Conceptualising the digitally distributed curriculum at #SOLSTICE19

On Wednesday 5th June this week I’m presenting at the annual SOLSTICE 2019 e-learning conference at Edge Hill University, which is organised and run as a joint conference by Edge Hill’s SOLSTICE Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (@SolsticeCETL) and the Centre for Learning and Teaching at EDU (@CLTatEHU).

The joint SOLSTICE and CLT conference at Edge Hill is long since a well established event, running early each June and featuring a range of internal and external speakers. External speakers include a number of Visiting Fellows and Visiting Professors attached to the Centre for Learning and Teaching, not least Professors Sally Brown and Phil Race, Professor Peter Hartley, Simon Thomson and Sue Beckingham, amongst other experienced colleagues in the fields of learning and teaching, academic development and digital education practice. I count myself fortunate to also be in a Visiting Professor role at Edge Hill University, as I have benefited in various ways through learning from the work of the aforementioned folks and, in some instances, collaborating with them.

I have also been fortunate to know and learn from Professor Mark Schofield, Dean of Learning and Teaching and Director of the Centre for Learning and Teaching at EDU, in a range of ways over the years. This includes Mark’s time as External Examiner for a Masters programme in blended and online education I used to run, many years ago now and while still definitely very wet behind the ears. As they are want to say around Merseyside way, and as Mark has said a few times, ‘I knew him as a lad, you know’.

As with the previous occasions I’ve been lucky enough to attend since the early 2000’s, the SOLSTICE and CLT 2019 Conference Programme looks excellent. I’m particularly looking forward to a number of sessions that between them are exploring key concepts, ideas and approaches relating to creativity, inclusion and resilience in relation to learning and teaching and digital education practice.

My own session for the conference this week is on the topic of ‘Conceptualising the digitally distributed curriculum’.

Title slide for presentation on the topic of 'Conceptualising the digitally distributed curriculum' for SOLSTICE 2019 Conference

There is something of a continuity here too, as the session is partially a follow-up to my presentation at SOLSTICE 2017 titled ‘Situating digital space and place within the Porous University‘. The previous session drew, in part, upon an initial and very emergent model for the digitally distributed curriculum that Bill Johnston, Sheila MacNeill and myself produced as part of our collaborative research, dialogue and reflective practice around a re-imagining of the concept of the ‘Digital University’ in relation to digital practice, space and place, for further extending universities and Higher Education as a public good.

Two years down the line, our work in the above area has been synthesised into a recently published book which Bill, Sheila and myself have co-authored, and within which we are offering a revised Conceptual Matrix for the Digital University and a much more fully developed model for the Digitally Distributed Curriculum which is founded on the values of praxis, participation and public pedagogy.

I’m looking forward, once again, to attending the SOLSTICE conference and to sharing and discussing the ideas about the ‘Digitally Distributed Curriculum’ that Bill, Sheila and myself have been developing. The abstract for my session at #SOLSTICE19 is below.

Conceptualising the digitally distributed curriculum

In a previous session at SOLSTICE 2017, which focused on the role of digital space and place in the context of the ‘porous university’, Keith Smyth explored the idea of the curriculum as a co-operative space within which digital and physical spaces for learning intersect to support greater engagement within, through and beyond higher education institutions. Part of this exploration included what was, at the time, an initial and emergent model for the digitally distributed curriculum.

Drawing upon subsequent work that has led to the further refinement of this idea (Johnston, MacNeill and Smyth, 2018), in his session for SOLSTICE 2019 Keith will present and explore the concept of and a related model for the Digitally Distributed Curriculum which is based on the values of praxis, participation and public pedagogy, and which is constructed around the four dimensions of co-location, porosity, co-production and open scholarship. The pedagogical implications of the Digitally Distributed Curriculum – which include student engagement with digital public knowledge domains and the relationship between institutional and self-selected physical and digital spaces for learning – will be key points for discussion amongst participants during the session itself.

Johnston, B., MacNeill, S. and Smyth, K. (2018) Conceptualising the Digital University: The intersection of policy, pedagogy and practice. Cham, Switzeralnd: Palgrave MacMillan.

Coming full (culture) circle at #OER19 – Part 1

This is the first of two blogs posts that accompany the session “Unpacking the geopolitics of open for the strategic development of (HE) institutions and communities – what is a university for?” that Sheila MacNeill, Bill Johnston and myself ran on day one of #OER19 on 10th April. Sheila will post Part 2, reflecting on the outcomes of the session itself.


For the past few years now, Bill Johnston, Sheila MacNeill and myself have been exploring, reflecting upon, and working towards developing a conceptualisation of the ‘Digital University’ that is focused on the extension of universities and Higher Education as a democratic public good, framed within critical education perspectives and concerned with the intersection of policy, pedagogy and practice.

Our work to date, which has involved the development of our ideas through engaging in reflective dialogue with colleagues across the sector (including peers, friends and trusted colleagues in the critical and open education communities), has been distilled into a recently published book (Johnston, MacNeill and Smyth, 2019). In our book, we argue for a rethinking of how digital and open education practices are developed and positioned within and beyond the university. Key points and areas of concern relate to porosity, the nature and location of the curriculum, educational institutions as technology rich spaces within our communities, public pedagogy (Giroux, 2000) and civic responsibility.

As we developed and further refined the proposals now presented in the book, which include a revised Conceptual Matrix for the Digital University and a model for the Digitally Distributed Curriculum, we experienced a pivotal moment in time at the OER16 conference held at the University of Edinburgh in 2016.

At OER16 we presented the original version of the aforementioned Conceptual Matrix and a very nascent version of the Digitally Distributed Curriculum idea.

At the time of OER16, Sheila and I captured how our work with Bill was developing in two linked blog posts. Our posts complemented the session we presented at the conference itself, and explored how our ideas and models concerning the Digital University related in turn to open education and where different forms of (and locations for) digital and open education practice might intersect:

Reframing Open in the Context of the Digital University – Part 1 (#OER16)
Reframing Open in the Context of the Digital University – Part 2 (#OER16)

The discussions we had with colleagues at OER16, and in response to the above posts, clarified our (at the time) emergent and still quite messy thinking and helped us to find a way forward in refining our narrative and ideas. We brought our hopefully clearer, slightly more refined thinking to #OER18 in Bristol last year, which was the first occasion on which we presented our near final versions of the Conceptual Matrix for the Digital University and our Digitally Distributed Curriculum model.

Now, for OER19, we’re coming full circle in presenting the main outcomes of our work.

Title slide for presentation at #OER19 conference. Unpacking the geopolitics of open for the strategic development of (HE) institutions and communities - what is a university for?

The topic for our session at #OER19

While the work and philosophy of the educator and activist Paulo Freire predates the widespread implementation of digital technology, spaces and approaches in education, and the emergence of open educational practices as we currently observe and understand them, Freire and his work (1974, 1975) came to the fore and was a major influence in shaping our own take on the ideas we explore and propose in the book.

The richness of Freire’s work and thinking cannot be captured here, and they are certainly not fully captured in our own book. Indeed, there are entire books that are specifically dedicated to exploring Freire and his writings. Antonia Darder’s ‘The Student Guide to Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed’ is an excellent recent one.

However, one of Freire’s ideas that became central to our own work was that of ‘culture circles’. For Freire, culture circles are an approach and a response in which the contextualisation of education within the wider socio-political context can be revealed through collaborative reflective dialogue in which learners are encouraged to share their own understandings of the world, and to then codify their thoughts and experiences (through words and images) as a basis for further critical discussion.

This, in essence, is the approach we sought to take to our session at #OER19. In the time available, we set out to summarise our own position with respect to the Digital University and to use our Digitally Distributed Curriculum construct as a lens through which participants could identify what it is that should be confronted, challenged and changed with respect to how open education is conceptualised and enacted in our own individual and shared contexts for practice, and within our institutional contexts.

In Part 2 of this post, Sheila will provide a summary of where we got to by the end of the session. Much was shared and suggested, and we thank colleagues for their participation in our session for #OER19. We also thank the OER conference and conference community for providing a critical, collegiate and convivial space for us to share and be supported in shaping our ideas over the last three years.

References

Freire, P. (1974) Education for Critical Consciousness. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Freire, P. (1975) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.

Giroux, H.A. (2000) Public Pedagogy and the Responsibility of Intellectuals: Youth, Littleton, and the loss of innocence, JAC, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 9-42.

Johnston, B., MacNeill, S. and Smyth, K. (2019) Conceptualising the Digital University: The Intersection of Policy, Pedagogy and Practice. Palgrave MacMillan.

Thanks and acknowledgements for ‘Conceptualising the Digital University’

Long before we got to the point of having an opportunity to write the book that became ‘Conceptualising the Digital University: The Intersection of policy, pedagogy and practice’,  Bill Johnston, Sheila MacNeill and myself benefited from early discussions and dialogue about the idea and implications of the ‘digital university’ with a great many colleagues across the sector. As our ideas developed, we drew further guidance and inspiration from a number of friends and colleagues in particular.

In our Acknowledgements section for the book, which we are sharing below, we have tried to thank everyone who helped, informed or inspired us. Many of those named below may not realise they had an impact on our thinking, others we have already thanked directly for the important contributions they made. We thank each and every one again, and if we have inadvertently missed anyone out we give our sincere apologies and equal thanks for helping shape our ideas and what we cover in the book itself.

Over on Sheila’s blog, you can read about our initial plans for open access publications relating to the key themes in the book and also read the testimonials for the book that a number of respected colleagues were kind enough to offer after an advance reading.

Acknowledgements

The writing of this book has very much been a discursive process and the culmination of many discussions and dialogues around the vague concept, questionable assumptions, and actual realities of realising any sort of vision and plan for the “digital university”.

Collaboration has been at the heart of this book, and the thinking and ideas we present within it. A series of blog posts by Bill and Sheila in 2011 prompted Keith to get in contact in 2012 about a project he was leading, which led in turn to our collective endeavours in further exploring the concept of the digital university, and the place of ‘the digital’ in Higher Education. Our efforts in doing so have encompassed our own joint dialogue, reflections and writing, our further reading and research, and crucially also the dialogue we have had with colleagues across the sector, through workshops at a range of universities, and through presenting our thinking, as it developed, at a number of conferences, symposia and events.

Now, six years later, we have this book.

Finding and developing our shared critical understanding of the concept of the digital university has been a challenging and humbling experience, and one which saw our own thinking move away from questioning the concept of the ‘digital university’ to also questioning the purpose of universities, and Higher Education, in relation to the constraints, purpose and possibilities of digital technologies, spaces and practices, and in relation to the ideas and ideals of critical and public pedagogy, openness, and democracy. As we have contextualised our understandings, we have given each other hope in a shared critique which we in turn hope our readers will share and use as a starting point for many more critically informed discussions, based on a shared recognition of the need for critical love and hope to challenge the neo-liberal dominance of our age.

There are a number of people we need to thank. Firstly the team at Palgrave Macmillan for recognising the potential for a book in our work, and their continued support throughout the writing process. Our work draws from many sources and we are continually inspired by all of our professional networks and the encouragement we have received from our peers at conferences where we have presented our work, and the opportunities that we have been given to publish our work. That has given us the faith to carry on and develop our thoughts from conversations and debates into this most tangible of outputs, a book.

We’d like to give special thanks to some key colleagues and friends. We warmly thank Antonia Darder for her immediate and continued engagement, support and critical love for our work. We were fortunate to meet Antonia at a pivotal point in the preparation of our book, and the time we spent with Antonia, both learning from and being inspired by her, left an indelible mark on our thinking and across the final version of this text. We also thank Helen Beetham, Catherine Cronin, Alex Dunedin and Martin Weller for taking the time to read the book and for their generous endorsements of our work. Their own respective work has had a significant impact on our thinking and the structure of this book, as has the work of Mark Johnson who introduced us to the concept of Value Pluralism which we explore at several points.

There are almost too many other people to thank, and we realise frustratingly that we cannot put a name to everyone we have had the benefit of speaking with as we have developed our work. However, we would like to give a special mention and thanks to a number of colleagues and friends who have supported and encouraged us as we started to clarify and structure our ideas into the form that they are now presented, or with whom we were fortunate to have important discussions at important points of our journey. In addition to those already mentioned above, we thank Gordon Asher, Linda Creanor, Jim Emery, Julia Fotheringham, Peter Hartley, Jennifer Jones, Ronnie MacIntyre, David McGillivray, Neil McPherson, Beck Pitt, Frank Rennie, Peter Shukie, John Alexander Smith, Panos Vlachopoulos, David Walker, Gina Wall, and Nicola Whitton.

In the above context, we extend a particular thanks to Richard Hall. Chapter 8 of our book, as indicated in the chapter, incorporates and extends material published in the paper Hall, R. and Smyth, K. (2016) Dismantling the Curriculum in Higher Education, published in the Open Library of Humanities. We are grateful to Richard and the Open Library of the Humanities for allowing us to repurpose this material in our narrative. Richard also draws upon aspects of the aforementioned paper in his recent book ‘The Alienated Academic: The Struggle for Autonomy Inside the University’ (2018, also published by Palgrave Macmillan).

To our respective families, thank you for your patience and understanding and tolerance of lost weekends over the past year. Thanks also to colleagues at Glasgow Caledonian University and the University of the Highlands and Islands for your support and understanding at points where our work on this book had an impact on other activities. Finally we’d like to give a special mention to the Black Isle Bar in Inverness for providing a welcoming space for warmth, laughter, pizza and the occasional glass of red wine.

In solidarity, love and hope.

Recently published – Conceptualising the Digital University: The intersection of policy, pedagogy and practice

Well, it’s almost exactly a year since my last blog post. I blog sporadically, so it’s likely no one has noticed! It’s not good practice to blog so infrequently, although I have a good reason. Around this time last year, my friends and colleagues Bill Johnston, Sheila MacNeill and myself were undertaking, in earnest, the writing of our book on the concept of the Digital University. Our work on this book was a slow burn, following a number of engagements, initiatives, conferences, short articles and much dialogue with ourselves and trusted colleagues across the HE sector.

Our intention from the outset was not to to frame the notion of the ‘Digital University’ in relation to digital efficiencies, economies of scale, or market outreach, but instead to try and develop a more holistic conceptualisation that scrutinised and positioned ‘the digital’, and digital education practice, in relation to democratising access to education and extending universities, the curriculum and higher education as a public good. Critical and public pedagogy came to the fore in writing the book, influenced by the ideas of Friere, Giroux, and coming to meet and know the inspirational Antonia Darder.

Why have I not blogged in a year?

Partly because, over dinner and a glass or two of wine at one of our vital and convivial writing retreats, I resolved not to blog until we had finished writing our book. Similarly, you may notice elsewhere on this blog that I didn’t really undertake any talks or conferences during 2018. Not beyond a few internal ones within my own institution. Head down, fingers to the keyboard! That didn’t help me meet our agreed deadlines on time, but it definitely helped me meet them around about on time!

Image of front cover of the book "Conceptualising the Digital University - The intersection of policy, pedagogy and practice"

Our book, Conceptualising the Digital University – The Intersection of Policy, Pedagogy and Practice, is now out. It was a real labour of love, and I loved and learned in working with Sheila and Bill on the book. We’ll be blogging about and presenting ideas from the book in the coming months, and looking forward to further developing our ideas – and being challenged of course – in dialogue with friends and colleagues.

In the meantime, please find below the short synopsis of our book…

Despite the increasing ubiquity of the term, the concept of the digital university remains diffuse and indeterminate. This book examines what the term ‘digital university’ should encapsulate and the resulting challenges, possibilities and implications that digital technology and practice brings to higher education. Critiquing the current state of definition of the digital university construct, the authors propose a more holistic, integrated account that acknowledges the inherent diffuseness of the concept. The authors also question the extent to which digital technologies and practices can allow us to re-think the location of universities and curricula; and how they can extend higher education as a public good within the current wider political context. Framed inside a critical pedagogy perspective, this volume debates the role of the university in fostering the learning environments, skills and capabilities needed for critical engagement, active open participation and reflection in the digital age.

Open practice and praxis in the context of the Digital University. #OER18

This week saw the latest in a small series of writing workshops for Bill Johnston, Sheila MacNeill and myself for our forthcoming book Conceptualising the Digital University: Intersecting policy, pedagogy and practice (Palgrave).

Our work on this book has been a very enjoyable slow-burn, originating five or so years ago with the application of Sheila and Bill’s ‘Conceptual Matrix for the Digital University‘, which we used as the key framework to focus and guide the dialogue that was taking place in an institutional-wide digital futures consultation I was coordinating.

This then led us into a series of wider discussions, workshops and short papers in which we further explored the idea of the digital university, developed an emergent model for the ‘digitally distributed curriculum‘, and began to think about the relationships between ‘the digital’, learning and teaching, the location and co-location of the university within our communities, and the furthering of universities and higher education as a public good. Following a conference presentation of our work to date, which Sheila delivered a year or so ago, the opportunity to author a book for Palgrave presented itself.

We’re now into the final three months of writing our book (Conceptualising the Digital University: Intersecting policy, pedagogy and practice), and the latest of our periodic writing retreats this week has been extremely useful in underlining the key narrative threads that will run through the text. Foremost amongst these is a ‘critical pedagogy’ perspective in which ‘praxis’ (a commitment to challenging and changing that which needs to be challenged and changed) is presented as a necessary, ‘no-option’ counter to currently dominant neo-liberal policies and practices pertaining to the purpose of the university and higher education, and to techno-centric notions of the role digital technologies might play in delivering educational content, organising and managing the educational experience of our learners, and offering competitive advantage and market share to higher education institutions. There has been pizza, snow and laughs along the way this week, but our resolve to say ‘no’ to the current state of affairs remains and Paulo Freire has come further to the fore within our discussions about what we hope to propose about the place of ‘praxis’ in relation to the Digital University.

Ahead of completing our book, we are presenting some of our thinking in relation to the above at the forthcoming #OER18 conference in Bristol this coming April.

The title of our talk for #OER18 – in which we’ll offer elaborations on both the ‘Conceptual Matrix for the Digital University’ and our thinking on the ‘digitally distributed curriculum’ – is Open practice and praxis in the context of the Digital University. Our abstract for our session is below. Paulo will be on our minds.

Selection of texts being consulted in writing 'Conceptualising the Digital University'

Some of the sources we’re drawing upon for ‘Conceptualising the Digital University’. Paulo Freire is tagged with the most post-its, saying something about the direction the book is going in.

 

Open practice and praxis in the context of the Digital University

Abstract for #OER18

What is the ‘Digital University’? And what might it be? Despite the increasing ubiquity of the term, and many attempts at relating what ‘digital’ means within the context of the university and Higher Education, the concept of the digital university remains diffuse.

It is not our contention that digital technologies and practices are under challenged within current discourse on the concept of the digital university. To the contrary, we can look towards robust theory and research in areas including digital literacies development (Goodfellow and Lea, 2013); digital technologies in learning and teaching (Selwyn, 2014); and administration and governance (McCluskey and Winter, 2012).

Instead, and accepting that we are still at a stage of relative infancy in understanding the wider possibilities and implications of digital technology and practice within Higher Education, we contend that emergent attempts at defining and conceptualising the digital university are partial, tending to locate the digital in current institutional structures and processes within the university, instead of asking how the ‘digital’ challenges those structures and processes, and how in turn they can be reconfigured or reimagined.

Extending previous work in the development (MacNeill and Johnston, 2013) and application of a conceptual matrix for the digital university (Smyth, MacNeill and Johnston, 2015), our aim is to propose a more holistic, integrated account that emerges from exploring the intersection between policy, pedagogy, digital space, and open educational practice.

At the forefront of our narrative, and our critique of institutional and sectoral policy in particular, is the concept of praxis as applied to educational contexts i.e. “reflection and action directed at the structures to be transformed” (Freire, 1970, p. 126). Here we will question the extent to which digital technologies and open practices can allow us to rethink where the university, our curricula, and the educational opportunities the university provides are located and co-located, in order to support more inclusive educational models and approaches, and to further extend higher education as a public good.

Our conclusions will be synthesised within a revised conceptual matrix for the digital university, and a related model for the distributed curriculum, which we hope will support further dialogue and critique, and pragmatic action, relating to the development of open education, the harnessing of digital space, and democratisation of learning opportunities.

Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Goodfellow, R. and Lea, M.R. (Eds.) (2013) Literacy in the Digital University: Critical Perspectives on Learning, Scholarship and Technology. Routledge.
MacNeill, S. and Johnston, B., (2013) The Digital University in the Modern Age: A Proposed Framework for Strategic Development, Compass, University of Greenwich. Available online [last accessed 22.11.17] https://journals.gre.ac.uk/index.php/compass/article/view/79/121
McCluskey, F.B. and Winter, M.L. (2012) The Idea of the Digital University: Ancient Traditions, Disruptive Technologies and the Battle for the Soul of Higher Education. Policy Studies Organisation.
Selwyn, N. (2014) Digital Technology and the Contemporary University: Degrees of Digitization. Routledge.
Smyth, K., MacNeill, S., and Johnston, B. (2015) Visioning the Digital University – from institutional strategy to academic practice. Educational Developments, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.13-17.

Student transitions to, within and beyond Higher Education. Special Issue of JPAAP.

Over the last few months I have been working with Lorraine Anderson (University of Dundee) and Roni Bamber (Queen Margaret University) to co-edit a new Special Issue of the online, open access Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice (JPAAP).

The theme of the  Special Issue is Student Transitions and the issue has been published in partnership with the QAA Scotland to capture work resulting from, and relating to, the current national enhancement theme of Student Transitions which is now drawing to a close. The Special Issue, which was launched this week at the 3rd International Enhancement in Higher Education Conference, features a range of full research papers, case studies, opinion pieces and ’emerging work’ articles relating to multiple challenges, issues and dimensions in the transitioning of students to, within, and beyond HE.

The production of the Special Issue itself was made possible by by Kirsteen Wright, editorial officer of JPAAP based at Edinburgh Napier University, and by the Special Issue copy editors Tonje Hefte (@TonjeHefte) and Douglas Walker (@D_M_Walker91) who are students on the MSc Publishing course at Edinburgh Napier University.

The Special Issue is now online and you can read our editorial for the issue below.

Editorial

Welcome to the Special Issue of JPAAP on Student Transitions. The inspiration for this Special Issue is the current national Enhancement Theme of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for Higher Education, Scotland, and we are delighted to bring you this Special Issue in partnership with the QAA Scotland.

JPAAP has come to develop a wide readership in recent years, and for colleagues who are unfamiliar with the Enhancement Themes their purpose are to enhance the quality of the student learning experience within Scottish Higher Education through a co-ordinated period of enhancement activity that is focused on a specific developmental theme. Every Higher Education Institution (HEI) across Scotland engages with the Enhancement Themes, through internal and cross-institutional initiatives. The Enhancement Themes are managed by the QAA Scotland in collaboration with a Theme Leaders Group (TLG) comprising institutional and student representatives from each HEI in Scotland.

The current Enhancement Theme of Student Transitions has been running for the last three academic years, since summer 2014. The work for the theme is currently drawing to a close, and will be marked by the 3rd International Enhancement in Higher Education Conference to be held in Glasgow from 6–8 June 2017, and also by the publication of this Special Issue.

While this Special Issue of JPAAP is brought to you in conjunction with the current Enhancement Theme of Student Transitions, and indeed features several articles that relate to work undertaken in Scotland as part of the theme, we are delighted to also feature a number of contributions from colleagues based in universities across the UK and Australia.

Within this Special Issue, one of our largest issues to date, we are pleased to feature a rich range of original research papers, case studies and reviews, opinion pieces, and On the Horizon articles which report on emerging work. Between them, the full papers and other articles within this issue address several important dimensions of Student Transitions to, within, and beyond Higher Education.

Widening participation and the articulation of students from further education to higher education are addressed in the respective papers by Neil Speirs and colleagues from the University of Edinburgh, and Debbie Meharg and colleagues from Edinburgh Napier University.

The capturing of the student voice to ease transitions into and through Higher Education is the focus of the case study by Hope Christie and Karl Johnson, while other important dimensions of peer support and social integration are addressed in the papers and articles by Rick Hayman and colleagues from Northumbria University, Sidonie Ecochard and Kirsteen Wright from Edinburgh Napier University, and Shona Robertson from the University of Dundee.

Transitions within the undergraduate student journey are explored by Celine Caquineau and colleagues, in their consideration of assessment practice and transitioning to Junior Honours, and by Margaret-Anne Houston and Lindsey Carey from Glasgow Caledonian University who look at the academic reintegration of final year students following work placements and study exchanges.

Supporting the transition from undergraduate to postgraduate study, and student experiences of becoming postgraduates, are to the fore in the contributions from Jessica Bownes and colleagues at the University of Glasgow, and Charlotte McPherson, Samantha Punch and Elizabeth Graham from the University of Stirling. Furthermore, in the case study by Jennifer Scally and Andrea Cameron from Abertay University, you can read about the experience of an undergraduate student who transitioned to becoming a postgraduate research student through interning as a research assistant.

Student transitions beyond Higher Education and into employment and professional practice, in areas including veterinary nursing and teaching, are explored by Patricia Logan and colleagues who represent a number of Australian universities, and by Donna Dey, Angela Lindsay and Patricia Thomson from the University of Dundee.

Cultural and intercultural dimensions in student transitions are the focus of the literature review on the challenges faced by international students that has been contributed by Sidonie Ecochard and Julia Fotheringham from Edinburgh Napier University, and in the opinion piece on ‘multilingual mindset’ by Argyro Kanaki from the University of Dundee.

In the second of our two opinion pieces for this Special Issue, Mike Murray and colleagues ask “Are career academics gatekeepers to students’ tacit knowledge?”, while in the remaining case study paper that we are pleased to feature Josephine Adekola and colleagues from the University of Glasgow report their work to support students in making the transition to blended learning.

Perhaps fittingly, in the remaining contribution to be mentioned Ashley Dennis and colleagues present their research into stakeholder perceptions of the current QAA Scotland Enhancement Theme of Student Transitions, including recommendations for future Enhancement Theme activities.

Whether you have been engaged directly with the work of the current Enhancement Theme on Student Transitions, are engaged in your own practice and research relating to student transitions, or are simply looking to learn more about some of the work underway across the sector, we hope that this Special Issue will be of some relevance and value to yourself and colleagues.

With thanks equally to our contributing authors, reviewers, editorial officer, and the publishing students at Edinburgh Napier University who worked on this Special issue and made it possible.

Guest Editors

Dr Lorraine Anderson, University of Dundee
(Deputy Chair Enhancement Theme Leaders Group)

Professor Roni Bamber, Queen Margaret University
(Chair, Enhancement Theme Leaders Group)

Professor Keith Smyth, University of the Highlands and Islands
(Professor of Pedagogy)

 

 

Situating digital space and place within the Porous University

Over the 5th and 6th of June I am at the joint SOLSTICE and CLT Conference 2017 at Edge Hill University. The programme is a rich and interesting one, as it always is at this event, and features a range of speakers from across and beyond the UK.

On day two I will be presenting a guest speaker session, drawing inspiration from discussions and debate at the recent Porous University Symposium (#porousuni).

The title of my talk is ‘Situating digital space and place within the Porous University’ and the abstract is provided below.

Situating digital space and place within the Porous University 

Framed within the concept of the ‘Porous University’ as one which values open engagement in the sharing and development of knowledge, and where formal boundaries are fragmented and intersect, this session will explore how digital space and place can contribute to the porosity of our universities in established and emerging areas of educational practice. These include:

•             Bridging informal and formal learning opportunities
•             Learning across cohorts and communities
•             The curriculum as a co-operative space
•             Students as public scholars

Within the above context and areas of practice, an important question concerns the extent to which we can apply ‘third space’ thinking to: re-conceptualise the university as a place of education; extend the ways in which digital spaces and places can supported distribute collaborative learning; and explore where physical and digital spaces for learning can intersect to support greater engagement within, through, and beyond higher education and higher education institutions.

While this session is unlikely to fully answer the ‘third space’ question above, the examples to be drawn upon point towards what is possible when we mindfully situate digital space and place within contexts of open, co-located and co-operative approaches to education.