S. (2020). Behaviorism vs constructivism: A paradigm shift from traditional to alternative assessment techniques. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 7(2), 19-33.

  • Al-Qaysi, N., Mohamad-Nordin, N., & Al-Emran, M. (2021). Developing an educational framework for using whatsapp based on social constructivism theory. In Recent Advances in Intelligent Systems and Smart Applications (pp. 243-252). Springer, Cham.

  • Ayer, A. J. (1936). Language, truth, and logic. London: Victor Gollancz.

  • Bächtold, M. (2013). What do students “construct” according to constructivism in science education? Research in Science Education,43, 2477–2496.

  • Baines, L. A., & Stanley, G. (2000). We want to see the teacher: Constructivism and the rage against expertise. Phi Delta Kappan,82, 327–330.

  • Bakar, M. A., Mukhtar, M., & Khalid, F. (2019). The development of a visual output approach for programming via the application of cognitive load theory and constructivism. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 10(11).

  • Boyles, D. R. (2006). Dewey’s epistemology: An argument for warranted assertions, knowing, and meaningful classroom practice. Educational Theory,56, 57–68.

  • Brindley, R. (2000). Learning to walk the walk: Teacher educators’ use of constructivist pedagogy in their own practice. Professional Educator, 22, 1–14.

  • Chaudhary, B., & Nagar, U. P. I. (2018). The role of ICT in promoting constructivism. International journal of Technical Research & Science, 3(1), 1-4.

  • Choy, S., Delahaye, B. L., & Saggers, B. (2015). Developing learning cohorts for postgraduate research degrees. The Australian Educational Researcher, 42, 19–34.

  • Eybers, O. O. (2018). Friends or foes? A theoretical approach towards constructivism, realism and students’ well-being via academic literacy practices. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(6), 251-269.

  • Finnegan, M., & Ginty, C. (2019). Moodle and social constructivism: Is Moodle being used as constructed? A case study analysis of Moodle use in teaching and learning in an Irish Higher Educational Institute. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 11(1).

  • Gordon, M. (2009). The misuses and effective uses of constructivist teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice,15, 737–746.

  • Jančič, P., & Hus, V. (2019). Representation of teaching strategies based on constructivism in social studies. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 25(1), 64-77.

  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based learning. Educational Psychologist,41, 75–86.

  • Kroll, L. R. (2004). Constructing constructivism: How student–teachers construct ideas of development, knowledge, learning, and teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice,10, 199–221.

  • Kuhn, D. (2007). Is direct instruction the answer to the right question? Educational Psychologist,42, 109–113.

  • Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Larison, K. D. (2022). On beyond constructivism. Science & Education, 31(1), 213-239.

  • Massaty, M. H., & Budiyanto, C. W. (2020).  Robotics and the constructivism approach as a means of increasing self-efficacy. Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Vocational Education, 3(1), 37-40.

  • Matthews, M. R. (2000). Appraising constructivism in science and mathematics. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Matthews, W. J. (2003). Constructivism in the classroom: Epistemology, history and historical evidence. Teacher Education Quarterly,30(3), 51–64.

  • Merve, K. A. R. A. (2019). A systematic literature review: Constructivism in multidisciplinary learning environments. International Journal of Academic Research in Education, 4(1-2), 19-26.

  • Muller, J. (2009). Forms of knowledge and curriculum coherence. Journal of Education and work, 22(3), 205-226.

  • Nandhakumar, R., & Govindarajan, K. (2020). Effect of-database oriented learning (DBOL) in developing constructivism at higher education level. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 117.

  • O’Connor, K. (2022). Constructivism, curriculum and the knowledge question: tensions and challenges for higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(2), 412-422.

  • Orland-Barak, L. (2006). Cracks in the iceberg: Surfacing the tensions of constructivist pedagogy in the context of mentoring. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice,11, 293–313.

  • Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and psychology of the child. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York: Grossman Publishers.

  • Popper, K. (1934). Logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge.

  • Quine, W. V. O. (1969). Ontological relativity and other essays. New York: Columbia University Press.

  • Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 2003, 1623–1640

  • Schmidt, H. G., van der Molen, H. T., te Winkel, W. W., & Wijnen, W. H. (2009). Constructivist, problem-based learning does work: A meta-analysis of curricular comparisons involving a single medical school. Educational Psychologist, 44, 227–249.

  • Uopasai, S., Bunterm, T., Muchimapura, S., & Tang, K. N. (2018). The Effect of Constructivism, Metacognition and Neurocognitive-based Teaching Model to Enhance Veterinary Medicine Students' Learning Outcomes. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 26(4).

  • Van Bergen, P., & Parsell, M. (2019). Comparing radical, social and psychological constructivism in Australian higher education: a psycho-philosophical perspective. The Australian Educational Researcher, 46(1), 41-58.

  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). The construction of knowledge: Contributions to conceptual semantics. Salinas, CA: Intersystems Publications.

  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Routledge Falmer.

  • Vygotsky, L. V. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

White Structure

The role of exemplars or samples to teach students

​by Simon Moss

Introduction

Many educators, such as teachers and lecturers, utilize exemplars or samples to teach students.  For example, to demonstrate how to complete some assignment or task, educators might email their students a few examples that previous individuals, enrolled in the same course, have completed.  The educator might then prompt the students to identify the strengths and deficiencies in these samples or exemplars.  Finally, the educator might outline their own opinions about these exemplars.  These discussions are designed to clarify both how to complete some task and the criteria that will be applied to grade these assignments.  

 

Exemplars vary on several attributes.  First, exemplars are usually assignments that previous students have submitted.  However, in some instances, the educators will deliberately construct the exemplars (Handley & Williams, 2011) or modify the work of past students.

 

Second, in some instances, the exemplars could be previous attempts of the same assignment that students need to complete now (Orsmond et al., 2002).  Alternatively, these exemplars might be previous attempts of assignments that differ from the assignments that students need to complete now—but are perhaps similar in structure or marking criteria, for example (Hendry et al., 2021).  These differences between exemplars and assignments can diminish the incidence of plagiarism.     

 

Third, educators might distribute only exemplars that are high in quality, primarily to demonstrate the features or practices that students should emulate (Bell et al., 2013).  Or educators might distribute exemplars that are high in quality and low in quality (Hendry et al., 2006), enabling students to identify the features or practices that determine grades. 

 

Finally, educators could encourage students to complete a range of tasks to learn about the exemplars, such as grade the assignments themselves, discuss the marks, listen to the perspectives of educators, and so forth.   Carless and Chan (2017), for example, delineated a series of four activities that are designed to enhance the extent to which students engage with exemplars.   

 

In general, research has shown that students tend to value the opportunity to read and to analyze exemplars. Nevertheless, educators need to be aware of some complications.  First, students may imitate some of the features, or even the sentences, in these exemplars, but without understanding the assignments (Handley & Williams, 2011).  Second, after students hear an educator articulate opinions about these exemplars, they might conform to these opinions mindlessly rather than contemplate how to apply these principles (Orsmond and Merry 2013).  Third, at least in some circumstances, students often perceive these exemplars as useful but do not necessarily receive higher grades after they utilize these exemplars (Hendry et al., 2006).  Practices that enhance the utility of these exemplars may override these limitations (Carless & Chan, 2017).

 

Despite these caveats, exemplars, if introduced appropriately, can appreciably benefit students.  In particular, exemplars may not only clarify the expectations of markers and the standards that students should fulfil but can also

 

  • demonstrate a diversity of approaches that students can adopt to complete a task or fulfil a goal (Orsmond et al., 2002)

  • diminish the feelings of uncertainty and anxiety that students often feel before completing a task or assignment (Yucel et al., 2014)—as well as increase the confidence of students to commence and to engage in this task (Hendry & Anderson, 2013)

 

Case study: Annotated exemplars

Often, but not always, educators will insert comments into the exemplars or samples, indicating how the various sentences correspond to the marking criteria or expectations, called annotated exemplars.   Handley and Williams (2011) conducted a study to explore whether annotated exemplars of similar assignments, but on another topic, improved the performance of students.  The participants were undergraduate students, studying business, in the UK. The students wrote assignments in pairs.  To assist students, these individuals received assignments that previous students had completed on a similar topic. The lectures inserted annotated remarks, underscoring strong arguments and flaws, on these assignments.   

 

Students tended to appreciate the annotated exemplars.  On a subsequent survey, almost three quarters of these participants indicated they felt these exemplars were useful.  On average, each student accessed more than four of these annotated exemplars.  Nevertheless, the relationship between number of exemplars that students accessed and course grades was only modest, r = .28.    

 

Case study: An exemplar that is high in quality

Some educators prefer to disseminate exemplars that are high in quality.  For example, in one study, conducted by Bell et al. (2013), 119 undergraduate students, enrolled in accounting at a UK university, needed to complete a written assignment.  The assignment was an essay about an ethical issue, derived from a newspaper article.  In addition, embedded within this assignment, students needed to write about their reflections or experience of this task.  To enhance their performance on this assignment, in Week 1, students received an annotated exemplar, demonstrating the features of an excellent assignment.  A comprehensive rubric accompanied this exemplar.  

 

The results suggested the exemplar was helpful.  Almost 90% of the students indicated they perceived the resources, including the exemplar and rubric, as beneficial to their learning and performance.  Specifically, these resources helped the students understand the standards the lecturer expected and determine the principles they should follow to write the assignment.

 

Nevertheless, the report also presented some caveats of these results.  First, a few students felt the exemplar and rubric limited their autonomy, rather than guided their decisions, and were thus redundant and restrictive.  Only a minority of participants, however, expressed this concern.  Second, the students evaluated the annotated exemplar and other resources, such as the rubric, collectively.  Hence, the study did not clarify attitudes towards the exemplar specifically. 

 

Case study: Activities to engage students in exemplars

To help students analyze the exemplars and thus learn from these samples, educators might prompt these individuals to complete a range of tasks.  To illustrate, Hendry et al. (2006) conducted a study in which the educator, a university lecturer, discussed exemplars with students before these individuals submitted their assignment.  In particular, 81 undergraduate students, enrolled at a large Australian university, attended a course in animal science.  The students needed to complete a critical review of a scientific paper.  Before they completed their assignments, students received two exemplars of previous but anonymous students.  These exemplars had earned a pass grade and distinction grade respectively.    

 

Students were first granted an opportunity to apply the marking rubric—a table that outlined the characteristics of each section that epitomize a pass, credit, distinction, and high distinction—to grade the exemplars.  A week later, students discussed their marks with peers, facilitated by the educator. 

 

Finally, participants submitted their assignments—a critical review of another paper.  Once these students received a grade, they completed a questionnaire about their perceptions towards these discussions about the exemplars.  

 

Of the 39 completed questionnaires, about 56% of these individuals applied the marking rubric to grade the assignments. Most students discovered their marks diverged from the grades their peers and educator had assigned. As the survey revealed

 

  • only about 8% of students felt that marking the exemplar was the most useful feature of this approach

  • 90% of students agreed that listening to the lecture explain how he graded the assignments was useful—and helped the participants complete their own assignments

 

Only 15% of students felt the exemplars impeded their own creativity.  Most students, in contrast, felt that clarity about the expectations actually enabled creativity, because students knew which principles they needed to follow and which principles were optional.  Yet, the time they dedicated to marking was not significantly associated with the grade they received on this assignment.

 

Nevertheless, the students who did not achieve high grades were not as supportive of this approach.  Perhaps their modest grades biased their judgment of this discussion about the exemplars.  Or perhaps these students could not understand the discussion about exemplars as well.

 

Case study: A comprehensive set of activities to engage students in exemplars

Carless and Chan (2017) proposed, implemented, and evaluated perhaps the most comprehensive sequence of activities to inspire the students to learn from exemplars.  In particular, as this study reports, the educator invited students to complete a sequence of five tasks.

 

Specifically, in this example, students receive two exemplars—assignments that previous students had submitted, both of which had earned a high mark.  The assignment that previous students completed differed from the assignment that students in this study completed.  Both assignments were reflective essays, with the same marking criteria, but the topic differed.  To engage students

 

  • the educator first invited the students to apply the marking criteria and to grade these exemplars individually, before the class. 

  • second, during the first 10 minutes of class, the educator articulated the purpose of these exemplars: to help students learn and internalize the principles that epitomize commendable work and to clarify the marking criteria, for example.

  • third, during the next 50 minutes of class, students justified their marks and discussed their perceptions of the exemplars in pairs

  • fourth, during the next 40 minutes, students were granted opportunities to articulate a strength or flaw of an exemplar to the class and other members could respond, called mini presentations; the educator facilitated these discussions

  • finally, after class, students were encouraged to reflect on the principles or insights they learned from this approach.

 

One of the educators then contemplated and outlined some of the insights he gained from these discussions about how to facilitate these mini presentations.  The educator deliberately wanted to expose the students to a range of perspectives, because this diversity might inspire these individuals to contemplate the features of assignments in more depth.  For example, some students felt that tables, when embedded in essays, limit creativity, because the format of tables is constrained.  Other students felt that tables enable writers to convey information readily and thus offer more opportunities to elaborate later.  This discussion, therefore, exposed students to a range of considerations—such as the importance of creativity as well as simplicity.  Rather than merely clarify whether students should include tables, this discussion may have helped students decide when tables are suitable and how these tables should be used, if at all.

 

During these discussions, the educator did not impose his own perspective.  Instead

 

  • he clarified the argument of students, such as “Are you saying that, if we represent the ideas in a table format, our thinking might be limited”

  • towards the end of each principle, he summarized the key considerations

 

This practice, in which the educator does not impose a personal opinion, at least not initially, is beneficial.  First, this practice enables the students to explore the intricacies of principles that seem relevant to their needs—a benefit that students, in a subsequent survey, underscored.  Second, this practice might unearth insights the educator would otherwise have overlooked. 

 

Theories that guide exemplars: Tacit knowledge

Researchers have applied several theories to explain the benefits of exemplars.  These theories might help educators choose suitable exemplars and use these exemplars effectively.  One theory invoked the notion of tacit knowledge (Chong, 2019).  According to Polanyi (1958), and consistent with the arguments that Carless et al. (2018) proposed, some knowledge, such as how to write an essay, is hard to communicate verbally.  If teachers, for example, impart some principles about writing, these principles cannot be imagined or connected tangibly.  Instead, students need to be granted opportunities to engage in this topic experientially.  They need to participate in tangible activities, such as evaluate a sentence, and then reflect upon these activities, either alone or in a dialogue with other people. 

 

As they complete these activities, student learn specific practices. These practices, however, are specific to particular circumstances and thus do not correspond to common words or concepts.  Students, therefore, cannot articulate these practices explicitly.  Knowledge that is hard to articulate is called tacit rather than explicit.  But, over time, as they continue to reflect on these experiences, these students become more attuned to patterns and regularities.  These patterns and regularities correspond to common words or concepts and, therefore, can be articulated.  Therefore, from this perspective, experiences with exemplars generate tacit knowledge, whereas reflections on multiple exemplars may ultimately generate explicit knowledge.  Explicit knowledge, although not always necessary to complete a task, can help students adapt this knowledge to novel circumstances as well as communicate this information to other people.    

 

Theories that guide exemplars: Metacognition

As Chong (2019) argued, exemplars might also help students develop their meta-cognition—their knowledge about how to think and how to learn.  Specifically, exemplars may help students develop three interrelated domains of knowledge:

 

  • person knowledge—that is, the knowledge of students about which strategies and approaches correspond to their preferences

  • task knowledge—that is, the knowledge of students about the goals they need to fulfil, the skills they need to acquire, and the resources they need to access to thrive in class

  • strategic knowledge— that is, the knowledge of students about how they choose practices to enhance their motivation, concentration, or performance

 

According to Chong (2019), exemplars benefit each of these domains.  For example

 

  • if students receive an exemplar after they attempt an assignment, they can more readily identify their strengths and deficiencies, representing person knowledge

  • if students are exposed to annotated exemplars—or discuss the exemplars in class—they learn the marking criteria and expectations of educators, representing task knowledge

  • if students apply the marking criteria to evaluate the exemplars, they become more attuned to which strategies or practices are effective and ineffective as well, representing strategic knowledge.

 

References

  • Bell, A., Mladenovic, R., & Price, M. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the usefulness of marking guides, grade descriptors and annotated exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(7), 769-788.

  • Carless, D., Chan, K. K. H., To, J., Lo, M., & Barrett, E. (2018). Developing students’ capacities for evaluative judgement through analysing exemplars. In Developing evaluative judgement in Higher Education (pp. 108-116). Routledge.

  • Carless, D., & Chan, K. K. H. (2017). Managing dialogic use of exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 930-941.

  • Carter, R., Salamonson, Y., Ramjan, L. M., & Halcomb, E. (2018). Students use of exemplars to support academic writing in higher education: An integrative review. Nurse Education Today, 65, 87-93.

  • Chong, S. W. (2019). The use of exemplars in English writing classrooms: From theory to practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5), 748-763.

  • Dixon, H., Hawe, E., & Hamilton, R. (2020). The case for using exemplars to develop academic self-efficacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(3), 460-471.

  • Handley, K., & Williams, L. (2011). From copying to learning: Using exemplars to engage students with assessment criteria and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1), 95-108.

  • Hendry, G. D., & Anderson, J. (2013). Helping students understand the standards of work expected in an essay: Using exemplars in mathematics pre-service education classes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 754-768.

  • Hendry, G. D., Armstrong, S., & Bromberger, N. (2012). Implementing standards-based assessment effectively: Incorporating discussion of exemplars into classroom teaching. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(2), 149-161.

  • Hendry, G. D., White, P., & Herbert, C. (2016). Providing exemplar-based ‘feedforward’ before an assessment: The role of teacher explanation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(2), 99-109.

  • Newlyn, D. (2013). Providing exemplars in the learning environment: the case for and against. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 1(1), 26-32.

  • Orsmond, P., & Merry, S. (2013). The importance of self-assessment in students’ use of tutors’ feedback: A qualitative study of high and non-high achieving biology undergraduates. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 737-753.

  • Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4), 309-323.

  • Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. London: Routledge

  • Scoles, J., Huxham, M., & McArthur, J. (2013). No longer exempt from good practice: using exemplars to close the feedback gap for exams. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 631-645.

  • To, J., Panadero, E., & Carless, D. (2021). A systematic review of the educational uses and effects of exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education.

  • Yucel, R., Bird, F. L., Young, J., & Blanksby, T. (2014). The road to self-assessment: Exemplar marking before peer review develops first-year students’ capacity to judge the quality of a scientific report. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(8), 971-986.

White Structure

Electronic work-integrated learning

​by Simon Moss

Introduction

At most tertiary education institutions, students are granted the opportunity to complete work integrated learning as part of the curriculum—experiences in which they can apply the knowledge and information they learn in classes to work settings.  Work integrated learning may include clinical placements, internships, workplace projects, and other practicums. 

 

Electronic work integrated learning, sometimes called virtual or blended work integrated learning, tends to refer to circumstances in which institutions apply technology to facilitate or deliver work integrated learning either partly or wholly online.  If defined loosely, most examples of work integrated learning could be classified as electronic work integrated learning.  However, this term tends to be reserved to describe more recent technologies (Schuster & Glavas, 2017) such as instances in which the experience significantly revolves around

 

  • immersive technology, such as virtual reality or augmented reality

  • online role-plays or online games

  • remote work experiences, in which the student and colleagues are not located in the same physical location

 

Schuster and Glavas (2017) developed a typology that differentiates four clusters of electronic work integrated learning experiences.  The clusters vary on two dimensions: whether the technology is an integral or peripheral feature of the experience and whether the technology is relevant to the administration or pedagogy of this experience. 

 

For example, when the technology is an integral feature of the experience and relevant to the pedagogy of this experience, the placement or internship is classified as technology-based. In these instances, immersive technologies, such as virtual reality, mediate all the interactions between the students, educators, and industry partners.  Second, when the technology is an integral feature of the experience but relevant only to the administration, the placement or internship is classified as technology-facilitated.  Technology is used to prepare students before the experience or assess students during or after the experience. To illustrate, institutions might use a digital platform, such as OpenSim, to organize simulations that prepare students.   

 

In contrast, when the technology is a more peripheral feature of the experience but relevant to the pedagogy of this experience, the placement or internship is classified as technology-blended.  These experiences usually comprise both activities online and activities in person. Students, educators, and industry partners may collaborate in person but also online, such as engage in online role-plays.  Finally, when the technology is a peripheral feature of the experience and relevant only to administration, the placement or internship is classified as technology-supported.  Technology might facilitate preparation or assessment, such as a web portal that enables the industry partner to engage with the university (e.g., Collis & Seeto, 2008).  

 

Case study: A virtual organization in which students must solve crises that unfold

One pioneering example of an electronic work integrated learning experience, implemented in the mid 2000s by the Queensland University of Technology, is the Virtual Golden Foods Corporation, a virtual organization, accessible from the web, that fictitiously processes food and manufactures cans of food.  The organization comprises many departments, such as HR, finance, accounts, marketing, and operations. This virtual organization exposes students to a range of crises, in which they need to apply the skills they learned in management or marketing classes to address these crises.  The visuals and sounds were designed to seem realistic, as if embedded in the organization.   

 

In one of the pilot studies, about 15 or so students attend a theater in which they are exposed to this virtual organization on a large screen. Each student is assigned a role, such as sterilizer worker, sterilizer supervisor, warehouse supervisor, and production manager.  Some problem unfolds in the organization.  The students then discuss how they would respond to these problems, comparable to Hypotheticals, the TV series that Jeffrey Robertson facilitated.  In this instance, however, the program that underpins the virtual organization generates the crises, although the teacher moderates the discussion among students.  

 

Over 80% of students enjoyed or greatly enjoyed the experience.  The majority of students felt the experience improved their skills in decision-making, risk-taking, and problem-solving (Godat, 2007; see also Yahaya, 2006).          

 

Case study: Two realistic websites, outlining fictitious organizations to facilitate online role-play

A simple, but thoughtful, illustration of an electronic work integrated learning experience was developed by Flinders University in Australia.  The university developed two realistic websites that outline the policies, practices, and strategies of two fictitious organizations.  The first organization, the International Development Organization, is designed to eliminate poverty in the Asia Pacific region. The second organization, Gender Associates, funds programs that support gender equality. 

 

Students are assigned roles in the International Development Organization.  They are informed that grant and research opportunities are available from Gender Associates.  To benefit from these opportunities, the students collaborate on a virtual meeting platform—FLO Live—to complete realistic tasks in small teams, such as construct a white paper or undertake a gender analysis research project.  The tasks were designed in consultation with many stakeholders, including multilateral development agencies, government planning authorities, business corporations, advocacy groups, and NGOs. FLO live enables the students to discuss ideas in small teams or larger classes, to edit documents collaboratively, and to use whiteboards to brainstorm ideas.

 

According to subsequent evaluations (Mundkur & Ellickson, 2012), the majority of students enjoyed the role-play, although some of the students would have preferred discussions in person.  Students valued the opportunities to apply the principles and theories they learned in the classroom to a practical setting.  Many students also liked the combination of synchronous collaboration, such as the virtual meetings, and asynchronous collaboration, such as the discussion boards, in which they could reflect on the insights of their peers more carefully. 

 

Case study: Illustration which an experience online complements an experience in person

RMIT, in Australia, published an example in which an online role play complemented an actual placement (see Ogilvie & Douglas, 2007). Students enrolled in the Bachelor of Arts (Criminal Justice Administration) completed a 50-day professional internship, in person, with the police, corrections, or other workplaces in the justice sector.  In these internships, clients may be aggressive.  Therefore, as part of this internship, students need to complete a OH&S risk assessment of the workplace.

 

To complement this activity, students also completed an online role play that revolved around OH&S and risk assessment.  During this role play, students needed to interpret data about risks and then to negotiate with managers, union reps, OH&S officers, and other stakeholders to advocate changes that could improve the safety of officers in the workplace, despite the expense of these changes.  The conversations were conducted online.  In reality, RMIT staff members, students, or even industry representatives volunteered to assume some of these roles.  

 

Students were permitted to propose some of the suggestions they raised in their actual placement.  After this role play, teaching staff and industry representatives delivered feedback—feedback that could both enhance the communication and negotiation skills of students as well as help these students address matters that transpired in their placement.  Because the role play is online, however, students could be anonymous, sometimes diminishing their anxieties, and could also communicate asynchronously, granting these individuals more time to think carefully.    

 

Implementation of electronic work integrated learning experiences: Design of placements and internships

Many researchers have attempted to delineate the principles that institutions should follow to design traditional, rather than electronic, work integrated learning experiences.  For example, according to this literature, the experience should be as authentic and similar to typical work roles as possible.  To be authentic, the experience should (Herrington et al., 2003):

 

  • comprise tasks that are multifaceted and explored over an extended duration

  • not comprise a predetermined set of tasks but compel students to contemplate the scope of each task and determine how to complete these activities  

  • enable students to apply a range of perspectives or theories to complete each task

  • generate actual products that other individuals could utilize

 

In addition,

 

  • the experience should enable students to apply some of the knowledge and skills they learned in the classroom

  • during the experience, students should be able to access resources, supervision, advice, and other information almost immediately

  • the experience should impart knowledge and skills that are relevant to other assessments in the course

  • students should complete a comprehensive induction before the experience—to learn about workplaces behavior in general and this workplace in particular

 

Yet, to design electronic work integrated learning experiences, institutions may need to consider additional principles.  For example, Gamage (2022) proposed some other design principles that should be considered.  These principles may facilitate the level of collaboration between students, academic supervisors, and industry partners.  To illustrate

 

  • the institution should develop a template that helps academics, students, and industry partners design the placement or internship.  The template should include standard features, such as typical milestones, but enable the industry partner to customize this template to accommodate the needs of this workplace. This level of co-design facilitates communication, fostering a shared understanding, but does not overwhelm the student or industry partner

  • compared to placements or internships that are completed in person, electronic work integrated learning experiences need to include more social opportunities, enabling students to interact with industry supervisors and colleagues frequently.  These opportunities might include virtual coffee lounges, online discussion forums, and video conferences, designed to foster warmth, caring, humor, and trust, to offset the limited communication in person.     

 

Fewer studies, however, have explored which design principles should guide electronic work integrated learning.  One exception was a study that Glavas and Schuster (2020) conducted.  The researchers interviewed 16 students who had participated in some variant of electronic work integrated learning during their undergraduate studies.  To illustrate, students were asked to share their insights on how technology can enhance the experience of work integrated learning, what they liked and did not like about the technology, and the skills they gained from this experience.  The responses were subjected to a blend of inductive and deductive thematic analysis, generating four overarching design principles.

 

First, the experience of electronic work integrated learning should overlap as closely with actual work environments.  For example, the institution should utilize technologies that are common in workplaces today, such as Zoom instead of Second Life.  Similarly, the assessment tasks should be similar to the actual tasks that employees complete, such as presentations rather than journals. 

 

Second, the technologies the institution uses should be compatible with one another, enable students to receive information promptly, and consistent with the preferences of students.   To illustrate, information on various platforms, such as the software that facilitates the coordination of placements and the learning management system, should obviously be consistent.  Yet, because discrepancies are possible, students should be aware of which information should be trusted.   Furthermore, institutions should arrange technologies, such as mobile apps and alerts, that expedite communication, enabling the individuals to receive immediate updates. Yet, these technologies, such as mobile apps, should be compatible with the other technology platforms, such as the learning management system

 

Third, the institutions should develop administrative procedures that are tailored to electronic work integrated learning; otherwise, the information that students receive from the learning management system, remote supervisors, and other individuals often conflict.  To illustrate, institutions should clarify the roles and responsibilities of students, academic staff, professional staff, and industry supervisors as soon as possible, before the experience commences. 

 

Fourth, the institutions should introduce a range of provisions to foster a sense of co-presence in which students perceive supervisors, colleagues, and other stakeholders as accessible and available rather than remote or detached.  To foster this co-presence, students should be granted more time socialize and interact with their industry mentors and colleagues—in person, if possible. 

 

To apply these principles, Beuerlein (2015) recommended a backward design approach.  Specifically, relevant specialists should delineate the learning outcomes they want the students to achieve in consultation with industry partners.  Next, these specialists should identify practices or experiences that enable students to achieve these outcomes.  Then, in consultation with the industry partners, specialists should design tasks that entail these practices or experiences.   

 

Implementation of electronic work integrated learning experiences: Readiness of students, academics, and industry partners

To participate in placements, internships, and similar opportunities remotely, students need to address three complications that are not as pronounced in traditional work integrated learning.  First, these students cannot develop sustainable relationships as readily, partly because they may overlook the social cues of remote individuals, feel a sense of distance, and may not be able to interact as frequently or incidentally.  Second, the expectations of students, academics, and industry partners are more likely to diverge—especially if only one, rather than all, these individuals have completed remote work before.  Third, these experiences are especially challenging if the students and industry partners are unfamiliar with the technologies they have to utilize to navigate these virtual interactions. 

 

Because of these complications, Gamage (2022) suggested that institutions should assess whether the students, academic supervisors, and industry partners are equipped or ready to embrace this experience.  For example, before the placement or internship commences, institutions could implement measures that develop and assess the capacity of students to develop networks remotely, to manage challenges and disputes, and to utilize the technology efficiently.  Institutions could also prompt the parties to clarify expectations, roles, and responsibilities, perhaps with a template that presents common examples.     

 

Implementation of electronic work integrated learning experiences: Evaluation

Institutions need to evaluate remote or electronic work integrated learning experiences proficiently but efficiently and then deliver feedback.  Indeed, feedback is especially important in virtual or remote placements and internships (Beuerlein, 2015), because otherwise students can feel isolated and divorced from the experience.  Therefore, institutions need to gauge the degree to which the experience facilitated the learning and development of students, consistent with the learning objectives of this course.  Yet, scholars have not developed validated tools to measures this development.  In addition, scholars have not identified measures to manage the inevitable variability in how industry supervisors may assess these students. 

 

Because of these complications, Gamage (2022) offered some insights, inspired by the Kirkpatrick evaluation model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick 1998), to guide these evaluations.  First, as soon as the placement or internship ends, institutions could administer surveys, interviews, or focus group to measure the satisfaction of engagement of students, industry mentors, and academic staff towards the experience.  In addition, to measure engagement, institutions could also analyze some measure of student activity.

 

Second, during the placement or internship, institutions should regularly measure the knowledge and skills that students have acquired.  The institution could derive some of this information from the evaluation forms that supervisors complete.  But students might also be instructed to maintain journals of their experience and reflect upon their learning.  The assessment tasks in the course should also be adapted to measure this learning and development as well.   

 

Third, and both immediately before and several months after the experience, institutions should measure whether these experiences have shifted the attitudes and behaviors of these students. That is, institutions should assess qualities that are relevant to the job, such as analytical skills or communication skills.  Although evaluations from industry supervisors or colleagues could inform this evaluation, other sources of information could be considered.  For example, academic mentors could observe these individuals in other settings. 

 

Finally, institutions should monitor whether these electronic work integrated learning experiences do indeed enhance the job and careers prospects of these students.  Every five years or so, for example, the institutions could analyze the alumni data to explore associations between these experiences and job outcomes.  Several other measures, such as whether the industry partner employed this student or accepted future students, might complement this report.

 

References

  • Beuerlein, L. (2015). Curriculum innovation in undergraduate accounting degree programmes through “virtual internships”. Education and Training, 57(6), 673–684.

  • Collis, C., & Seeto, D. (2008). Web-based industry partner portals to university workplace learning programs: Implementation and design issues. In EdMedia+ Innovate Learning (pp. 998-1003). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

  • Fong, M. W., & Sims, R. (2010). e-WIL in student education. Interdisciplinary Journal of ELearning and Learning Objects, 6(1), 45–60.

  • Gamage, A. (2022). An inclusive multifaceted approach for the development of electronic work-integrated learning (eWIL) curriculum. Studies in Higher Education, 47(7), 1357-1371.

  • Glavas, C., & Schuster, L. (2020). Design principles for electronic work integrated learning (eWIL). The Internet and Higher Education, 47.

  • Godat, M., Yahaya, R., Singh, P., & Euler, T. (2007). Virtual golden foods corporation: Generic skills in a virtual crisis environment (a pilot study). Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(1)

  • Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T.C. (2003) Patterns of engagement in authentic online leaning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59-71.

  • Holmes, A. M., Kinslow, R., & Pope, M. (2012). Learning integrated work: Inter-organisational collaborators reflect on provision of authentic virtual multimedia project experience. 2012 Australian collaborative education network national conference (pp. 120–124).

  • Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (1998). Evaluating training programs: the four levels. Berrett.

  • Landorf, C., Brewer, G., Maund, K., & Ward, S. (1996). Enhancing learning for construction industry professionals with a 4-dimensional digital learning environment. In T. Thomas, E. Levin, P. Dawson, K. Fraser, & R. Hadgraft (Eds.). In Research and development in higher education: Learning for life and work in a complex world, Vol. 38 (pp. 267–278). Australia: Melbourne

  • Mundkur, A., & Ellickson, C. (2012). Bringing the real world in: Reflection on building a virtual learning environment. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 36(3), 369–384.

  • Ogilvie, A., & Douglas, K. (2007). Online role plays and the virtual placement: Aiding reflection in work integrated learning. Refereed Conference Proceedings, ASCILITE, Singapore

  • Peach, D., Gomez, R., & Ruinard, E. (2013). Reconstructing places and spaces in blended work integrated learning. Research and development in higher education: The place of learning and teaching, 36 (pp. 336-345). Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, Inc Refereed papers from the 36th HERDSA Annual International Conference.

  • Schuster, L., & Glavas, C. (2017). Exploring the dimensions of electronic work integrated learning (eWIL). Educational Research Review, 21, 55-66.

  • Stokes-Thompson, F., Wood, D., Scutter, S., & Dobinson, T. (2012). Researching the potential of the 3D virtual learning environment to complement work integrated learning in higher education. 2012 Australian collaborative education network national conference ISBN: 978-0-9805706-2-5.

  • Trede, F., Goodyear, P., Macfarlane, S., Markauskaite, L., McEwen, C., & Tayebjee, F. (2016). Enhancing workplace learning through mobile technology: Barriers and opportunities to the use of mobile devices on placement in the healthcare and education fields. In L. E. Dyson, W. Ng, & J. Fergusson (Eds.). Mobile learning futures-sustaining quality research and practice in mobile learningSydney: University of Technology Sydney (pp. 250), Proceedings of 15th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning, mLearn 2016, Sydney, Australia, October 24-26.

  • Yahaya, R. A. (2006, July). Assessing the effectiveness of virtual reality technology as part of an authentic learning environment. In Sixth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT'06) (pp. 262-264). IEEE.

White Structure

Internships in graduate research programs

by Simon Moss

Introduction

In recent decades, the percentage of doctoral candidates who continue in academic roles after graduation has steadily declined because of several reasons.  First, academia has become appreciably competitive and often unpredictable, potentially deterring many candidates from roles in this sector.  Second, in many nations, the number of vacant academic positions has subsided. 

 

Even many doctoral graduates who secure a role in academia soon contemplate other career paths.  Indeed, because they are uncertain of the careers in which they are most suited, many PhD graduates persist along the academic pathway and pursue a postdoctoral appointment, despite an acknowledged disinterest in an academic career (Sauermann & Roach, 2016)

 

Accordingly, the traditional perspective, in which a PhD is regarded as an apprenticeship, preparing individuals to become academics, is patently obsolete.  Instead, doctoral candidates need to develop the skills and qualities that are valued in other industries, sometimes called transferable skills.  Consequently, many institutions, around the globe, encourage doctoral candidates to complete internships—usually projects that are conducted with an industry partner, lasting around three months. 

 

These internships not only benefit candidates who want to explore other industries but also benefit candidates who want to pursue academia.  That is, after PhD candidates participate in an internship, they are more likely to

 

  • apply the insights they derive from their research to solve a problem in society or in an organization, enhancing the impact of their work

  • establish collaborations that either they or their supervisors can utilize to attract funding, to access informative data, and to enjoy an array of other benefits.

 

If possible, these internships should be designed to help PhD candidates developed the professional skills that employers value.  According to Gault et al. (2010), the skills that motivate employers to rehire interns at various levels include

 

  • an eagerness to learn and to develop skills as well as to embrace criticism

  • the capacity to prioritize tasks effectively and to achieve deadlines

  • an ability of individuals to motivate themselves and to demonstrate initiative

  • ethical behavior and professional conduct

  • reliability, consistency, and quality of work

 

Introduction: History of doctoral internships

Over many years, commentators have recognized that graduate researchers, such as doctoral candidates, need to develop career skills that transcend research capabilities.  The Set for Success review, conducted by the UK Research Councils, epitomized this position (Roberts, 2002).  The report indicated that PhD graduates in the UK generally worked outside academia but had not developed the career skills that employers value.  Ten years later, Wilson (2012), in a review of collaborations between universities and industry, remarked that progress on this pursuit has been limited and that PhD candidates should participate in an internship, lasting between two and three months. 

 

Although attempts to integrate work experience with study was more common in coursework degrees, especially during undergraduate, than in graduate research degrees, some innovative exceptions soon transpired.  Smaglik (2015), for example, outlined a program, in the US, called Broadening Experience in Scientific Training or BEST.  This program embedded career development courses and internships in 17 universities and was available to 14 000 candidates.  The program was developed to equip biomedical graduates to pursue careers outside academia—and to expose these individuals to career opportunities they might not have considered otherwise.

 

Similarly, around this time, candidates who received funding from the doctoral training centers of the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council were obliged to complete internships that last three months—an experience that students perceived as very beneficial to their careers (Jones & Warnock, 2015; Pope, 2016).  Interestingly, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council stipulated that all internships must be divorced from the research thesis, enabling candidates to experience industries and opportunities that diverge from their research field and past experience.  These internships, therefore, were more designed to broaden the experience of candidates rather than to hone their skills in a specialist field.

 

In some nations, such as Germany, PhD internships have been prevalent since the early 2000s or earlier.  For example, at the Technical University of Munich, PhD candidates must complete an internship in another nation but receive funding to support this experience (Mascarelli, 2012). 

 

Australian universities also began to embrace internship, soon after the review of research training, conducted by ACOLA or the Australian Council of Learned Academies, was released in 2016.  According to this review

 

  • although some institutions deliver training in transferrable, career skills to PhD candidates, this training is seldom accountable or transparent

  • graduate research is too divorced from industry, compromising the capacity of industries and universities to collaborate more productively in the nation

  • the government should introduce a national approach to facilitate PhD internships, primarily to facilitate agreements about intellectual property and to match the needs of candidates with the needs of industry partners.

 

Introduction: Examples of internships

Doctoral candidates, depending on their field or research skills, may complete a range of projects during their internships.  Some of these projects might depend only on the research skills of candidates.  For example, candidate might

 

  • conduct surveys and other methods to clarify the key needs of this organization

  • conduct focus groups or interviews to ascertain the opinions of individuals about a topic

  • conduct a study to assess the effects of some intervention on health or other outcomes

  • undertake a program evaluation of some intervention or initiative

  • apply various practices, such as design thinking, to help teams of individuals solve a problem

  • compare alternative designs or prototypes of some product, such as an appliance or software program, on the attitudes of customers or the features of this product, such as the level of noise

  • conduct a literature review or benchmarking to collate the benefits and drawbacks of various practices

  • examine and collate historical archives about some topic

  • update a website or improve communication, such as promote a product or service on social media or other platforms

 

Other projects might utilize the subject matter expertise of candidates.  To illustrate, candidates might

 

  • perform chemical assays to analyze a sample or substance

  • develop and pilot an app

  • integrate or develop policies

  • facilitate training or workshops on some matter, and so forth.

 

Even candidates who conduct research in creative fields, such as visual arts, may participate successfully in internships.  For example, these candidates often

 

  • use their creative skills to collect, articulate, and display data uniquely—such as a mural or play

  • design websites to disseminate information and impart knowledge

  • disseminate media and digital stories to communicate to audiences

  • apply design thinking and other methods to help organizations solve problems

  • utilize their capacity to engage diverse communities, demonstrating reciprocity, collaboration, and sensitivity

 

Consequences of internships

Studies have explored the consequences of internships to doctoral candidates. For example, Schnoes et al. (2018) evaluated two PhD internship programs in the life sciences—one at the University of California, San Francisco and one at the University of California, Davis.  In addition to the internship that lasted three months, the program also comprised workshops around career opportunities and decisions.  These workshops, lasting about 16 hours but distributed over 10 weeks, covered eight topics.  These topics included personal assessment of skills, values, and interests, how to learn about career opportunities, how to set appropriate career goals and an individual development plan, how to identify an internship, how to thrive during interviews and negotiations, how to work effectively with supervisors and peers, and how to communicate effectively.  During the internship, candidates received a wage from the industry partner that was equivalent to the stipend plus health insurance.  

 

To identify internships, staff publicized opportunities on a shared website and candidates utilized their own networks or internet searches to identify possible industry partners. Candidates sometimes contacted the industry partners themselves or sought assistance from staff to organize and to negotiate these opportunities.

 

To evaluate these programs, Schnoes et al. (2018) conducted focus groups and interviews as well as administered surveys. As the results showed, despite the benefits of these internships, some participants expressed some concerns.  For instance

 

  • some participants felt that staff had misrepresented the challenge of identifying a suitable internship

  • some participants felt the work during these internships was too menial or too irrelevant to their skills and interests

  • many participants felt they did not learn anything from some of workshop topics but recognized that other peers might perceive these topics as relevant

 

Likewise, some obstacles impeded the participation of candidates in the internships.  Specifically

 

  • because candidates had to defer their research during the internship, they often needed to complete extra activities to both halt and to recommence this research—squandering time

  • hence, internships need to be arranged at a suitable time, perhaps just before an experiment or before candidates write their thesis

  • internships after submission of the thesis, although often helpful, sometimes impeded the attempts of these candidates to seek employment.   

 

Despite these challenges, many participants deemed the internships to benefit their careers.  To illustrate

 

  • participants felt more confident about their choice of career and more confident they can secure a job after the internship

  • for example, some participants recognized their skills were more suited to industry than to academia

  • internships often evolved into permanent positions

  • workshops with peers fostered a sense of community around careers, in which candidates felt they could explore alternatives with likeminded individuals and learn from the experiences of these individuals

 

Consequences of internships: Case studies in Australia

To further explore the merits of internships, Valencia-Forrester (2019) explored the perceptions of Australian PhD candidates and graduates towards internships and work-integrated learning.  Seven individuals, recruited from one university in Queensland, who had been exposed to work-integrated learning participated in interviews.  The interviews revolved around the perceived value of internships, the optimal timing of internships, and the responsibilities of each party. Valencia-Forrester applied constructivist grounded theory to guide the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data. 

 

The participants felt that internships motivate candidates, either because these candidates appreciate the significance and direction of their research or because they learn skills they could apply to improve their research.  The research seems more grounded rather than abstract.  Nevertheless, one participant felt that internships might disrupt, rather than enhance, motivation in the candidates who were already failing to progress effectively.  Therefore, internships might not suit all candidates. 

 

The participants also discussed the benefits of industry engagement.  They felt that candidates, after they discover the relevance of their research and skills to industry and start to develop professional networks, may feel buoyed and confident about their career and direction.  They also might appreciate the needs of end users more effectively; their interpretations of their research may be more nuanced and sensitive to the challenges that industries experience.  Similarly, as participants argued, the challenges and dynamics of authentic experiences in industry are hard to simulate in classrooms or other contrived settings.  Hence, these authentic experiences in industry not only enable candidates to develop important qualities but also enhance the reputation of this program.

 

Finally, the participants expressed diverse perspectives about how the internships should be designed—but tended to concur that such designs should depend on the nature and field of the research.  They recognized that some candidates benefit from internships towards the outset of their research, to help guide their work, whereas other candidates benefit from internships towards the end of their research, to demonstrate their skills.  Yet, participants also felt that an alliance between research and internships was challenging and typically imperfect.  Consequently, the internships would need to be compartmentalized to prevent disruptions.

 

Consequences of internships: Social sciences

Originally, the bulk of PhD internships revolved around STEM.  Stamati and Willmott (2022), however, explored whether PhD internships benefited candidates in the social sciences.  In this study, the candidates were enrolled in a UK Russell Group university.  The internships in this university accommodated the preferences of candidates and industry partners—and, for example, could be remote and part-time.  The internship was designed to

 

  • enhance the knowledge of candidates about the industry

  • enable candidates to develop practical skills that could be applied in industries

  • enhance the employability of candidates

  • help partners gain a fresh perspective, utilize the skills of specialists, and benefit from the knowledge of universities more broadly.

 

The data were derived from surveys of 18 candidates and 15 industry partners.  Furthermore, 30 case study reports and 7 interviews with industry partners complemented this source of data.  The data revealed that

 

  • most candidates perceived the internships and satisfaction as beneficial to their PhD, professional skills, and career opportunities

  • the industry partners also felt their goals were fulfilled.

 

The individuals reported many specific benefits of the internships.  To illustrate

 

  • industry partners felt the candidates did not offer skills that were specific to project, but applied their advance knowledge and research capabilities to offer a fresh perspective as well as to uncover useful and objective data

  • candidates felt the experience had extended their professional contacts, broadened their perspectives, stimulated ideas, and improved their research skills

  • candidates could sometimes, as a consequence of these relationships with industry partners, access data that could benefit their PhD

  • the internships often generated helpful reports, blogs, presentations, publications, or even an archive—sometimes culminating in future collaborations

  • after the internship, candidates often felt more certain of the career paths they wanted to pursue—whether in academia or outside academia

  • after the internship, candidates recognized which of their skills are helpful to industry as well as which capabilities they might need to develop

 

The researchers, however, identified some challenges. For example, some industry partners felt that

 

  • candidates had not developed project management skills—and, therefore, could not always deliver the outputs on time

  • candidates had not always developed specific capabilities that were vital to the project, such as programming skills

  • candidates could not always disseminate the knowledge effectively, either orally or in writing, to senior decision makers

  • some internships were not long enough to enable students to develop their capabilities, understand the business, and fulfill this goals—and three months was often regarded as a minimum

  • before the internship, workshops on how to disseminate research that is relevant to decision makers may be necessary

 

Consequences of internships to supervisors

Garza and Jones (2017) explored the attitudes of supervisors towards these internships.  Initially, supervisors were often concerned that internships might impede the academic progress of their candidates.  However, after the internships ended, supervisors felt these candidates had developed broader skills and a mature perspective to work, enhancing their productivity.

 

Hence, if the benefits of internships are communicated effectively, supervisors are likely to encourage these internships.  That is, supervisors should be informed that

 

  • internships tend to enhance the confidence, skills, and networks of candidates—often enhancing their productivity and wellbeing

  • internships enhance the likelihood that candidates will be able to translate their research into practice.

 

Theories that underpin the benefits of internships

Some researchers, such as Schnoes et al. (2018), have invoked social cognitive career theory to explain the benefits of PhD internships.   According to this perspective, the career choices of individuals primarily depend on their career goals—the objectives they want to achieve from their career.  The likelihood that individuals will pursue and achieve these goals depends on the likely benefits of this pursuit, called outcome expectations, the degree to which these goals match the interests of these candidates, and the level of support these candidates receive. 

 

If candidates need to overcome many barriers, such as family responsibilities, they are not as likely to pursue or achieve their career goals.  However, if their self-efficacy or confidence is elevated, these barriers are not as likely to stifle their pursuits.  Self-efficacy primarily depends on

 

  • the degree to which candidates feel they have mastered helpful career skills, called mastery experiences

  • the extent to which candidates have observed people like themselves succeed in this career, called vicarious learning

  • the degree to which friends or colleagues have encouraged these candidates to pursue this career, called social persuasion

  • the extent to which these candidates experience positive emotions when they contemplate this career.

 

Researchers can then explore how internships shape the career goals, outcome expectations, interests, support, barriers, and self-efficacy of candidates.  For example, as Schnoes et al. (2018) revealed,

 

  • project supervisors who support the internships of their candidates implicitly demonstrate the value they attached to this industry, representing social persuasion

  • internships help candidates develop a range of career skills that enhance their self-efficacy, such as the capacity to negotiate and to solve problems

  • internships clarify the outcomes that candidates may experience in the future, enhancing outcome expectations and thus goal commitment.

 

Initiatives to boost internships: Changes to the Research Training Program in Australia

Governments have introduced a range of strategies to encourage more internships.  For example, in 2020, the Australian Government introduced an incentive to motivate universities to pursue internships.  This incentive was embedded in the research block grants—the annual fund of $2 billion the government distributes to support research and research training in Australian universities.  A portion of this fund is directed to graduate research training, called the Research Training Program or RTP.  The amount of RTP funding that universities receive depends on both the research income of these institutions and the number of graduate researchers who complete their degree.  However, to calculate the number of graduate researchers who complete their degree, some candidates receive a higher weighting than other candidates.  Originally, the weighting was

 

  • a Masters thesis in a field in which the costs are deemed as low receives a weighting of 1

  • a Masters thesis in a field in which the costs are deemed as high—typically the sciences—receives a weighting of 2.35

  • a PhD thesis in a field in which the costs are deemed as low receives a weighting of 2

  • a PhD thesis in a field in which the costs are deemed as high—typically the sciences—receives a weighting of 4.70

  • if the candidate is Indigenous, the weight is doubled.

 

However, if PhD candidates also completed an internship, the weighting is increased by 2.0.  This adjustment does not apply to Masters candidates.  For example, whenever PhD candidates also complete an internship

 

  • a PhD thesis in a field in which the costs are deemed as low receives a weighting of 4

  • a PhD thesis in a field in which the costs are deemed as high—typically the sciences—receives a weighting of 6.70

 

Nevertheless, the weight increases by 2 only if the internships fulfill several criteria.  Specifically

 

  • the internships must comprise at least 60 days full time and span over 3 months or longer—sufficient time to enable the candidates to develop career skills and professional networks

  • the internship must be a project that overlaps with the research of these candidates—that is, overlaps in the subject matter or utilizes the research skills these individuals have acquired—and the parties should maintain a record that justifies how the project overlaps with the research of these candidates

  • the internship must be completed before the degree is awarded

  • the industry partner cannot be a university or an affiliate of the university, such as a research institution 

  • the candidate, university, and industry partner must have, within the first 18 months full time equivalent, agreed on a written contract that stipulates the research and development project that will be undertaken and the duration of this project. 

  • the university will report this internship within seven days of degree conferral.

 

This timeline—that is, an agreement within 18 months full time equivalent—sparked controversy.  The concern was that many candidates prefer to complete the internship after they submit their thesis.  Few industry partners, however, would agree to a project that is likely to be deferred two to three years later.  

 

Nevertheless, at 18 months, the written agreement does not need to be finalized but can evolve later, if necessary.  For example, after 18 months, the parties can still clarify

 

  • the milestones and deliverables—as well as how the milestones and deliverables can be adjusted over time

  • the responsibilities of each party around key activities, such as induction, training, support, supervision, and evaluation

  • the benefits of this project to each party, such as the skills the candidate will develop and the possibility of future employment

  • provisions to manage complications, such as the possibility the candidate might want to defer the internship or withdraw from the internship in response to problems with their candidature

  • ownership of intellectual property and agreement around research output and communication—such as who needs to approve research publications

 

Apart from these criteria, the internships are designed to be flexible.  For example

 

  • the internships can be completed online

  • candidates may be employees of the industry partner.

 

This flexibility, however, could sometimes culminate in complications.  For instance, in principle, the projects should be beneficial but not essential to the industry partner.  That is, the candidates are not research contractors or employers.  Instead, these individuals need to be granted opportunities to experiment and to develop their skills.  Yet, the eligibility criteria do not explicitly preclude research contracts.

 

Since the announcement of this change, most Australian universities have established positions, such as an internship officer, to facilitate internships centrally.  A minority of these institutions have established two or more of these positions.  Most universities have introduced digital campaigns to promote these internships across the university and purchased tools to manage these placements, such as SONIA or InPlace.  

 

Initiatives to boost internships: Rebates to encourage the participation of industry partners

Paradoxically, the Australian Government introduced changes that motivate universities to embrace internships around the same time as withholding incentives that motivate industry partners to embrace internships.  That is, in previous years, the Australian Government had introduced rebates to industry partners that support internships.

 

To clarify, in 2007, the Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute established at internship program, supported by a $2 million state government fund, that enabled PhD candidates in mathematics to work on an industry project.  In 2010, supported by a $1.7 million partnership with the Commonwealth Government, this scheme was extended to all disciplines, culminating in a program called Australian Postgraduate Research or APR intern   After 2017, APR intern, together with the Commonwealth Government, had introduced a model that would last four years.  According to this model

 

  • for a 3-month internship, the industry partner would pay $20 000 but receive a $10 000 rebate from the Australian Government

  • a quarter of the funds would be directed to APR intern; this body would help arrange, administer, and manage the internships

  • the research supervisor would receive a quarter of these funds—funds they could use to support other research expenses

  • the candidate would receive half these funds, paid as a salary.

 

However, since 2020, the model shifted, because the government no longer supported the rebate.  Instead, APR intern introduced a subscription model: Universities pay an annual fee to receive the support of APR intern.  APR intern can identify relevant internships and administer these internships.    

 

Initiatives to boost internships: iPREP

In Western Australia, a coalition of universities developed the Industry and PhD Research Engagement

Program, or iPREP, a unique initiative, designed to bolster internships (for a discussion, see Lerch et al., 2018).  The distinct feature of this initiative revolves around the notion of teams.  Specifically, PhD candidates establish teams of 3 or more members, who have developed complementary skills.  Program coordinators then attempt to match teams to the needs of industry partners. 

 

Lerch et al. (2018) reported an evaluation of iPREP. Specifically, 12 months after completing their internship, PhD candidates participated in interviews.  The candidates indicated the program had boosted their confidence to pursue a career, enhanced their professional skills, such as project management, and extended their professional networks. 

 

Surveys of nine industry supervisors indicated that over half the industry partners had employed the candidates after the internship ended.  Other industry partners had funded university research, engaged university researchers as consultants, funded a university scholarship, or submitted joint grant applications with the university.  Nevertheless, some concerns were raised.  One supervisor, indicated that universities need to carefully manage the expectations of industry partners, clarifying the time and resources they may need to dedicate to this project in advance.  Another supervisor indicated they would recommend iPREP only to organizations that could identify a precise need or goal they wanted the project to achieve. Finally, one supervisor felt the candidates were too academic and not attuned to the challenges of actual organizations.

 

The iPREP website supplies other universities with resources they can use to establish similar internships.  This website includes a database of projects, promotional videos, templates of agreements, strategies on how to attract industries, and other resources, such as application forms, evaluation forms, and onboarding of supervisors.  

 

Initiatives to enhance internships

Practitioners and researchers have proposed a range of practices that institutions should apply or matters they should consider to optimize internships.  Jones and Warnock (2015), for example, derived a series of recommendations from their experiences with PhD internships.  Specifically, according to these authors

 

  • institutions should develop a working party that integrate resources and expertise from across the university, such as career services, to design the internship and to distribute responsibilities appropriately

  • institutions should maintain a webpage, or similar resource, to attract and to manage industry partners—such as information about the benefits and range of internships

  • institutions should help candidates identify suitable industry partners; they might interview candidates to clarify their interests and skills, facilitate workshops to help candidates approach partners, and organize events in which candidates and industry partners can meet

  • a legal professional should check the final agreement between the candidate, institution, and industry partner

  • institutions should help candidates decide when to commence the internship; internships that overlap with the research project should be organized earlier, whereas internships that diverge from the research project—and designed to broaden the skills of candidates—should be organized later.

  • institutions should design the internship to comply with the visa restrictions of international students

 

The Australian Graduate Research Council (2018) also compiled a series of recommendations, designed to help universities establish and manage PhD internships.  For example, the Council presented suggestions on how to foster collaboration and engagement between universities and industry partners.  For example, according to the Council

 

  • the university should develop one point of contact to support industries and clarify processes around the development of projects and agreements

  • to design a provisional or initial project, the industry partner should first clarify the problems they need to solve and the candidates can then discuss the roles they can fulfill

  • during subsequent meetings, the responsibilities of each party—such as the level of support and resources the candidate will receive—as well as provisional timelines should be clarified

  • the parties should also discuss how the candidate and industry partner will benefit from this internship

  • the industry partner needs to recognize the internship is primarily designed to facilitate the development of candidates, despite the collateral benefits of this engagement

  • however, the supervisor and candidate must agree to understand and to accommodate the commercial imperatives of industry partners

 

To manage controversies around intellectual property, publishing, confidentiality, and moral rights, the Council recommended that

 

  • parties consult the Australian Government’s Australian IP Toolkit for Collaboration, or the Mini IP toolkit, if intellectual property might be jointly owned—because this toolkit clarifies the issues to be considered, supplies template contracts, and helps manage these arrangements

  • although candidates own the copyright of their thesis, industry partners might want the parties to sign non-disclosure agreements and confidentiality agreements—but these agreements should not impede the capacity of candidates to publish

 

The Council also presented recommendations on how to manage compliance and risk.  For example

 

  • candidates should continue to be enrolled during the internship—and the learning goals as well as assessment should be articulated explicitly—to circumvent minimum wage and other provisions of the Fair Work Act and National Employment Standards, Awards and agreements

  • candidates should be paid, especially if the work transcends university requirements, prioritizes productive work over professional development, or is integral to the operations of this industry partner

  • industry partners may be eligible to receive R&D rebates

  • universities should confirm their insurance covers unpaid student placements, including public liability and workers compensation, because candidates are not deemed as employees and thus not covered by the insurance policy of industry partners

 

Finally, the Council outlined recommendations on how to complete the various phases of this internship project, from recruitment to assessment.  For instance

 

  • the industry partner should participate in decisions about which candidates to select

  • the induction should cover workplace procedures, workplace standards, agreed outcomes, industry supervision and encouragement of honest, but supportive, communication; industry partner should introduce candidates to the teams or individuals with whom they will be working

  • the industry partner should assign at least one mentor to assist these candidates, to help these candidates develop professional skills, to highlight the strengths of these candidates, and to liaise with the academic supervisors

  • the evaluation should explore the degree to which the internship benefited the industry partner and candidates and the extent to which the objectives were fulfilled.

 

References

  • Australian Graduate Research Council (2018).  Enhancing industry university engagement through graduate research students: A guide for universities

  • Drisko, J., Hunnicutt, C., & Berenson, L. (2015). A national content analysis of PhD program objectives, structures, and curricula: Do programs address the full range of social work's needs? Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(1-2), 14-28.

  • Ferrer-Marti, L., Garfi, M., & Ferrer, I. (2015). Cooperation and human development projects as bachelor, master and PhD thesis: evaluating an internship program. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 196, 63-68.

  • Garza, T. G., & Jones, H. M. (2017). The impact of the internship experience on returning doctoral students.

  • Gault, J., Leach, E., & Duey, M. (2010). Effects of business internships on job marketability: the employers' perspective. Education and Training.

  • Jones, H. M., & Warnock, L. J. (2015). When a PhD is not enough: A case study of a UK internship programme to enhance the employability of doctoral researchers. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning.

  • Lerch, M. A. R., Howell, K., & Haq, K. (2018) Exploring the impact and national implementation of iPREP: A post-submission industry program for PhD candidates.

  • Mascarelli, A. (2012). Stepping stones. Nature, 490, 571-573.

  • McCarthy, P. X., & Wienk, M. (2019). Who are the top PhD employers?

  • Molla, T., & Cuthbert, D. (2019). Calibrating the PhD for Industry 4.0: global concerns, national agendas and Australian institutional responses. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 3(2), 167-188.

  • Pope, C. (2016). Professional internships for PhD researchers: An integral part of doctoral training (Occasional paper C2).  Paper presented at the Vitae Researcher Development International Conference, Manchester, UK.

  • Roberts, G. G. (2002). SET for success: The supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills: The report of Sir Gareth Roberts' review.

  • Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2016). Scientific workforce. Why pursue the postdoc path? Science, 352(6286), 663–664.

  • Schnoes, A. M., Caliendo, A., Morand, J., Dillinger, T., Naffziger-Hirsch, M., Moses, B., ... & O’Brien, T. C. (2018). Internship experiences contribute to confident career decision making for doctoral students in the life sciences. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(1).

  • Smaglik, P. (2015). Internships: Mind wide open. Nature, 525(7567), 147-148.

  • Stamati, K., & Willmott, L. (2022). Preparing UK PhD students towards employability: a social science internship programme to enhance workplace skills. Journal of Further and Higher Education.

  • Tiraboschi, M. (2014). Work based learning industrial PhDs, research apprenticeships, and on-the-job training: The case of Italy from a comparative and international perspective. Work Based Learning eJournal, 4(1), 28–54.

  • Tuckerman, L. (2022). Doing and making the most of PhD internships. In How to Engage Policy Makers with Your Research (pp. 136-145). Edward Elgar Publishing.

  • Valencia-Forrester, F. (2019). Internships and the PhD: Is This the Future Direction of Work-Integrated Learning in Australia? International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 20(4), 389-400.

  • Wilson, T. (2012). A review of business–university collaboration.  UK government.

bottom of page