Greater engagement in and responsibility for learning: what happens when students cross the threshold of student–faculty partnership

References

• Ahlfeldt, S., Mehta, S., & Sellnow, T. (2005). Measurement and analysis of student engagement where varying levels of PBL methods of instruction were in use. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(1), 5–20. doi: 10.1080/0729436052000318541
   Google Scholar
• Arum, R., & Roska, J. (2010). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Azevedo, R. (2009). Theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and instructional issues in research on metacognition and self-regulated learning: A discussion. Metacognition Learning, 4(1), 87–95. doi: 10.1007/s11409-009-9035-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bain, K., & Zimmerman, J. (2009). Understanding great teaching. Peer Review, 11(2), 9–12.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, V.L., & Griffin, K.A. (2010). Beyond mentoring and advising: Toward understanding the role of ‘faculty developers’ in student success. About Campus, 14(6) 2–8.
   Google Scholar
• Barber, J.P. (2012). Integration of learning: A grounded theory analysis of college students’ learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 590–617. doi: 10.3102/0002831212437854
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barradell, S. (2013). The identification of threshold concepts: A review of theoretical complexities and methodological challenges. Higher Education, 65(2), 265–276. doi:10.1007/s10734-012-9542-3. Retrieved September 10, 2013, from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10734-012-9542-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovill, C. (2011). Sharing responsibility for learning through formative evaluation: Moving to evaluation as learning. Practice and Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 6(2), 96–109. Retrieved September 10, 2013, from http://www.pestlhe.org.uk/index.php/pestlhe/article/view/112/222
   Google Scholar
• Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011). Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design and curricula: Implications for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), 133–145. doi: 10.1080/1360144X.2011.568690
   Google Scholar
• Bryson, C., & Hand, L. (2007). The role of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(4), 349–362. doi: 10.1080/14703290701602748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A. (2008). ‘What you get is looking in a mirror, only better’: Inviting students to reflect (on) college teaching. Reflective Practice, 9(4), 473–483. doi: 10.1080/14623940802431465
   Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A. (2009). From traditional accountability to shared responsibility: The benefits and challenges of student consultants gathering midcourse feedback in college classrooms. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 231–241. doi: 10.1080/02602930801956042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A. (2010). Students as learners and teachers: Taking responsibility, transforming education, and redefining accountability. Curriculum Inquiry, 40(4), 555–575. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-873X.2010.00501.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A. (2011a). Layered learning: Student consultants deepening classroom and life lessons. Educational Action Research, 9(1), 41–57. doi: 10.1080/09650792.2011.547680
   Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A. (2011b). Teaching and learning together: College faculty and undergraduates co-create a professional development model. In J.E. Miller & J.E. Groccia (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development (pp. 219–232, Vol. 29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A. (2012). Lessons in higher education: Five pedagogical practices that promote active learning for faculty and students. Journal of Faculty Development, 26(1), 33–39.
   Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A. (2013). Student–faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2013.805694
   Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A., & Agu, P. (2012, October). Students of color and faculty colleagues developing voice in the ‘counter-spaces’ of a professional development programme. Paper presented at the 37th Annual POD Conference, Seattle, WA.
   Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A., & Agu, P. (2013). Students of color and faculty members working together toward culturally sustaining pedagogy. In J.E. Groccia & L. Cruz (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development (pp. 271–285, Vol. 29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Anker.
   Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A., & Alter, Z. (2011). What is and what can be: How a liminal position can change learning and teaching in higher education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 42(1), 37–53. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-1492.2010.01109.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in teaching & learning: A guide for faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Cousin, G. (2010). Neither teacher-centred nor student-centred: Threshold concepts and research partnerships. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (2), February. Retrieved October 9, 2012, from http://www.aldinhe.ac.uk/ojs/index.php?journal=jldhe&page=article&op=view&path[]=64
   Google Scholar
• Cox, M.D. (2001). Student–faculty partnerships to develop teaching and enhance learning. In J.E. Miller, J.E. Groccia, & M.S. Miller (Eds.), Student-assisted teaching: A guide to faculty-student teamwork (pp. 168–171). Bolton, MA: Anker.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, P., & Mangan, J. (2007). Threshold concepts and the integration of understanding in economics. Studies in Higher Education, 32(6), 711–726. doi:10.1080/03075070701685148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delpish, A., Holmes, A., Knight-McKenna, M., Mihans, R., Darby, A., King, K., & Felten, P. (2010). Equalizing voices: Student–faculty partnership in course design. In C. Werder & M.M. Otis (Eds.), Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning (pp. 96–114). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
   Google Scholar
• Donkor, A.K. (2011). Higher education and culturally responsive teaching: A way forward. Journal of Multiculturalism in Education, 7(1). Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://wtamu.edu/journal/volume-7-number-1.aspx#donker
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, E., & Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as change agents. New ways of engaging with learning and teaching in higher education. Bristol: ESCalate Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Education/University of Exeter.
   Google Scholar
• Fielding, M. (1999). Radical collegiality: Affirming teaching as an inclusive professional practice. Australian Educational Researcher, 26(2), 1–34. doi: 10.1007/BF03219692
   Google Scholar
• Flavell, J.H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Harper, S.R., & Quaye, S.J. (Eds.). (2010). Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, M. (2012, October). Students as producers and change agents. Plenary session presented at the Meeting of the International Society for the Study of Teaching and Learning, Ontario, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchings, P., Huber, M.T., & Ciccone, A. (2011). The scholarship of teaching and learning reconsidered: Institutional integration and impact ( Jossey-Bass/Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Kileyab, M. (2009). Identifying threshold concepts and proposing strategies to support doctoral candidates. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 293–304. doi:10.1080/14703290903069001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, K., & Felten, P. (2012). Threshold concepts in educational development: An introduction. Journal of Faculty Development, 26(3), 5–7.
   Google Scholar
• Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J.H., & Whitt, E.J. (2010). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Land, R., Cousin, G., Meyer, J.H.F., & Davies, P. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (3): Implications for course design and evaluation. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning diversity and inclusivity (pp. 53–64). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development. Retrieved October 9, 2012, from http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/isl/isl2004/abstracts/conceptual_papers/ISL04-pp53–64-Land-et-al.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lesnick, A., & Cook-Sather, A. (2010). Building civic capacity and responsibility through a radically inclusive teaching and learning initiative. Innovative Higher Education, 35(1), 3–17. doi: 10.1007/s10755-009-9122-3
   Google Scholar
• Little, S. (Ed.). (2011). Staff-student partnerships in higher education. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Mann, S.J. (2001). Alternative perspectives on the student experience: Alienation and engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 7–19. doi: 10.1080/03075070020030689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manor, C., Bloch-Schulman, S., Flannery, K., & Felten, P. (2010). Foundations of student–faculty partnerships in the scholarship of teaching and learning. In C. Werder & M.M. Otis (Eds.), Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning (pp. 3–15). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
   Google Scholar
• McCutcheon, G., & Jung, B. (1990). Alternative perspectives on action research. Theory into Practice, 29(3), 144–151. doi: 10.1080/00405849009543447
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, J.H.F., & Land, R. (2003). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning – ten years on (pp. 412–424). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, J.H.F., & Land, R. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49(3), 373–388. doi: 10.1007/s10734-004-6779-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J.H.F., & Land, R. (2006). Overcoming barriers to student understanding. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Neary, M., & Winn, J. (2009). Student as producer: Reinventing the undergraduate curriculum. In M. Neary, H. Stevenson, & L. Bell (Eds.), The future of higher education: Policy, pedagogy and the student experience (pp. 192–210). London: Continuum. Retrieved September 10, 2013, from http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/1675/1/Future_of_HE_-_Chapter_10.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Nygaard, C., Brand, S., Bartholomew, P., & Millard, L. (2013). Why student engagement matters. Student engagement: Identity, motivation, and community. Faringdon, England: Libri.
   Google Scholar
• Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. doi:10.3102/0013189X12441244
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pintrich, P.R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219–225. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlechty, P. (2011). Engaging students: The next level of working on the work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. (2004). Teaching as community property: Putting an end to pedagogical solitude. Teaching as community property: Essays on higher education (pp. 140–144). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Somekh, B., & Zeichner, K. (2009). Action research for educational reform: Remodelling action research theories and practices in local contexts. Educational Action Research, 17(1), 5–21. doi: 10.1080/09650790802667402
   Google Scholar
• Sorenson, L. (2001). College teachers and student consultants: Collaborating about teaching and learning. In J.E. Miller, J.E. Groccia, & M.S. Miller (Eds.), Student-assisted teaching: A guide to faculty-student teamwork (pp. 179–183). Bolton, MA: Anker.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, C.E. (2008). Threshold concepts, troublesome knowledge and ways of thinking and practising. In R. Land, J.H.F. Meyer, & J. Smith (Eds.), Threshold concepts within the disciplines (pp. 185–195). Rotterdam: Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Underwood, T. (1997). On knowing what you know: Metacognition and the act of reading. The ClearingHouse, 71(2), 77–80.
   Google Scholar
• Werder, C., & Otis, M. (Eds.). (2010). Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
   Google Scholar
• Werder, C., Thibou, S., & Kaufer, B. (2012). Students as co-inquirers: A requisite threshold concept in educational development? Journal of Faculty Development, 26(3), 34–38.
   Google Scholar
• Zander, C., Boustedt, J., Eckerdal, A., McCartney, R. Moström, J., Ratcliffe, M., et al. (2008). Threshold concepts in computer science: A multi-national empirical investigation. In R. Land, J.H.F. Meyer, & J. Smith (Eds.), Threshold concepts within the disciplines (pp. 105–118). Rotterdam: Sense Series. Retrieved September 10, 2013, from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-1339
   Google Scholar