This is a draft of the presentation that will be given at the HEA Social Sciences annual conference - Teaching forward: the future of the Social Sciences. For further details of the conference: http://bit.ly/1cRDx0p Bookings open until 14 May 2014 http://bit.ly/1hzCMLR or external.events@heacademy.ac.uk ABSTRACT This paper focuses on the duality of roles that students and lecturers play in sharing responsibilities for creating productive and worthwhile teaching and learning environments. Taking student-centred learning as a starting point, this paper focuses on university teacher fellowship projects that challenge students to take control of their learning as a means of democratising the learning experience. This means the lecturer is more facilitator and environment creator than sage or expert and advocates getting students to trust themselves to learn as well as getting lecturers to trust themselves and let go of control.

1. HEA SSC 2014: Presenter Resources and Materials
Zoe Allman and Kerry Francksen, De Montfort University
Simon Moralee, Manchester Business School
“Trust Thyself: Learning and Letting Go” (Theme: Trust yourself)
Discover (1st
Floor), Thursday 22nd
May 1015-1115
Introduction
We have provided our own stories and learning journeys to act as prompts for audience members
and those engaged with the HEA to create their own stories and examples of doing one thing
differently. Where relevant, we have provided the (referenced!) inspiration behind our thinking,
which adds robust pedagogical foundations to our work.
In addition, we have provided a series of vignettes, from across our different disciplines of dance,
media production and management of our own experience, of putting our ideas into practice, of
doing one thing differently. Although we have highlighted where these ideas were first tried, the
real essence of all of this is that the ideas work anywhere, in any discipline, in any type of class and
really it’s the endeavour, the attitude to try something new that is the key.
As part of our DMU teacher fellowship projects, we are capturing our experiences and those of
others who are doing one thing differently via a DMU hosted blog and we are keen to hear stories
from others who have been inspired by our work:
http://zallma00.our.dmu.ac.uk/2014/04/17/hea-social-sciences-conference-2014-trust-thyself-
learning-and-letting-go/
Our Stories – Zoë Allman
My starting point
Working as an academic in the same school where I was an undergraduate student, I’ve always
approached teaching from the point of view of the student experience. Having sat directly on the
other side I often question: what do I remember from lectures? What topics stayed with me?
Which lecturers really got the point across? Reflecting on these and similar questions allows me
to consider my teaching approaches, with the learner at the heart of every decision.
Trusting myself and having a go: an example (this is provided as Vignette 6 below)
Issue:
I’m very aware that our students are asked to sit in a number of lectures each week, usually in the
same building, often in the same room, and so I ask myself, what is it that they will take away from
‘my’ session this week? Looking at my lecture notes I know what I’d like the students to view as
the key messages, and what topics will be important for their ongoing learning process, but then
there’s the idea of how to make certain topics a bit more interesting to try to ensure greater
understanding and learning.

2. Possible solution:
Having reflected on student feedback one key message was the desire for greater interaction in
sessions, so I explored this with our CELT representative who recommended using a voting system
in lectures.
Personal reaction:
My initial thoughts focused on the barriers to introducing voting technologies: time, software,
hardware, student engagement. But, reflecting on the student feedback I wanted to give it a go,
just once to see what could be done with this idea. My personal aim was to try the system, just
once, with a first year lecture and explore the reaction, response and to try to assess learning
through this ‘interactive’ lecture approach.
Practical approach:
The ‘Turning Point’ system I use is a simple plug-in with PowerPoint and works really easily, so
that’s great for the time, software and hardware concerns I initially faced. Student feedback is
incredibly positive and using this system allows me to assess whether my messages are being
understood during delivery. Students can use the voting pads anonymously, so I can easily assess
whether the intended messages are being understood across the cohort, without asking students
to raise their hands. Initially I was sceptical, and I wrongly assumed that students would view this
as a gimmick, but actually it’s something that they have been keen to use again.
One change leads to many:
I now use the voting system for revision lectures across different levels, as well as for lectures
containing particularly detailed technical content, where it helps to know if the students are
keeping up with the speed of delivery. It also adds a nice change to the teaching environment and
empowers the students to actually participate. I always advise students to keep a note of any
questions they are perhaps struggling with so that they can then raise these with me in the smaller
tutorial setting.
Reflection:
Looking back I’m so pleased I made myself try the system, just the once. I learned from that initial
experience and have developed my approach. The students are keen to use the system and it
makes a good change to the academic environment, as they are invited to engage in a different
way. I would fully recommend that if you have an idea, try it just once, as you never know what it
might lead to.
Who informs me
My day-to-day decision making about teaching and learning delivery is predominately informed
by:
 Student feedback
 My own reflections, and memories of ‘sitting on the other side’
 Colleagues and peers
 Teacher Fellow network
 Research
Our Stories – Kerry Francksen

3. My starting point
Having been engaged in learning and teaching across a range of disciplines (including dance,
performing arts and music) for 15 years I have become more and more interested in how I might
enable and facilitate opportunities for students to let go of, or open-up, their focus on end goals
(for example ‘how do I get my ‘A’ grade’?) and actually engage in the process of learning from a
positive position as a learner. This is not to say that students should not be aiming for that ‘A’
grade, to the contrary, that’s ultimately what all students should be aiming for. But, I am more
interested in trying to enable learners to recognise that the acquisition of skills and knowledge as a
continual process will lead them not only to their ‘A’ grade, but will offer them an understanding
of learning and teaching that truly enables them to trust themselves as an effective learner,
equipped to transfer their understanding across a range of contexts. Key to this has been
interdisciplinary learning, where students from all of the above disciplines come together to work
on creative and collaborative projects through the uses of creative technologies.
Being a Reflective Educator
As our title suggests ‘learning and letting go’ has also been key from my perspective as an
educator. By aiming to continually engage in my own learning and teaching practice (also as an
artist-researcher), I have noticed that modelling an approach in behaviour has enabled me to
reflect on my own pre-conceptions about what it means to learn and consequently how best to let
go. By fostering such an approach my aims have been to open up opportunities for: formulating
spontaneous responses in classroom/workshop type situations, developing group strategies, to
find creative solutions through collaboration within an interdisciplinary context and to engender
amongst others: peer learning, collaborative learning, experiential learning, problem/enquiry-
based learning, interdisciplinary learning, interactive learning and practice-based learning. I often
lead on extra-curricular activities that bring together staff members from a number of
backgrounds as well as undergraduate and postgraduate students and alumni to work together on
interdisciplinary activities. Placing myself in the very position many of my students find themselves
in has been key to my own learning and letting go. As a reflective educator I therefore strive to
continually assess my own working practices by having to respond to new situations, which
provides a useful framework for learning and teaching more generally and enables me to promote
learning as a participatory act.
Influences and context
The notion of experiential learning (Elliot 1991) and ‘creating the conditions in which creativity is
more likely to thrive’ (Kleiman 2005) underpins my interests in interdisciplinary and collaborative
creativity within Higher Education. Other influences and interests include Boud, Cohen and
Walker’s idea of ‘active engagement in the environment, of which the learner is an important part’
(1993:6) as well as Savin-Baden’s notion of ‘liquid learning’ and ‘transitional learning’ (In: Land,
Meyer & Smith 2008). These ideas provide useful platforms for considering and opening up
‘spaces for learning’ (ibid). I have also been heavily influenced by innovative uses of new software
technologies, such as the Isadora software programme (Isadora is a graphic programming
environment that allows for real-time, interactive control over live and digital material), which I
have been uniquely applying within studio settings to facilitate joint exploration. Through the
software I create interactive environments (e.g. engaging with the real-time manipulation of live
and digital media, telematic performance and tracking technologies), which enable students from
a wide variety of subject specialisms to work creatively together on joint projects. This highlights

4. many questions relating to how new technology might figure as an integral agent in the creative
process rather than merely using it as an external tool for postproduction and effects (Popat &
Palmer 2005).
Pedagogic application – an example (this is provided as Vignette 2 below):
As a consequence, in 2012 I developed a new undergraduate module titled, Performance,
Interaction and Digital Technologies, which brings together students from dance, performing arts
and music technology and innovation. This has been made possible through my own practice-
based research and expertise in using the Isadora software. This new module allows students from
the above disciplines to work on creative and collaborative projects outside of their normal
assessment regime. By bringing individuals from different disciplines together to explore concept
driven ideas, at the same time as they to learn how to programme in the Isadora software
environment, I have witnessed first hand how the process of learning together through joint
creativity has empowered learners to question their own habitual methods and subsequently
begin to questioning how best to manage their developing interdisciplinary skill sets. This not only
begins to expand their subject specialist knowledge (it has been fascinating to watch dance and
music students discuss their understanding of terminology and come up with their own
definitions, such as the meaning of ‘lyrical’ for example), it more importantly affords them an
opportunity to learn from each other. Students enthuse about how such a creative situation,
which is directly brought about by having to negotiate across disciplines within mixed media
environments, inspires them to think differently about their practice. As a result, DMU is now one
of a hand full of University’s offering interactive performance opportunities to undergraduates.
Particularly innovative is the use of inventive assessment strategies that place emphasis on
interdisciplinarity and collaborative demonstrations where the ‘process’ of learning collectively
encourages deep learning. Students taking this module do not work towards a final performance,
instead they work towards two demonstrations where emphasises is placed on their learning
process and not the final outcome of the work.
Where I am now
The most exciting part of ‘trusting thyself: learning and letting go’ has been enabling myself and
those students and colleagues I have worked with, to embrace ‘new’ situations and to ‘collectively’
and ‘collaboratively’ find our way through the processes of learning together. Irrespective of
discipline or skill set, allowing one self to respond to the practice of learning as an emerging and
cyclical process has been enlightening – I urge you to give it a go.
Our Stories – Simon Moralee
My starting point
Since coming into academia from the NHS seven years ago, my starting point has always been to
try and understand what makes students tick and I always felt I wouldn’t be able to do that until
I’d considered things from their point of view, until I’d walked in their shoes and sat in their seats,
so to speak.
Trusting myself and having a go

5. Over several years I have endeavoured to approach ‘teaching’ more as an exercise in facilitative
learning – to transmit some content and knowledge, but to ensure that at every opportunity
students can talk, discuss, disagree, be confused and ultimately overcome that confusion, through
a variety of different methods and approaches (action learning, peer assessment, interactive
learning, exemplar assignment marking, interactive learning, debating, problem/enquiry-based
learning, peer assessment, student teaching, discovery learning, collaborative/ cooperative
learning, negotiated work-based report) across different academic levels (from FHEQ L4 to L7).
Who informs me
In all of the above, my role as ‘the expert’ was to be de-emphasised and students were given
responsibility for making decisions about how they want to learn, underpinned by robust
pedagogic foundations:
 Lev Vygotsky / Jean Piaget – zone of proximal development; building blocks; the environment
is yours in which to develop and safe for you to try things out but you will be challenged within
it
 Colin Beard – helping students achieve meaningful learning experiences through making them
uncomfortable and confused; getting them to the ‘edge’ by making the most of the
technological and physical space available (experiential learning addresses complexity,
because there is no one best way through it)
 Paulo Freire / John Dewey / Julie Brown – education to gain knowledge and employment but
also to learn how to live – active enquiry is a ‘democratising’ process
 Phil Race – inspiring students to want and need to learn, by doing, by getting feedback, by
making sense of their own learning; then by explaining this back to others and making
judgements about what they have learned
My own journey
I made my first changes to curriculum in 2008 by introducing problem-based learning into a Level
6 finance module, underpinned by the knowledge and skills I had gained during my PGCertHE. In
2009 I extended my application of PBL into a new health and social care management module. In
2011, I attended a Higher Education Academy (HEA) sponsored event “Empowering Students
through Effective Feedback”, which eventually led to my involvement as a partner in the NTFS It’s
Good To Talk (see Vignette 4). Later on in 2011, I developed a bespoke guide for action learning
for Level 4 management students, which is updated for each new cohort (Vignette 3), and in 2012
I published, with a colleague, our work into problem-based learning (PBL) in health and social care
management. See Appendix 1 for further details.
Where I am now
For me the key was not my particular ideas or approach, thus acknowledging that different
schools/faculties/disciplines need different approaches to learning; moreover it was the
consistency of my attitude and ‘contract’ towards the student – doing one thing different, for me,
is about instilling a culture change of ‘student first’ – to create a new and consistent form of
approach, because, above all, it’s the students’ education – therefore their approach to learning is
paramount.
Vignettes

6. Vignette 1: Collaborative and interdisciplinary learning (DANCE)
Creating situations for learners to step outside of their subject specific disciplines and to engage in
interdisciplinary and collaborative learning underpins my approach to learning and teaching.
Through innovative uses of new technologies I have become interested in how experiential and
collaborative learning, where creative exploration within a media-rich environment, can help
students to understand each other and to appreciate the learning process as something besides
attainment at a particular level. By working across specialisms and across multi-media platforms,
my aims have been to offer students an opportunity to question how they learn in order to effect
meaningful pedagogic and artistic change. One way in which I have done this is to create
interactive environments (e.g. engaging with the real-time manipulation of live and digital media,
telematic performance and using tracking technologies), where students from arts disciplines such
as dance, performing arts and music technology have been given opportunities through new
curricular developments to work creatively on joint interdisciplinary projects. This is besides
normal teaching practices where students learn within their own subject specialisms. What is
more, my aims have been to open-up conventional learning and teaching strategies, particularly in
choreography and composition, where the focus is normally on creating final, fixed performative
outcomes, in order to promote unique collaborative and interdisciplinary approaches that
emphasises the process of learning at a deep level.
Vignette 2: Performance, Interaction and Digital Technologies (DANCE)
In 2012 I developed a new undergraduate module titled, Performance, Interaction and Digital
Technologies, which brings together students from dance, performing arts and music technology
and innovation. This has been made possible through my own practice-based research and
expertise in using the Isadora software. This new module allows students from the above
disciplines to work on creative and collaborative projects outside of their normal assessment
regime. By bringing individuals from different disciplines together to explore concept driven ideas,
at the same time as they to learn how to programme in the Isadora software environment, I have
witnessed first hand how the process of learning together through joint creativity has empowered
learners to question their own habitual methods and subsequently begin to questioning how best
to manage their developing interdisciplinary skill sets. This not only begins to expand their subject
specialist knowledge (it has been fascinating to watch dance and music students discuss their
understanding of terminology and come up with their own definitions, such as the meaning of
‘lyrical’ for example), it more importantly affords them an opportunity to learn from each other.
Students enthuse about how such a creative situation, which is directly brought about by having to
negotiate across disciplines within mixed media environments, inspires them to think differently
about their practice. As a result, DMU is now one of a hand full of University’s offering interactive
performance opportunities to undergraduates. Particularly innovative is the use of inventive
assessment strategies that place emphasis on interdisciplinarity and collaborative demonstrations
where the ‘process’ of learning collectively encourages deep learning. Students taking this module
do not work towards a final performance, instead they work towards two demonstrations where
emphasises is placed on their learning process and not the final outcome of the work.
Vignette 3: Learning at Level 4 (MANAGEMENT)
For these classes, there was a combination of lectures for knowledge transmission (one hour),
action learning sets (one hour) and plenary feedback (one hour) for a weekly three-hour class.
After the first week, I asked students for feedback regarding the plenary feedback session, which

7. was designed to check understanding of student learning. The class felt that it enabled them to
‘hide’ and not participate or engage with learning and suggested, post-learning sets, that they join
together into bigger groups to critique their own learning. This was the model that was adopted
from that point on and although there may be concerns that students’ understanding is not being
checked, the continued engagement with the subject into a third hour of learning on a Thursday
afternoon convinced me, against a small potential risk of loss of learning, that this was the
approach with which to continue. The students actively created an element of the learning
strategy because they know best how they learn (Brown, 2008; Niebur, 2004) and my aim is for
them to be educated not just for the sake of a good degree and employment opportunities, but
also, once given the responsibility to make decisions, to make them independent of instruction
and direction for the rest of their lives at and beyond university.
Vignette 4: Understanding Assessment (MANAGEMENT)
Following the work of Blair and McGinty (2010) and the National Teacher Fellowship (NTFS)
project It’s Good To Talk, in 2011 I became interested in ways of getting students to understand
what is required from them in assessment and helping them to reach their own ‘grade goals’. The
process involved students ‘learning to learn’ how essay marking was done by marking themselves,
initially without using university mark descriptors and then reflecting on the marks they had
awarded in light of those descriptors. Many had never engaged with the descriptors before (or
knew of their existence) and as part of the exercise they spent time marking exemplar essays and
discussing their marks with fellow students. Finally they reflected on the exercise in terms of its
use and relevance for future assessments and what they would do differently as a result of the
exercise when writing their next assessment. Results were encouraging, including how students
understood better the importance of focussing on answering the set question rather than just
stating every single fact about a subject. Moreover, they identified work that was too descriptive,
how it could be better structured and the relevance of referencing for supporting arguments
(Moralee, 2012). It also allowed me to understand that they value individual, face-to-face
feedback and the opportunity for dialogue as their preferred form of feedback, in conjunction with
standardised, written templates. This then became a key element of the module’s learning
approach.
Vignette 5: Learning in practice (MANAGEMENT)
Students from professional practice are often under pressure more than others to undertake
academic qualifications for career progression, whilst being constrained in terms of the
opportunity to devote time to their learning. Using a negotiated work-based report for health care
management students at FHEQ L7, this focused on students using an example directly related to
the professional workplace. The very fact that the assignments were negotiated passed much
more responsibility onto the students to consider a workplace scenario, issue or problem that they
could research and learn about. My role was to support them in ensuring the question afforded
them the opportunity to apply knowledge, analyse themes and synthesise and evaluate their work
not only to L7 but for learning beyond the qualification. The aim of this approach was to draw on
students’ own experiences of their working environments, whilst encouraging them to push
forward the boundaries of their understanding and offer them new perspectives and differing
insights into the world of health care management. By doing so, it encouraged them to develop a
deep approach to learning, by asking them to understand ideas, look for patterns and seek
meanings. Furthermore, the learning strategy recognised how they got to their particular end
point, where they were going with it next and what they wanted to get out of this situation (and

8. not just the assignment). This reflected Dearing’s (1997) view that, “...the world of work is in
continual change: individuals will increasingly need to develop new capabilities and to manage
their own development and learning throughout life.” My approach to student learning was for
them to actively construct knowledge, supported by a facilitative tutor, with learning and
assessment activities that reflected the requirements of employers and the wider world.
Vignette 6: Student interaction and interest (MEDIA PRODUCTION)
I’m very aware that our students are asked to sit in a number of lectures each week, usually in the
same building, often in the same room, and so I ask myself, what is it that they will take away from
‘my’ session this week? Looking at my lecture notes I know what I’d like the students to view as
the key messages, and what topics will be important for their ongoing learning process, but then
there’s the idea of how to make certain topics a bit more interesting to try to ensure greater
understanding and learning.
Having reflected on student feedback one key message was the desire for greater interaction in
sessions, so I explored this with our CELT representative who recommended using a voting system
in lectures. My initial thoughts focused on the barriers to introducing voting technologies: time,
software, hardware, student engagement. But, reflecting on the student feedback I wanted to
give it a go, just once to see what could be done with this idea. My personal aim was to try the
system, just once, with a first year lecture and explore the reaction, response and to try to assess
learning through this ‘interactive’ lecture approach.
The ‘Turning Point’ system I use is a simple plug-in with PowerPoint and works really easily, so
that’s great for the time, software and hardware concerns I initially faced. Student feedback is
incredibly positive and using this system allows me to assess whether my messages are being
understood during delivery. Students can use the voting pads anonymously, so I can easily assess
whether the intended messages are being understood across the cohort, without asking students
to raise their hands.
Initially I was sceptical, and I wrongly assumed that students would view this as a gimmick, but
actually it’s something that they have been keen to use again. I now use the voting system for
revision lectures across different levels, as well as for lectures containing particularly detailed
technical content, where it helps to know if the students are keeping up with the speed of
delivery. It also adds a nice change to the teaching environment and empowers the students to
actually participate. I always advise students to keep a note of any questions they are perhaps
struggling with so that they can then raise these with me in the smaller tutorial setting. Looking
back I’m so pleased I made myself try the system, just the once. I learned from that initial
experience and have developed my approach. The students are keen to use the system and it
makes a good change to the academic environment, as they are invited to engage in a different
way. I would fully recommend that if you have an idea, try it just once, as you never know what it
might lead to.

9. References and Bibliography
Anderson, L.W., Sosniak, L.A. (Eds.). (1994). Bloom's taxonomy: a forty-year retrospective. Ninety-
third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Pt.2. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environment
to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness,
Educational Research Review, 5: 243-260.
Baeten, M., Struyven, K., Dochy, F. (2013). Student-centred teaching methods: Can they optimise
students’ approaches to learning in professional higher education? Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 39: 14-22.
Barrett, T. (2005). Understanding Problem-Based Learning, In: Barrett, T., Mac Labhrainn, I. and
Fallon, H. (Eds.) Handbook of Enquiry and Problem Based Learning: Irish Case Studies and
International Perspectives. Galway: All Ireland Society for Higher Education (AISHE) and Centre for
Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT). Available from: http://www.aishe.org/readings/2005-
2/chapter2.pdf
Blair, A., McGinty, S. (2010). It’s good to talk? Developing feedback practises, Gateway papers: a
journal of pedagogic research in higher education, 1. Available from:
http://moriarty.tech.dmu.ac.uk/webapps/journal/index.php/gateway/article/view/39 [Accessed
26.2.2013].
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of
educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and
university examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans.
Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Walker, D. (eds.) (1993). Using experience for learning. Buckingham: The
Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Brown, J.K. (2008). Student-Centered Instruction: Involving Students in Their Own Education,
Music Educators Journal, 94 (5): 30-35.
Curtis, W. & McDonnell, J. (2012). Creating spaces for democracy in higher education: assessment
and feedback strategies, Gateway papers: A journal of pedagogic research in higher education, 2,
40-51, January 2012.
Dearing, R. (1997). Higher Education in the Learning Society. [WWW]. National Committee of
Enquiry into Higher Education. Available from: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/ncihe[Accessed
26.2.2013].
Elen, J., Clarebout, G., Leonard, R., Lowcyk, J. (2007). Student-centred and teacher-centred
learning environments: what students think, Teaching in Higher Education, 12 (1): 105-117.
Elliot, J. (1991) Action research for educational change. Milton Keynes: Open University Press

10. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn?
Educational Psychology Review, 16 (3): 235-266
Kahn, P. and O’Rourke, K (2005). Understanding enquiry based learning. In: Barrett, T., Mac
Labhrainn, I. and Fallon, H. (Eds.) Handbook of Enquiry and Problem Based Learning: Irish Case
Studies and International Perspectives. Galway: All Ireland Society for Higher Education (AISHE)
and Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT). Available
from: http://www.aishe.org/readings/2005-2/chapter1.pdf [Accessed 26.2.2013].
Kell, C. (2006). An analysis of entry-level postgraduate students’ readiness for student-centred,
Masters Level learning, Learning in Health and Social Care, 5 (3): 133-141.
Kleiman, P. (2005). Beyond the tingle factor; creativity and assessment in Higher Education, Paper
presented at ESRC creative seminar, October 7, in University of Strathclyde
Marquardt, M.J., Leonard, S., Freedman, A., and Hill, C. (2009). Action learning for developing
leaders and organizations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Press
McGill, I., Beaty, L. (2001). Action learning: a guide for professional, management and educational
development. Revised 2nd edition, London: Kogan Page.
McGill, I., Brockbank, A. (2004). The action learning handbook: powerful techniques for education,
professional development and training. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Moralee, S., Sweeney, K. (2012). Problem-based learning in health care management: reflecting
the world out there, Gateway papers: a journal of pedagogic research in higher education, 2: 56-
64. Available
from:http://moriarty.tech.dmu.ac.uk/webapps/journal/index.php/gateway/article/view/56[Acces
sed 26.2.2013].
Moralee, S. (2012). Enhancing Feedback Using Exemplar Assessments, Enhancing Student
Feedback: Best Practice Conference, De Montfort University, 8 February 2012. Available
from: http://www.dmu.ac.uk/documents/business-and-law-documents/research/its-good-to-
talk/enhancingfeedbackusingexemplarassignments080212.pptx [Accessed 26.2.2013].
Moralee, S. (2014). A short guide to... Action Learning and Action Learning Sets. Available from:
https://www.academia.edu/6488929/A_short_guide_to..._action_learning_and_action_learning_
sets
Niebur, L. (2004). Assessment as a Class Activity, Music Educators Journal, 80 (5): 23-25.
Popat, S and Palmer, S. 2005. Creating common ground: dialogues between performance and
digital technologies, International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media, 1 (1): 47 - 65.
Prosser, M., Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Revans, R. W. (1998). ABC of action learning. London: Lemos and Crane.

11. Savin-Baden, M. (2008) Liquid Learning and Troublesome Spaces: Journeys from the Threshold. In
Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer and Jan Smith (Eds). Threshold Concepts within the Disciplines.
Rotterdam/Taipei, Sense Publishers.
Sharples, M. (2001). Developing M-learning: pedagogical and design perspectives. 10th
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. International AI-ED Society, San
Antonio, Texas, 21 May.
Tang, T., Robinson, T. (2010). Learning approaches and perception of learning context in
economics education: a causality test, The International Journal of Learning, 17 (2): 21-40.
Taras, M. (2002). Using Assessment for Learning and Learning from Assessment, Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 27 (6): 501-510.
Winters, T. (2011). Facilitating Meta-learning in Art and Design Education, The International
Journal of Art & Design Education, 30 (1): 90-101.
Woodward-Kron, R., Remedios, L. (2007). Classroom discourse in problem-based learning
classrooms in the health sciences, Available from:
http://www.nla.gov.au/openpublish/index.php/aral/article/viewFile/1942/2325

12. Appendix 1: Summary of different approaches
Subject /
FHEQ Level
Methods and
Approaches
Examples Selected pedagogic
foundations
Health Care
Management
Level 4
Vignette 3
Action learning,
peer assessment,
interactive learning
Experiential, self-directed
learning in a learning ‘set’
environment, supported by
bespoke action learning set
guide (Moralee, 2013).
Anderson & Sosniak
(1994); Bloom et al.
(1956); McGill & Beaty
(2001); McGill &
Brockbank (2004);
Marquardt et al. (2009);
Revans (1998)
Health Care
Management
Level 5
Vignette 4
Assessment and
feedback exercise;
interactive
learning, debating.
Series of meta-learning sessions
incorporated into the schedule,
whereby students assessed
exemplar coursework before
submitting their own and then
subsequently reflecting on the
process in face to face dialogic
feedback (Moralee, 2012).
Blair & McGinty (2010);
Curtis & McDonnell
(2012)
Health and
Social Care
Management
/ Health Care
Finance &
Planning
Level 6
Problem- / Enquiry-
based learning,
peer assessment.
Exploration of self-directed
issues within a contextually
defined framework, allowing for
deeper learning and mirroring
the workplace by introducing
students to uncertainty,
independence and the need to
engage with a changing political
context (Moralee & Sweeney,
2012)
Barrett (2005); Elen et al.
(2007); Hmelo-Silver
(2004); Kahn & O’Rourke
(2005); Tang & Robinson
(2010); Winters (2011);
Woodward-Kron &
Remedios (2007)
Comparative
international
health care
systems
Level 6
Student teaching,
discovery learning,
interactive
learning,
collaborative/
cooperative
learning, debating.
Students jointly deliver seminars
on international health systems,
thus taking responsibility for
others’ learning and having the
opportunity to practise
presentation skills in a formative
environment.
Baeten et al. (2010);
Baeten et al. (2013);
Brown (2008)
Health Care
Management
Level 7
Vignette 5
Negotiated work-
based report
Assessment in this instance is
contextual, relating to what the
students actually do and asking
them to consider, with reference
to theory and within a
framework of academic rigour, a
response to a work-based
scenario.
Kell (2006); Prosser &
Trigwell (1999); Sharples
(2001); Taras (2002)