How conceptualisations of curriculum in higher education influence student-staff co-creation in and of the curriculum

Abstract

There is a wide range of activity taking place under the banner of 'co-created curriculum' within higher education. Some of this variety is due to the different ways people think about 'co-creation', but significant variation is also due to the ways in which higher education curriculum is conceptualised, and how these conceptualisations position the student in relation to the curriculum. In addition, little attention is paid to the differences between co-creation of the curriculum and co-creation in the curriculum. This paper addresses this gap by examining four theoretical frameworks used to inform higher education curriculum design. We examine how each framework considers the position of the learner and how this might influence the kinds of curricular co-creation likely to be enacted. We conclude by calling for more discussion of curriculum and curriculum theories in higher education-and for these discussions to include students. We argue that more clarity is needed from scholars and practitioners as to how they are defining curriculum, and whether they are focused on co-creation of the curriculum or co-creation in the curriculum. Finally, we suggest that paying greater attention to curriculum theories and their assumptions about the learner, offers enhanced understanding of curricular intentions and the extent to which collaboration is possible within any particular context.

Co-creation in learning and teaching: the case for a whole-class approach in higher education

“…When I refer to co-created learning and teaching, I include assessment. I could use the term co-created curriculum, but in this paper I purposely avoid the term curriculum to avoid further complexity due to the widespread lack of agreement over how higher education curriculum is defined and the resulting influence on what students are invited to co-create (Bovill and Woolmer 2018). Co-creation overlaps with the concept of active learning, which aims to move the student from adopting a passive role in learning to an active role involving interaction between teacher and students, and between students and students.…”

Learner involvement in the co-creation of teaching and learning: AMEE Guide No. 138

“…Teachers generally prefer to be in control of teaching and this can be undermined by fears that co-creation may focus on complaints, blame and critique, and the possibility that outcomes of the re/design process can be unpredictable (Kadi-Hanifi et al 2014; Bergmark and Westman 2016; Bovill 2019). They can feel threatened by the idea of giving up control of elements in the curriculum, partly because they feel responsible for the teaching and partly because they assume that their content expertise confers them authority over it Bovill 2013a;Bovill 2019). Giving up some power might also raise feelings of vulnerability within the institution and uncertainty about job security (Matthews et al 2018).…”

“…In co-creation the aim is to bring different perspectives of stakeholders together, but this implies that it can be difficult to find common ground (Marquis et al 2017). Involving larger groups of learners can make it extra challenging, especially if the tone of the conversation is not automatically in good harmony; learner groups can be problematic or resistant to engage and take co-responsibility for the process (Bovill 2019). Generally, if the conversation is too much about negative issues and complaints only, this can hamper the constructive progress of the conversation, which also requires focus on positive aspects (Carey 2013).…”

“…Relatedness concerns the desire of social connectedness, belonging to a group and feeling significant among others (Ryan and Deci 2017). Co-creation requires collaboration and interdependency with teachers; literature reports indicate that learners feel more connected to teachers and peers resulting in improved learner-teacher relationships (Bovill 2013a(Bovill , 2019. Finally, competence refers to a feeling of mastery and being effective in one's actions (Ryan and Deci 2017).…”

Expectations Versus Reality: What Matters to Students of Economics vs. What They Receive from Universities?

“…Significant discrepancies between students' expectations and what universities actually offer suggest that the former should be more actively involved in the discussion on curriculum development. These activities should include all the types of co-creation identified by Bovill and Woolmer [66], including reviewing the existing modules/programmes and designing courses from scratch. The role of creativity will increase, among others, due to the consequences of introducing three-dimensional printing together with re-localisation of de-localised production from low-paid-labour countries to developed ones, named re-de economy [67].…”