Shiv Shanmugam (SHLS), Heather Gray (SHLS), Paul McKenna (SEBE), Siobhan White (GSBS), Scott Rooney (PhD student), Yetunde Ogedengbe & Eilidh Fulton (Students Association) Lesley McAleavy (AQD)

Project Drivers & GCU Context Student Experience Action Plan 2020 (Objectives 1.1; 1.2) Strategy for Learning 2015-20 GCU Community: Working Together in Partnership 2017 NSS 2017 Qs 21, 23-25 under ‘Learning Community and ‘Student Voice’

Project Goals Scope ‘good’ partnership working practice(s) across the HEI sector. Quantify & review GCU’s current partnership practices & activities. Collate case examples of partnership working at GCU. Explore the ways in which students and staff can partner together at GCU. This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND

Desired Project Outputs Enhanced GCU Partnership working policy with clear operationalisation processes. Online Good Practice Guidelines, resources and signposting materials for students and staff to encourage and embed sustainable practices Inspirational case studies on good partnership working practices by the GCU Community. Recommendation on capturing partnership working as part of GCU’s AQD Programme monitoring processes and documentation.

Project Impact Q21 Q23 Q24 Q25 GCU 62% 81% 69% 49% Learning community   Q21 Q23 Q24 Q25 GCU 62% 81% 69% 49% Learning community 21. I feel part of a community of staff and students. Student voice 23. I have had the right opportunities to provide feedback on my course. 24. Staff value students’ views and opinions about the course. 25. It is clear how students’ feedback on the course has been acted on.

Project Stages Completed stages Staff PL survey of current PW practices Staff consultation workshop Student consultation workshop HEI scoping of PW practices Collected 13 case study examples On-going work Collecting 7 further case studies Write final report with recommendations Website development with case examples, videos & resources Liaising with SPARQS Siobhan?

Programme Lead Survey Results

Participants (N=38) School N = 38 School of Health and Life Sciences 50% (19) School of Computing, Engineering & Built Environment 21% (8) Glasgow School for Business & Society GCU Institute for University to Business Education 3% (1) GCU London Academic Quality and Development

Programmes Level Number Undergraduate 21 Postgraduate 18 Doctoral programme 1 Shiv= survey results

Q. During your most recent Programme approval/review did you partner with students in the co-creation of the following?

Partnership Working in Programme Approval/Review

Student on Approval/Review Panel

Q. Outside of Programme Approval/Review have you ever partnered with students in the co- creation and/or delivery of the following?

Partnership Working Outside of Programme Approval/Review

Q. In your Programme have you used any of the following types of partnership activities for learning, teaching and assessment?

Partnership Working Activities

Q. Excluding dissertations/honours projects, have you ever partnered with students during research and scholarship using any of the following activities, e.g. knowledge exchange; consultancy, community, scholarly projects?

Research & Scholarly Activities* * Excluding Hons Projects/ Dissertations

Q. Has your programme team partnered with students in the identification of staff training needs and/or development or delivery of staff CPD, i.e. partnership for staff professional development?

PW for Identifying Staff Training/ Development Needs or Delivery of Staff CPD

Staff Consensus Development Workshop

Q1. In what ways/during which activities can students and staff partner together in GCU?

Q1. Staff NGT Item Description % of group Co-design L&T/module/curriculum resources, seminars/tutorials 45% Design of assessment/rubrics and feedback 27% Peer assessment/evaluation 18% Work together on projects - e.g. website design SSCG committee/programme board involvement Co-write/present research at conferences etc. Showcases of work - e.g. physical, social media Shaping learning environment Working with external partners (companies/3rd sector) - Industry/consultancy projects Co-create programme review/approval materials Develop marketing material

Q1. Student NGT Item Description % of group Co-design L&T/module/curriculum resources, seminars/ tutorials 60% Jointly review student feedback from surveys etc. and jointly develop action plans Design of assessment/rubrics and feedback 40% Policy development at GCU Student panel members - quality events Student/staff events Working with external partners (companies/3rd sector) - Industry/consultancy projects External (offsite) curricular or extra-curricular visits

Q2. What key factors would facilitate these partnership working activities taking place?

Q2. Staff NGT Item Description % of group Staff and student training/expectations management 27% Willingness to change Templates/guides/"how to" resources Increase staff feeling valued Time (ring fenced) 18% Policy that explicitly includes partnership Culture that partnership is the norm Mutual trust and respect: staff, students, management

Q2. Student NGT Item Description % of group Incentivise staff/students with benefits of partnership working, e.g. PW award 80% Create culture where it is expected Better staff-student communication 60% Willingness of participation 40% Proactive leaders Enhance Student Partnership Agreement Clear definitions and parameters for partnership working - outlining benefits

Thank you for your participation!

Nominal Group Technique Face to face, small group, consensus development method that follows three stages: ideas generation; group discussion and clarification; and individual ranking/scoring (Potter et al., 2004). Rooted in co-production as was established in public sector, service user engagement settings (Fox, 1993) Highly structured - increases reproducibility Results in participants generating a larger number & higher quality of ideas than traditional focus groups Enables enhanced confidentiality of responses and maximises each participant’s contribution Enables the amalgamation of the results from nominal groups that are conducted consecutively and/or concurrently