Engaging diverse student groups in higher education:- reflections on the impact of team teaching

1. Engaging diverse student groups in higher education:- reflections on the impact of team teaching Wendy Yellowley and Marilyn Farmer Business School University of Hertfordshire

2. About the session • The research into team teaching in collaboration with Dr Stuart Levy, Monash University, Melbourne • What we have done since joining the University • Any questions?

3. Most Institutions offer:- For Students: • University places for widening participation • Varied assignments • Clear assessment criteria • Formative feedback • Option modules • Support for Academic Skills development • Student support and guidance For Lecturers: • Staff development • Peer observation • Subject development days • Probation • Increasingly larger group sizes! Few spend time considering the impact of what goes on in the class room and whether working in a team could make a difference.

4. What has generated our interest in team teaching? • Teaching is usually ‘an isolated activity with limited opportunity for reflection or feedback from peers’. (Knights, Meyer & Sampson, 2007) • It is assumed that we will develop our teaching expertise over time – the more we do the better we will get. • Evidence suggests that team teaching produces qualitative improvements for lecturers. (Schon (1987) & Argyris (1993)) • Research has found that there can be improvements in the student learning experience ………team teaching can improve the capability of students in areas of critical evaluation and analysis. (Austin & Baldwin (1991)) • Team teaching has been found to be of particular value with increasingly diverse student populations. (Robinson & Schaible (1995) and Maroney (1995)

5. Team Teaching – the Research Idea • To investigate the impact of team teaching on the student learning experience • To explore the impact of team teaching on the lecturers learning and development experience

6. Team teaching: definitions and variations Three distinct models:- • Interactive or fully integrated – two lecturers teaching the class together- same discipline or from different disciplines • The participant observer – two lecturers in the teaching room – one takes the session the other observes • Rotational models – individual lecturers teach the class separately but split/divide the module (Nead, 1995; White, Henley & Brabston, 1998) ‘A group of two or more lecturers working together to plan, conduct and evaluate the learning activities for the same group of learners.’ Goetz (2000)

7. Summary of research • Two academic years • Undergraduate and Post Graduate modules • Data collected via questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and informal ‘post–it notes’ • Findings and emerging themes captured in article and conference papers

8. Team Teaching at the University of Hertfordshire – September 2009 to date • Human Resource Management module Semester A, 60 students for Single Honours HRM students • Two MA HRM modules Semester A and Semester B, 55 students • Managing Human Resources module Semester B, 560 students for general Business students

9. Post it note campaigns – so far…. Feedback suggests that students like: • Accessibility team teaching creates • Dual teaching seen as involving and supporting learning • The different view points presented which stimulates critical thinking • The level of organisation and resources provided

10. Discussion points - team teaching impact on lecturers • Innovation – provides a safety net for risk taking • Act as role models for students to encourage collaborative learning • Creates a climate for critical evaluation and questioning • Removes ‘pedagogic isolation’ • Provides a supportive climate • More fun and rewarding

11. Team teaching - the challenges • Time and financial implications • Requires a commitment to co-ordinating, consulting, communicating, and co-operating • Trust and respect (as exposes weaknesses and strengths!) • Possibility of students exploiting the approach • Dangers of ‘contrived collegiality’ being forced on lecturers. (Hargreaves, 1994)

12. Discussion points - general • University class room provides a powerful arena for work place learning – team teaching generates chance to experience and reflect to aid professional development and adapt individual practice (Knights et al, 2007) • Team teaching encourages the team to ‘challenge one another’, ‘construct knowledge together’ and ‘build something bigger’ (Lester et al, 2009) • Process encourages the action research cycle – plan, act, reflect and re-plan (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988) • Develops small scale ‘community of practice’ between the members of the teaching team (Knights et al, 2007; Murata, 2002) • Knowledge spiral (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) in action – tacit to explicit to tacit knowledge • Creates ‘collaborative learning’ opportunity which helps to eliminate the ‘narrowness of view’ of the individual (Feltovich et al, 1996)

13. Concluding remarks • Team teaching offers an alternative teaching and learning strategy to help capture and support the various learning needs of new student populations • Although additional staff costs are associated with team teaching these have to be considered against the costs of failing to engage and retain students • ‘every student ‘lost’ represents a financial loss for institutions’……but also ‘an opportunity cost through loss of valuable life time for the student’ (Swail, 2006) • Critical is the personal interest and commitment of the tutors in being willing to explore different strategies to help support and encourage new student populations.

14. Questions • How many of you have the opportunity to team teach? • What are your experiences? • What do you see to be the barriers and implementation issues? • Can you see situations where it may help in the delivery of modules?