References
- Barnett, R., & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Open University Press.
- Basken, P. (2019). Does performance-based funding work? Times Higher Education, September. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/does-performance-based-funding-work
- Blackmore, P., & Kandiko, C. B. (2012). Strategic curricular change in universities: Global trends. Routledge.
- Bradford, M. (2009). An evaluation of change academy. HE Academy.
- Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, A., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in teaching & learning: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.
- Gibbs, G. (2013). Reflections on the changing nature of educational development. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(1), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2013.751691
- Greer, J. (2011). Checking the temperature and pressure: Faculty attitudes toward teaching. Bridges, 9(2), 1–3.https://studylib.net/doc/12041747/bridges-fi-fchecking-the-ftemperature-fand-fpressure--faculty
- Hart, D., Diercks-O’Brien, G., & Powell, A. (2009). Exploring stakeholder engagement in impact evaluation planning in educational development work. Evaluation, 15(3), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389009105882
- HEA. (2012). Reward and recognition enhancement change programme 2012. HEA. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/resources/reward_and_recognition_enhancement_programme_compendium.pdf
- HEA. (2013). Students as partners in the curriculum. HEA. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/sap-compendium.pdf
- Healey, M., Bradford, M., Roberts, C., & Knight, Y. (2013). Collaborative discipline-based curriculum change: Applying Change Academy processes at department level. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.628394
- Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. Higher Education Academy.
- Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2016). Students as partners: Reflections on a conceptual model. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 4(2), 8–20. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.10.20343/teachlearninqu.4.2.3
- Healey, R. L., Lerczak, A., Welsh, K., & France, D. (2019). By any other name? The impacts of differing assumptions, expectations, and misconceptions in bringing about resistance to student-staff partnership. International Journal for Students as Partners, 3(1), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i1.3550
- Julian, D. (1997). The utilization of the logic model as a system level planning and evaluation device. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20(3), 251–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(97)00002-5
- Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education. Springer.
- Kezar, A. (2005). Redesigning for collaboration within higher education institutions: An exploration into the developmental process. Research in Higher Education, 46(7), 831–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-6227-5
- Knight, P. T., & Trowler, P. (2000). Department-level cultures and the improvement of learning and teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/030750700116028
- Matthews, K. E., Groenendijk, L., & Chunduri, P. (2017). We want to be more involved: Student perceptions of students as partners across the degree program curriculum. International Journal for Students as Partners, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i2.3063
- Oxley, A., & Flint, A. (2010). Learning from internal change academy processes. Educational Developments, 10(3), 25–28. https://www.seda.ac.uk/resources/files/publications_113_Educational%20Developments%2010.3%20v3%20(final).pdf
- Palmer, M. S., Streifer, A. C., & Williams‐Duncan, S. (2016). Systematic assessment of a high‐impact course design institute. To Improve the Academy, 35(2), 339–361. https://doi.org/10.1002/tia2.20041
- Patrick, G. (2016). Curriculum innovation fund evaluation (p. 27) [Institutional research report]. University of Saskatchewan.
- Sedlačko, M. (2017). Conducting ethnography with a sensibility for practice. In M. Jonas, B. Littig, & A. Wroblewski (Eds.), Methodological reflections on practice oriented theories (pp. 47–60). Springer International Publishing. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/lancaster/detail.action?docID=4806865
- Seel, R. (2006). Liquid cafe. http://www.new-paradigm.co.uk/liquid_cafe.htm
- Trowler, P., & Cooper, A. (2002). Teaching and learning regimes: Implicit theories and recurrent practices in the enhancement of teaching and learning through educational development programmes. Higher Education Research & Development, 21(3), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436022000020742
- Trowler, P., Fanghanel, J., & Wareham, T. (2005). Freeing the chi of change: The higher education academy and enhancing teaching and learning in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 30(4), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500160111
- Turner, N. K., Bassendowski, S., Squires, V., & Wilson, J. (2016). Engagement with learning technology at the University of Saskatchewan. University of Saskatchewan.
- University of Saskatchewan. (2016). Mission, vision and values of the. http://www.usask.ca/leadershipteam/documents/president/MissionVisionValues.pdf