Contextual Background:
Following Case Study 1 which centred on the challenge of diverse English written and verbal communication skills in the classroom, the challenge I will focus on for Case Study 2 builds upon opportunities with how to solve this. This new problem however highlights the differences amongst the academic team, regarding background and expectations which in turn impacts student experience and the quality support we should aspire to give as 1 unified voice.
Evaluation:
To address this challenge of a unifying a team, I have embedded various approaches including working with Digital Learning Teams to create a digital infrastructure, weekly team check-ins, and providing supportive resources which are intended to ease team member workload and add to efficiency. By creating a Course and Unit TEAM and Sharepoint page, I am able to easily organise digital resources and ensure that all team members can contribute from an equal position. This foundation and transparency helps us communicate and stay up to date on important information, although weekly check-ins are not always well attended (mostly due to teaching clashes) and there is often a struggle in power dynamics. As many of our PG units are shared across courses, some units involve 3-5 Course leaders each with different personalities and approaches to leadership.
Moving forwards:
Currently when preparing for a unit to begin, my leadership style is to begin by sharing unit materials, including the scheme of work, assessment brief, key readings, and a timetable well in advance with my chosen team before the term. Next, I ask team members to contribute adding their perspectives and comments on their allocated sessions. Then we have a meeting as a team at the start of the Unit, mid-way through the unit to understand tutorials, formative and summative assessment expectations, and a final meeting to review feedback and have a blind marking parity session. The team is told my availability in advance and is encouraged to drop in on Wednesdays to discuss any outstanding issues. I also launch a mid-block review allowing students to feed forward any comments suggestions which can be implemented within a block.
Moving forwards, I plan to create a shared “glossary of terms” to support staff writing feedback to students with subject specific terms and positively constructive feedback terminology, an idea inspired by a fellow colleague from the PG Cert. I will also speak individually with each team member prior to sharing unit materials in order to understand everyone’s expectations, goals and priorities. It is important to create a strong sense of rapport (Rowan and Grootenboer, 2017) amongst teams in Higher Education but also to manage expectations when delivering on a unit as some members may be stretch across upwards of 5 units! Emphasising content ownership will also be a focus moving forward opposed to teams “following” prescribed unit content (Bergmark and Westman, 2016). This will hopefully create more intellectual stimulation and commitment to students on the unit. The principles of co-creation apply not only for students but for the team offering content. This reflection has allowed me to think more about my leadership style and the importance of relationships and empowering team members. There is a domino effect leading from staff experience to student experience and hopefully by targeting a positive and effective work culture, students will feel more supported.
References
Bergmark, U. and Westman, S., 2016. Co-creating curriculum in higher education: Promoting democratic values and a multidimensional view on learning. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), pp.28-40.
Rowan, L. and Grootenboer, P., 2017. Student engagement and rapport in higher education: The case for relationship-centred pedagogies. Student engagement and educational rapport in higher education, pp.1-23.