AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 1

The Student Experience of Final Year in an

Undergraduate Degree Programme in Education
Studies.
Roisin Donnelly1

Julie Ui Choistealbha 2

Marian Fitzmaurice 3

1
Technological University Dublin, [email protected]
2 Marino Institute of Education, [email protected]
3 Marino Institute of Education, [email protected]

Abstract.
This case study explores the student experience of the final year of a four-year
undergraduate degree in ‘Education Studies’, with a focus on the perceived impact of
curriculum design of the programme. The context is an Irish college of education, and the
programme structure has been designed to allow for flexibility to accommodate varying
student interests and professional pathways. As the first full iteration of the programme
came to a close, it was considered an opportune time to ascertain if the programme was
meeting its curriculum design objectives in terms of preparation for the chosen professional
pathway post-graduation from both the student and staff perspective. Literature explored
included learning ecologies, work-based learning, and the final year experience. Data was
collected through a student survey, individual interviews with self-selecting students, and a
focus-group interview with the programme development team. Findings suggest that
students could clearly identify the development of skills, knowledge and competencies for
the workplace through an internship; also highlighted was value in undertaking a
dissertation for researching a topic of personal interest, with it noted as a challenging,
intense experience. Having appropriate levels and different types of support for students
facing the challenges in final year was a significant outcome. A model emerged for final
year support in three contexts: pedagogic, workplace and research, and we argue that this
is a main research contribution that this study makes to educational research. A discussion
of implications for curriculum development in ‘Education Studies’ highlights the need for
‘cohesion’ workshops to be integrated to final year to synthesise student learning,
embedding a formalised support structure in order for students to have a greater
understanding of choices available to them post-graduation, and introducing a scaffolded
approach to ePortfolio development to encourage innovation.

Keywords: Dissertation, Ecology, Education Studies, Internship, Professionally-orientated,

Undergraduate education, Work-related learning.

All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (AISHE-J)

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 2

1. Introduction.
Individuals enter higher education (HE) as students and exit as graduates, and the way in which
higher education institutions prepare students for their post-graduation lives is a concern,
particularly in relation to policy intervention and institutional practice (Holmes, 2013). This
concern can be viewed in a wider, longstanding debate of how employability is understood and
conceptualised, and whose responsibility it is to cultivate and maintain it. Many higher education
institutions have been considering for some time how to enhance and build a graduate’s
employability, with various initiatives being deployed, and the National Strategy for Higher
Education to 2030 discusses these. Recent work by the National Forum for the Enhancement
of Teaching and Learning has 107 teaching and learning enhancement initiatives being
implemented across the sector: 28 of the funded initiatives are dedicated to discipline groups
and programme teams, 45 initiatives focus across multiple subject areas and a further 12
initiatives are fostering collaborative links with professional bodies and/or industry partners to
enhance teaching and learning content and practices and the success of students beyond
higher education.

Within the field of education studies, it is recognised that part of the challenge is the fact that
there is not a clearly defined pathway post-graduation. Consequently, there is a need to develop
a programme structure that allows for maximum flexibility to accommodate varying interests and
pathways. According to Sheppard et al. (2010) “…a singular career trajectory is increasingly
uncommon given today’s professional and economic realities” (p.90) and as such an
undergraduate award should be seen as the starting point for a variety of career options. This
paper focuses on the student experiences of the final year of an education studies degree in
terms of preparation for the chosen professional pathway post-graduation.

The aim of the B.Sc. (Education Studies) is to provide skills and competencies that are useful
in a wide range of careers in the area of education and training e.g. adult educator, an
instructional designer, an education officer, or an education advisor. This programme is
distinguished from teacher training programmes because of its focus on the themes of life-long
learning, ethics and social justice, education and culture, education policies and practices,
technology, the arts, curriculum and programme design, and policy analysis. Having the
opportunity to have a specialisation module, in an area of particular interest to each student,
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 3

which they pursue through the first three years of the programme, followed by an internship in
the final year of the programme in an education setting of their choice is a unique feature.

This qualitative study explores the key elements of dissertation, ePortfolio and internship from
a student and staff (programme team) perspective. The paper commences with a
contextualisation of education studies from both a theoretical and situated perspective. The
literature review explores student learning experience in final year and work-related learning
through the lens of a learning ecology framework. As key features of the programme are an
ePortfolio and a final year dissertation, the relevant literature is explored through the lens of
critical reflection and assessment. The evaluation of the programme can inform the
development of the programme for the design team involved, and offer other practitioners’
insights on structuring, sequencing and delivering similar programmes in the sector.

1.1 Context of the Education Studies Programme.

Drudy (2010) has considered Education Studies as a building block of teacher education
programmes. As a discipline it includes philosophy, history, curriculum studies, sociology and
psychology. In a national setting, this definition is applicable as the majority of education-related,
degree programmes in HE lead to teacher accreditation. The focus of education studies is
typically on a particular sector of education (early years, primary, post primary, further or higher
education). Education studies degree programmes are “a new context for the study of
education” (Davies & Hogarth, 2002, p.83). Murphy et al. (2009, p.3) define it as “a process as
opposed to a subject area” whereas Ward (2008) argues that education studies is a subject in
its own right, but makes the case that it is not linked to initial teacher education. Sharp et al.,
(2010) define education studies in terms of: “…stumbling blocks …(of) scope, diversity and
complexity not only of the content of education as a subject discipline itself but of the processes
by which education takes place and the social, cultural, political and historical contexts in which
it occurs” (p.1).

This research was set within the context of professional practice at the Marino Institute of
Education, where the three researchers contribute to the programme team of the BSc in
Education Studies. Sharp et al.’s (2010) definition is applicable to the context of this study as it
reflects the pillars of the Education Studies degree programme (ethics and social justice, lifelong
learning, education and culture, policy and practice). This newer definition reflects the reality of
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 4

the Education Studies degree programme as outlined in Figure 1 as students engage in

modules which develop content from the previous year’s study (process) and it is not associated
with any form of teacher accreditation (it is a degree in its own right). Figure 1 shows the
structure of the programme over the four years.

Figure 1: An overview of the programme structure.

The B.Sc. in Education Studies programme which commenced in September 2011 is a

professionally-orientated degree programme. Over the duration of the four-year programme,
students study adult, adolescent and childhood education as well as various core and optional
modules under the four organising pillars. In years 1 to 3, the college-based lectures are
complemented by a two-week work placement in an education-related setting in Ireland or
abroad. In year 4, students undertake a final year (capstone project) dissertation and an eight-
week internship (involving the development of an ePortfolio to demonstrate and reflect on their
journey of learning and to make connections with learning across the programme). ECTS is the
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 5

European Credit Transfer System and is shown for each module. The first three years of the
degree follow a similar structure of two 15 ECTS modules and six 5 ECTS modules, two of
which are self-selected elective modules. In year four, the course structure is realigned around
the internship period, with two 15 ECTS modules undertaken before internship and the
remaining credits dedicated to the research dissertation completed in semester 2.

1.2 Rationale.

Nixon & Williams (2014) argue that programme curricula need to be explored to find a balance
across modules, and the opinions of students need to be gathered to ensure that the team
delivering the curricula understand the impact on the students. This is because the way that
learning is delivered, supported and assessed can enhance employability attributes as the
individual becomes more aware of their skills and abilities. The aim for this current study is to
gain a deeper understanding on the totality of the student experience of the final year of the
Education Studies programme, and the balance of an internship (8-week work placement,
assessed by a reflective ePortfolio) with a research dissertation.

A systematic review explored the literature under four key areas: how to evaluate the final year
students’ learning experiences through the lens of learning ecology; the role of work-based
learning in this BSc programme; the ePortfolio and associated critical reflection; and the final
year dissertation. The rationale for why these key areas were chosen for exploration in the
literature review is aligned to the research study parameters of investigating the impact on
student experience, engagement and progression of the final year of a professionally-orientated
degree programme in Education Studies. Table 1 shows our understanding of how each
contribute to preparing the students for post-graduation success in Education Studies.
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 6

Table 1. Programme Team’s understanding of preparing students for post-graduation success in

Education Studies.

Theme explored in the Key arguments to inform Programme Team.

literature.

Evaluating Students' This can prepare students for post-graduation success by

Learning Experiences enabling them to explore the spaces they create for
from a Learning Ecology themselves to work in, their processes, activities and
Perspective. practices, their relationships, networks, tools, and the
technologies they encounter and use in the work-place;
ultimately it can provide them with affordances, knowledge and
other resources for learning, developing and achieving
something that they value in their future careers.

Work-related Learning. Education Studies is about fulfilment and enrichment, and

helping to ensure that students find success in the
professional pathway they choose to do. Work-related learning
can promote readiness for a career; creating graduates who
are more agile, have a solid understanding of how the
workplace works and can see how their skills fit into it is
important.

The ePortfolio for critical The lifelong learning concept that ePortfolios support can
reflection and as an enable students to continue to capture formal, non-formal and
assessment mechanism. informal learning in their careers or postgraduate study and
can be especially helpful with personal development planning.

The Final Year The dissertation can be a key step into further study; the
Dissertation. advanced knowledge, dedication and capacity for independent
learning demonstrated by the dissertation can help students
move into postgraduate study and a specialised Masters can
be used to bridge the gap between more general academic
subjects and specific career paths.
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 7

2. The Literature Review.

2.1 Learning Ecology Perspective on the Programme.

Learning ecology for an individual can be defined as comprising their process and set of
contexts and interactions that provides them with opportunities and resources for learning,
development and achievement (Jackson, 2016). More simply, Siemens (2007, p.63) defined it
as “the space in which learning occurs”. As evaluating the student final year learning experience
was a key element of the study, Jackson’s (2011) conceptual framework for learning ecology
(Figure 2) was helpful for considering the student learning experience in Education Studies. The
concept of a learning ecology provided the programme team with the means to visualise the
dynamics of a complex self-determined and self-organised learning process and to appreciate
how the different elements of the programme ecology - contexts, process, relationships and
resources, fit together. The concept provided a more holistic perspective on learning and
development on the programme.

This framework was useful for exploring a shift from a traditional teaching model to a more
learner-driven and personalized model, which suited the professional pathways approach of this
study. Learner choice is important here and providing the students on the programme with
opportunities to make choices in how and when they study is important. For example, in
modules situated earlier in the programme, a flipped classroom approach is used where the
students are offered a collection of curated interactive resources and tools that will support their
interests, growth and learning, as well as foster participation among the cohort. Through the
Moodle VLE, students have been introduced to external experts who have been brought into
the media enriched conversation. If this were to be extended across other modules, a
partnership between the experts and the students could provide an opportunity to create an
embedded mentoring learning environment.

The learning ecology dimension relevant for this current study includes looking at a number of
related aspects: goals and intended outcomes, knowledge and skill content, processes, spaces,
relationships, and resources including tools, technologies and mediating artefacts. These
dimensions are significant for the present study as they are all alluded to the HEA National
Strategy for Higher Education (2011) which states that in order to future-proof undergraduate
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 8

programmes, the curriculum needs to “…place more emphasis on generic skills, especially
those required for the workplace and for active citizenship. Creativity and entrepreneurship must
be encouraged to a much greater extent; and institutions should facilitate reflective learning,
applied knowledge, practical laboratory experience, and scientific skills” (p.56). Each of these
dimensions are discussed in the findings under the Programme Team Perspective.

Figure 2: Conceptual tool for evaluating the affordances for learning available to students based
on a learning ecology framework (source: Jackson, 2011).

Professionally-orien- Education centres, NGOs, arts/culture & media or-

tated degree pro- ganisations, community education programmes,
gramme in Dept of Education and Skills programmes, informal
Education Studies educational institutions from pre-school to third level
and FE

In his work, Jackson (2011) argues that curriculum designers could evaluate the potential of a
students' curriculum to support their own learning ecologies using a simple conceptual aid such
as that shown in Figure 3. The contexts or environments for learning explore whether the
contexts are formally constituted and structured within an academic programme, or whether
they are more informal semi- or unstructured opportunities for learning and development
connected to or outside the academic programme. Important considerations are whether the
institution or the learner determines the ‘what and why’, the ‘how’, ‘where and the when’ of
learning, and ultimately determines what counts as learning. It can be useful also to have a
through-line of research activity built into the programme because students are making
connections across subjects and out to the world of work, connecting their academic learning
to their workplace learning, and connecting with each other in the final year of the programme.
As argued by Petrella & Yung (2008) incorporating a research component along with a sound
academic foundation enables students to develop independent critical thinking skills along with
oral and written communication skills. The research process impacts valuable learning
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 9

objectives that have lasting influence as undergraduates prepare for professional service. Also
of relevance was the work of Bass (2014), especially on the internship component of the final
year of the programme, offering as its focus the three kinds of work in the future: solving
unstructured problems, working with new information, and carrying out non-routine tasks. Figure
3 shows these components structured into the final year of the programme.

Figure 3: Final year programme structure.

2.2 Work-related Learning.

Work-related learning is defined by Orell (2004) as an element of professionally-orientated

degrees which is supported by employers, valued by students and initiated by university faculty.
Grosemans et al. (2018) state that the main goal of a professional degree is to prepare students
for their future careers, and as such is a required element of these degrees. Put simply, the term
work experience covers a range of opportunities that enable students to experience working life
(GradIreland/Work Experience). Marsick et al.’s sampling of workplace learning definitions over
a twenty-year period in Malloch et al. (2011) shows how it has evolved (Table 2)
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 10

Table 2: Evolvement of workplace learning definitions.

(Watkins, 1989)
from a focus on developing a work-related learning capac-
ity
to specific skill acquisition in a social context (Resnick, 1987, in
Watkins 1998)
to a collective activity centred on a questioning of underly- (Raelin, 2000)
ing assumptions of practice
to a creation of an environment where learning can happen (O'Connor et al.,
2007)
to an experiential experience that balances the needs of (Jacobs & Park,
providers and students 2009)

Learning in the workplace is dependent on contextual factors such as relationships, individual

participation and the structuring of work tasks; and on learning factors such as challenge and
value of work, feedback, support, confidence, commitment, personal agency and motivation
(Eraut, 2001). There is evidence that students can benefit from learning in a work environment
in terms of key skills, developing further understanding about the context of work, gaining useful
career insights and enhancing employability (Chalkley, 2000, in Hills et al., 2003). A study by
Fanthome (2017) reported on student responses to an internship programme at a university in
London, with the purpose of highlighting potential areas for curricular improvement. It
concentrates on whether student expectations of their internships are met, and the nature of
students' perceived personal and professional learning outcomes. Of relevance to this current
study is its highlighting of discrepancies in the level and nature of support sought by an
increasingly diverse student population. Recommendations of broader self-help online
resources to include video interviews with past students, additional reflective writing workshops,
and the establishment of subject linked social media groups for additional peer support are all
beneficial for our Education Studies programme.

2.3 The ePortfolio for Critical Reflection and as an Assessment

Mechanism.

Portfolios are a purposeful collection of students’ work that tell the story of student effort and
achievement, and shows evidence of self-reflection (Arter & Spandel, 1992). ePortfolios are
student-owned, dynamic digital workspaces wherein students can capture their learning and
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 11

their ideas, access their collections of work, reflect on their learning, share it, set goals, seek
feedback and showcase their learning and achievements (EUFOLIO Project, 2015). Sutherland
& Powell (2007) define it as “a purposeful aggregation of digital items - ideas, evidence,
reflections, and feedback which presents a selected audience with evidence of a person’s
learning and/or ability”. Attention is drawn here to the importance of ideas, evidence and
reflection which are key elements in the portfolio process. Clear criteria in regard to all elements,
and in particular how to critically reflect, is essential in order to avoid the issue of ePortfolios
becoming simply a collection of information rather than what Moon (2004) has called a
mechanism for the development of meaningful knowledge.

JISC (2012) indicate that there is debate whether ePortfolios should or should not be assessed,
and have made a case for and against doing so. However, this appears to be dependent on the
role and purpose of the ePortfolio. From a pedagogical perspective, it was important for the
programme team to establish - what is being assessed: the product or the process? Baume
(2003) has previously stressed that tutors must ensure that their students know that they will
not be penalised for including less capable work. There should be discussions with the students
to include learning from when things went wrong - the assessment criteria need to show that
they are being marked on being able to learn from their experiences and their identification of
their future learning and development needs.

Boud (2000) argues that ePortfolios constitute a form of sustainable assessment because in
ePortfolios, students build themselves a resource that, once assessment is complete, they can
take with them into the workplace. As ePortfolios were one of the main assessment strategies
on the final year of programme, the programme team needed to consider what Stefani et al.
(2007) indicated as important features of ePortfolio implementation and support such as tutor
reaction, system functionality, administrative procedures for handling online assignments and
external examiner perspectives.

In the context of this programme, a key component was the integration of an ePortfolio. The
ePortfolio used as the assessment approach for the internship was a stand-alone ePortfolio
using the Mahara Platform. It was highly prescriptive in terms of content, layout and structure.
In order to avoid the issue of the ePortfolios becoming simply a collection of information rather
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 12

than what Moon (2004) calls a mechanism for the development of meaningful knowledge, it was
important for the programme team to develop clear criteria for the assessment of critical
reflection within the ePortfolio. In the assessment of the students’ ePortfolios, we concentrated
on the assessment of students’ reflections on different artefacts and the process of learning. For
the students to understand the standards, they needed to know what they were expected to
learn over the course of the 4 years and the expectations were clearly defined in the assessment
criteria. The programme team could then assess not just current student work, but also student
development over time. This was important for the aim of the study as it could show if the
Education Studies degree was seen by students as a process (as defined by Murphy et al.
(2009, p.3)). Finally, the students were encouraged to think about additional audiences for their
work. Their best work was selected to showcase their overall skills for the assessment on the
programme but they were also asked to think about how it could be repurposed for another
audience beyond the programme – postgraduate study or for a potential employer where it
would be useful for the student to be able to show that they have mastered technology through
video, podcasts, digital mind mapping and other multimedia.

The evidence-based nature of the Mahara ePortfolios required the students to provide critical
reflection on the process of learning across their modules and supporting their reflective entries
with appropriate digital artefacts. These entries included students' skills and competencies in
the formal setting of the BSc programme as well as their non-formal and informal learning from
their workplace experiences; the reflection component of the work asked the students to first
describe what they learned from these experiences, and then it was important for them to
discuss how they learned – what would they have done differently if they re-visited the
experiences. Finally, a meta-reflection was completed prior to submission and this gave an
overall summary of their body of work.

2.4 The Final Year Dissertation.

The Final Year Project is an important feature of the undergraduate experience and Marshall
(2009) posits that the use of projects and dissertations in university curricula has been seen as
increasingly important. For many students, it can be the longest and most focused piece of
research that they will undertake in their undergraduate degree, and it can play an important
part in determining the final award classification. It has been argued that the role of the
dissertation as the capstone of Bachelor degrees is likely to be of growing significance as a key
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 13

way of delivering programme-learning outcomes and research-informed teaching (Healey et al.,

2013). The dissertation is the main undergraduate research activity that integrates academic
notions of research as syllabus, pedagogy and assessment, and the dissertation experience is
seen by both supervisors and students as having value (Malcolm, 2012).

The dissertation is often promoted as a means of advancing autonomous learning and is said
to offer the potential for students to move along a continuum from dependence to independence
(Greenbank & Penketh, 2009). By engaging with the student one-to-one, supervisors can
enable and empower the student to move forward in their learning (Wisker et al., 2013). For
the students, the completion of the dissertation process shows commitment, perseverance, self-
motivation, independent study, initiative and critical thinking and leads to a sense of
achievement and pride (Todd et al., 2006). However, while students value the autonomy,
authenticity and ownership in relation to their dissertation, they also experience considerable
challenges, particularly in relation to time. Research suggests that students find completing the
final year dissertation stressful (Devenport & Lane, 2006). Although supervisor-student
interactions have become more regulated, more attention is needed for human interactions and
feeling during the process (Strandler, et al., 2014), as the emotional dimensions of the research
process tend to be overlooked (Shadford & Harvey, 2004).

3. The Research Study.

As ‘insider’ researchers, we, as a research team, were cognisant of the opportunities brought
about by our position (access to participants, rapport with participants and our deeper frame of
reference) as well as the challenges (preconceptions, bias and ethics) (Mercer, 2007). The aim
of the case study was to investigate three main areas of the final year of the B.Sc. in Education
Studies:

1. The final year student experience;

2. Student engagement with the learning, teaching and assessment strategies;

3. Preparation and support for professional pathways post-graduation.

The research question for this study - what is the impact on the student experience of the
curriculum design of the final year of a professionally-orientated degree programme in education
studies?
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 14

The primary focus was on the experience of the students, but the programme team perspective
was also sought. We were aware that research is value laden, and requires ethical principles
that safeguard participants particularly when carried out in the context of professional practice
(Lee, 2005). Zeni (2009) urges researchers to think about the responsibility and accountability
they have towards stakeholders of research. We had responsibility to the two sets of
stakeholders of the research, foremost the participants of the research, the students, and also
our colleagues on the programme team and the wider department within which we worked. The
students and staff who were participants in the research were made aware of the research
approach from the outset through an ethics statement and completing the participant informed
consent form. The institutional ethics committee was informed of the study, and ethical
permission was sought through a standard ethics approval application and was granted from
the head of the institution in relation to both the research approach and data collection methods.
Table 3 below shows details regarding the size of the programme in order to understand
contextual scale.

Table 3. Programme size and cohort composition.

Student Student characteristics: Programme Team

Numbers disability, gender, maturity Composition

25 recent No students registered with disability 8 lecturers including module

graduates from services for this cohort co-ordinators of the three
the programme Male 5 final year modules; the
Education Studies years 1-3
Female 20
lecturing team; the
Maturity: all in range 23-25 yrs
Education Studies
development group

The qualitative case study began in November 2015, with the design of an online survey for the
25 graduates of the programme using the SurveyMonkey tool. This was implemented in mid-
January 2016, and 14 graduates responded. The survey was a mix of closed and open
questions – the former was designed to firstly establish the current professional pathway of the
graduates following completion of the programme. It offered options from being enrolled in
further study to either full or part-time employment in an education-related field or other
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 15

discipline, and whether work or study was taking place locally to MIE, nationally or
internationally. A subsequent section in the survey consisted of a series of open questions to
explore the final year experience, in terms of highlights, challenges and supports. The balance
of the internship and the research dissertation were investigated from a professional pathway
perspective. A final section gave the students an opportunity to share their perceived impact on
their professional pathway of the graduate skills they acquired in the programme.

The survey data was analysed first in order to inform the subsequent individual interviews with
6 of these survey respondents in May 2016. These later interviews were used to probe more
deeply into the areas that emerged from the survey responses. Questions probed overall
perceptions and enjoyment of the final year experience, the value and balance of the research
dissertation and internship, on the variety and timings of assessments in final year and if the
structure of final year assessment enhanced employability attributes and research skills.
Questions were included to explore challenges encountered and subsequent coping strategies,
perceived benefits and impact of programme engagement on professional pathways. Finally,
they were provided with an opportunity to share an example of what they considered to be a
good learning experience.

The dual dimension of the study was an investigation of staff perspectives of the connected
curriculum; a focus group interview with the full programme team of 8 lecturers was held in April
2016. Questions focused on the programme team’s beliefs of what a final year programme
should support students to do, and what skills and values should they develop. They were asked
to discuss how the Education Studies final year curriculum was designed and how they worked
with colleagues in developing it, and they had the opportunity to share examples of their design
approach and what they considered a good student learning experience. Probing questions
were included to ascertain from the team what aspects of the programme they considered had
worked particularly well, and why; and conversely what areas they felt were challenging or
problematic both for the students and themselves in delivering it. The questions then moved
into their views on whether and how the programme prepared students for entering the work-
place, and equally whether and how the programme prepared students to pursue postgraduate
study. Questions were included from the programme team perspective on the balance between
research and work-based learning in the final year, and if the final year assessment was
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 16

structured for enhancing employability attributes and research skills development. A final series
of questions explored the programme team’s views on the balance of activities across the
programme to enhance student engagement and innovation, and what they would like to see
more or less of in the final year curriculum.

3.1 Data Analysis.

Qualitative thematic analysis was used for the case study, and the approach adopted was to
analyse the data for significant phrases, develop meanings and cluster them into themes, and
then present a description of the themes (Creswell, 2013). It has been argued by van Manen
(1990), that a theme is the desire to make sense of something and it is through the process of
finding, naming and elaborating a theme that understanding is heightened.

Drawing on the work of Green et al. (1989) and Niglas (2004), the use of multiple data sets in
the thematic analysis was justifiable for the following reasons:
Table 4. Thematic analysis justification in the context of this study

Justification Explanation Related to the study

Research objectives, Research objectives can be Data analysed from student

Triangulation, enabled more effectively survey, student interviews &

through the use of multiple programme team focus
Explanation,
data sets; Greater validity group to give a fuller picture
Completeness.
integrity and credibility of of the student and staff
findings by triangulating one experience of final year in
data set against the other. Education Studies.
Fuller picture is given
through the use of different
data sets, with one data set
explaining the other.

Context. Contextual factors can be The context of the final year

explained. student experience emerged
in relation to the balance
between the internship and
research.
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 17

Rigour. A combination of all the It was important that the

justifications above adds to findings from this study have
the rigour of the study. the integrity to make an
impact on practice in
Education Studies delivery.

The focus group interview was transcribed verbatim, and the three researchers read, and re-
read the transcripts. Open coding was used to organise the data in a meaningful and systematic
way. Analysis involved looking at several category sets (causes, effects/consequences,
strategies) present across the questionnaires and the focus group interview in relation to the
final year student learning experience. We examined the codes and some of them clearly fitted
together into a theme e.g. programme-level design. The work of Maguire & Delahunt (2017)
was helpful for our context in illustrating the qualitative analysis process using a worked example
conducted with undergraduate students, particularly in identifying themes at the semantic level.

The process and outcomes of the final year design and delivery was the key theme which
emerged from the data analysis. This was categorised as ‘Programme-level design’. Two other
themes emerged which were illustrative of common elements found throughout the online
qualitative survey and the interview transcripts. They were categorised as follows:

• Institutional-level support

• Personal-level practice

These three themes cover the spectrum of the undergraduate student experience. The
programme team perspective is also presented to provide balance to the student voice.

4. Research Findings and Discussion.

The research findings presented here provide valuable insights into the final year student
experience, student engagement with the learning, teaching and assessment strategies and
their preparation for professional pathways post-graduation. The key theme that emerged from
data analysis was programme-level design in relation to the balance of the final year work-
related learning component and the dissertation; two other themes on institutional support in
relation to the resulting quality of the student learning experience, and personal-level practice
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 18

for the students are also considered below. The programme team experience was important to
include in the latter part of this section for the insights it provided on the programme-level design
of the final year structure and how it impacted on the student learning experience.

A model is presented (Figure 4) based on the findings of the research study for supporting the
final year student experience in the three key contexts: pedagogic, workplace and research.
These contexts form important considerations of Programme-level design, and it is well
established that careful attention to how programmes and curricula are designed can make a
real difference to the student learning experience. Institutional level support is vital from first
year in students’ undergraduate study to final year to enable them to progress to graduate study
as a chosen professional pathway. It provides the vital sense of belonging and engagement that
makes a real difference to a successful student learning experience. At the senior level, the
institution must take responsibility for nurturing a culture of belonging and creating the
necessary infrastructure to promote student engagement (Thomas, 2012).

Personal-level practice for students encapsulated pedagogic gains through their sense of
ownership of their final year project, and their improved presentations skills and peer sharing
through the ePortfolio. The programme structure provided variety in assessments and an
emphasis on theory of education studies into practice, and all predicated on a clear
understanding by the programme team of student needs. The workplace gains for students were
primarily through the lens of preparing for the world of work by experiencing independence and
raised confidence levels that the internship provided, the opportunity for them to pursue an
educational passion through their chosen specialism, and benefiting from working in teams and
learning to develop professional relationships. Research gains took the form of establishing
professional connections through the research context in which their dissertation study was
located, growing their skills and capacity as researchers, improving how to source and review
literature on educational topics, understanding the value of proposals in the life cycle of a
research study, and acquisition of practical skills development in the form of time management
and organisation.

We are proposing that this model of student support in the final year of an undergraduate degree
programme has the potential to facilitate added value to education studies. It can provide a
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 19

robust framework for the work placement period during this important stage of the programme
as well as enabling students to have a mature ePortfolio that can be used for career purposes.

Figure 4: Towards a model of student support in the final year of an undergraduate degree
programme.

This model encourages programme designers to look at the transferable skills, values and
competencies that final year undergraduate students need in order to be able to progress from
students to graduates, ready for success in their post-graduation lives. We suggest that this
model has the potential to be applied across other discipline areas or in different contexts. There
are plans currently being considered by the programme team to potentially validate this model
for its implication in the provision of a holistic final year experience in education studies and to
show its effectiveness.

4.1 Programme-level Design.

The final year experience and the optimum balance between the practical internship and the
research dissertation was a result of the programme level design. Penttinen et al. (2013) argue
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 20

that the development of working-life orientation and expertise can be enhanced in HE

programmes, and suggest that more research is needed to gain a better understanding of how
it can be built into HE studies. In this programme, work-related learning was an important part
of the final year experience, and the data indicates that the internship impacted students on a
variety of levels:

• Their learning from the internship was active as a result of the goal orientated projects;

• It was cumulative as it called on the student to look back on the programme content since
first year, and at the same time to look forward to their life after graduation;

• It was purposeful in that it provided clarity of future pathways;

• It was personal in terms of the level of individual growth and development;

• It was situated in specific learning environments that called on professional relationships to

be developed with staff and/or students.

Students were reassured by the information given to them pre-internship and it was felt that
they ‘we had all the information we needed and what was expected of us.’ Reference was made
to the individual, person centred nature of the internship as it allowed students to ‘see what I
would be like in the workplace, how I would organise things; also my strengths and areas of
weakness - identify them first and then work on them during the eight weeks’. The internship
also allowed a space to develop new skills, but it was noted that ‘it was up to us to take the
initiative which in itself was a good skill to have’. Students reported a need to trust in the
programme that was in place for them although at times this meant that there was a sense of
uncertainty of being ‘obviously taken out of our comfort zone’ and of feeling’ like I don’t know
what the relevance of these are’. However, on reflection post–experience of the internship, the
benefits were more obvious to the students and they could see that the final year experience
was ‘structured very well towards employment’ in particular the competency based interview
preparation and the fact that it the students felt ‘more comfortable in the workplace’ and
prepared ‘to carry ourselves in the workplace’.

It has been argued that “while key skills are addressed in many undergraduate programmes,
self-management, professional development and the employability context were rarely covered”
(Hills et al., 2003, p.217). They go on to suggest that work-related learning provides the best
possibility for enhancing the employability of students through exposure to the world of work,
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 21

and this from this small-scale study this would appear to be the case. Holmes (2013, p.551)
writes about the “graduate identity” approach which involves more than developing skills and
attributes – it is about ‘developing ways of presenting your claim on the identity (of being a
graduate worthy of employment) in such a way that it stands a good chance of being affirmed
by those who make the selection decision on job applications you make.’ It was important to
the programme team to support the students to develop in this way, and the internship was the
mechanism.

The use of reflective journals made demands of the students in the context of becoming critically
reflective. A study by Moore (2013) concluded that while there was broad agreement about the
need for students to be critical in their studies, there is much variation in how the term is
understood by academics and students, and thus there is a whole range of different ways of
being critical. Becoming reflective is not an automatic process and becoming reflective is not
easy for students (Dearnley & Matthew, 2007); student perceptions echoed this. It was reported
that writing ‘the reflective journal is in itself a skill, and it took me several weeks to just to even
get the critical reflection thing down, because reflecting is one thing but then actually being
critical is another level’.

In order to help the students to reflect on the internship experience, different frameworks were
explained (Gibbs, 1988; Johns, 2009; Brookfield, 2009), and time was built in for developing
critical reflective writing drawing on the work of Moon (2013). However, it was challenging for
students, not in terms of recording what they had learnt and providing illustrations, but in writing
a critical commentary within the reflections.

The findings clearly show that the students were challenged by the dissertation which was cited
by many as an intense experience. They described the dissertation writing process as ‘a very
difficult challenge’, a huge learning curve’ and ‘probably the biggest learning experience of the
whole programme’.

However, students highlighted a number of areas of value in undertaking the dissertation

process. Looking at impact on their satisfaction in researching a topic of personal interest,
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 22

students believed it enabled them to show passion in education topics, develop research skills,
help them understand the value of research, and develop education specialisms such as special
educational needs and literacy. Students appreciated the ‘autonomy’ of the research experience
which was described as learning the different ways of research, the rules, the ethical issues
with research, the things you don’t even think about’ but at the same time they felt reassured
that’ there was as much support as you needed’. Students were also forward looking in their
approach to the dissertation and acknowledged that it would prepare them well for undertaking
post graduate research because ‘anyone who went on to do a masters is going to have to do a
thesis, so it has prepared us really well for going on and completing one’.

This echoes studies by Todd et al. (2006) which would concur, arguing that completing the
dissertation process shows commitment, perseverance, self-motivation, independent study,
initiative and critical thinking. However, the students did find the experience stressful which
echoes earlier research findings from Devenport & Lane (2006). The relational element of the
process also featured in their comments, and this would suggest the importance of giving
attention to human interactions and feelings during the process (Strandler et al., 2014).
Interestingly, when thinking about the value of a dissertation for their professional futures
(Minnighan, 2010), the direct impact on employability did not arise, and yet recent literature
concluded that the dissertation has currency, and offers transferable skills that may have value
to employers (Feather et al., 2014).

The students’ preference for on-going assessment as opposed to exams, which is also
highlighted by Nixon & Williams (2014), is clearly evident in the data. It was felt that it was ‘much
better that there were different types of assessment throughout the year rather than one big
exam at the end. The benefits articulated included the variety of the’ the mix of assessments’
and the fact that ‘different learners have a chance’.

The student response to the ePortfolio, which they had not experienced before the final year,
was interesting to the programme team. Clearly, creating an appropriate assessment
mechanism is only the first stage, and more support is needed in this regard. Students felt that
the ePortfolio was ‘time consuming and it didn’t reflect how much work you put into the
internship’ and that although’ I learnt a massive amount on the internship, (…) I don’t feel I was
able to express that in the best way because of specific methods of assessment’. From the
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 23

programme team’s perspective, the students were developing their Mahara ePortfolios with the
aim that the reflective practice of creating them could enable the students to document and track
their learning over the duration of the 4 years of study. It also gave them the opportunity to
develop an integrated, coherent picture of their learning experiences on all the BSc modules
and enhance their self-understanding. As it turned out, this process enabled the students to plan
and proceed towards their future goals in the different pathways available to them from the
degree programme and allow them to showcase their skills and knowledge to prospective
employers and research supervisors. The ePortfolio was designed to be broad enough to allow
students to use it in a variety of settings, thus replicating and reinforcing some of the
postgraduate options available to them. Findings of this study suggest that the design and
development of the ePortfolio provided an appropriate platform for integrative learning where
the students can visualize the links between the different concepts learnt throughout their
programme and beyond into the workplace. The collaborative activities and peer feedback
strategies that were utilised were effective for improving social learning on the programme.
There were also some identified challenges that the students experienced, prime of which was
the time intensive nature of development and difficulties in mastering the use of the Mahara
platform.

In bringing all three components (internship, thesis and ePortfolio) together in the final year of
the programme, for value to be more evident from both students and staff, there is further work
to be done from the curriculum design perspective, given that this was the first delivery of the
programme: “I think even it was the first year of a new degree where there were no models
anywhere in the country [and certainly not in this institution]”. While the ePortfolio showcases
students’ internship well, the Programme Team felt there was more to do here:

‘We need to really work on that and how we can enhance it and capitalise more on using
ePortfolios.’

‘There can be a clearer bridge between them all, more of a synthesis.’

‘There were huge gaps and room for manoeuvre - which we’re building on now.’

Taking into consideration how the final year of the programme was structured to allow a
connection to the world of work via both the internship and the research dissertation, a range of
benefits were identified by the students. These included that it was ‘enjoyable, interesting,
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 24

rewarding, practical, linked to link to further study and/or world of work, was career focused and
career shaping, allowed for the exchange of ideas as well as enhancing self-esteem and
personal competences’. The lectures which ran in conjunction with the practical elements of the
year (internship and capstone project), supported students’ understanding and experience of
the connected curriculum (Fung, 2015; Bass, 2014). The experience of the final year allowed
students to develop a range of new skills and to refine existing skills. The structure of the final
year, in particular the blend of theory and practice, meant that ‘we were taught about it and then
we were doing it.’ The skills articulated by the students include ‘better communication and
presentation skills - interpersonal and intrapersonal (skills)….to be able to express yourself, but
also to listen to others at the same time - active listening’.

In addition to communication skills and academic writing, they mentioned problem-solving,

teamwork, leadership, organisation, time management; motivation, the ability to multitask, take
risk and teach, interpersonal skills, confidence, independence, ideas generation, presentation
skills and the ability to conduct and analyse research whilst putting theory to practice. This level
and depth of skill development was facilitated by the learning environment (Jenkins & Healey,
2012), which students described as ‘supported, guided, challenging, exciting and reassuring’.

4.2 Institutional-level Support.

Many of the students mentioned that the institution had taken a ‘pioneering’ stance with the
programme, and while this raised issues at times, the teaching staff were identified as very
supportive to them. Reference was made to the ‘uneasiness of being the first year, and
uncertainty, but they (the teachers) were very open to listening to anything that we had to say’.
The context of the of the degree programme, in particular the size of the institution was seen as
an advantage in that ‘it comes back to the type of culture you had, because it’s a smaller college,
people are so open to assisting you’.

Harris (2005) has drawn attention to the importance of the recognition of the needs and
experiences of students as central to the mission of HE institutions and the statements above
are testimony to the desire by lecturers to support the students, and this contributed to a ‘good
atmosphere’ on the programme. Rodger et al. (2007, p.91) argue that “education can be
regarded as the sum of its parts, which include learning, teaching and testing of performance”.
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 25

The words of the students draw attention to another very important variable which is the learning
environment within the institution, and the importance of the relationship with the staff. For
these students, a good learning environment is central to the educational experience: ‘The
teachers give me time before and after class and have conversations about things that interest
me.’ Dorman et al. (2006) highlight that students learn better when they view the learning
environment as positive and supportive. It was important to the programme team to cultivate a
positive environment where the students feel a sense of belonging, trust their peers and the
teachers, and feel encouraged to tackle challenges, take risks, and ask questions. A variety of
qualities can form the basis of a positive student-teacher relationship, including good
communication, a safe learning environment with mutual respect, a positive and patient attitude,
student equality and timely praise.

4.3 Personal-level Practice and the Student Learning Experience.

In terms of balancing the two key components of the curriculum in the final year of the
programme, a number of challenges emerged from the student perspective. There were
opinions expressed about securing the internship initially as ‘stressful, apprehensive,
overwhelming and intense’. Also, the dissertation was perceived as ‘challenging, especially ‘the
process of conducting interviews, finding an organisation to conduct the interviews with,
undertaking academic writing, and wanting more time on the dissertation along with further
supervisor meetings’. The final year experience heightened ‘awareness of the range of
educational organisations in Ireland and further afield, the varying postgraduate qualifications
needed to work in these organisations and the importance of culture and environment when
choosing where to work or study’. Students indicated that these variables were at times in
contrast to what they had expected to be a linear journey to the world of education, in particular
those who had initially intended on becoming primary school teachers. The Programme Team
also picked up on this: ‘Students after fourth year will probably either enter the world of work, or
they’ll continue on into a master’s programme.’ The guest speakers from the ‘world of work’
made opportunities around non-linear pathways clearer for the students: ‘Rather than having
them as passive lectures where the students just come along and listen to somebody for an
hour, students can be involved more actively, working with those highly skilled people [guest
speakers] from different areas, who are extremely competent and experienced in their own
particular field of work.’
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 26

The choices made by the students post-graduation adhere to the notion of the Education
Studies degree being professionally-orientated, as opposed to professional or non-professional
(Arora, 2015). The data showed that there was no one clear direction taken by students post-
graduation, with a spread of pathways including further study in both education-related and non-
education related fields, as well as employment in both education-related and non-education
related fields.

4.4 The Programme Team Perspective.

The programme team perspective was interesting to compare to that of the students.
Collaboration by team members was considered to be key in design and delivery of modules
across the four years of the degree:

‘It was a very small team and we work extremely well together.’

‘There was a lot of collaborative work in the design and delivery of modules… to ensure
that there wasn’t any significant overlap.’

Collaboration also extended to outside the core programme team: ‘I would have collaborated
and spoken to a number of clients from outside of here who would’ve had experience of taking
on interns and sounded them out on what their experiences were, what kind of things they’d be
looking for from our interns.’

In relation to the Project in the final year, it was felt by the programme team that it was well-
grounded in research across the academic year, and there was a strong connection between
the theory and the practice in education studies. Specifically, in year 4, the research and
internship modules worked, but there was an indication that there was a need for a new module
to be developed to connect the learning from the preceding years of study. This could address
the issue of year 4 being somewhat isolated from the rest of the programme: ‘I suppose one of
the feelings I would’ve had maybe about it was that it was more isolated [from the rest of the
programme] and that there wasn’t enough linkage back into the other three years that went
before it.’

There was also mention of the programme pillars: ethics and social justice, lifelong learning,
culture and policy. Specific emphasis was on how these could be used to orientate choices
made by students regarding research topics and internship locations, thus providing a link to
the first three years of the programme: ‘Talking about values…the whole Education Studies
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 27

programme has a foundation of social justice and equality, and I think that could be to the fore
more in the fourth year…there’s a very heavy emphasis on academic achievement and it’s
clearly focussed on the thesis and a lot of research, but I think those other aspects could be
used in fourth year to tie things together.’

Looking at how the programme impacted the students, there was also a collective belief from
the programme team that the curriculum design supported the students to become more
independent learners, and that it gave students the ability to reach a level whereby they become
autonomous:

‘I would expect the skill-base for them…that they are much more responsible and self-
learners at that stage, so I (would) say, making them independent.’

‘In fourth year ideally they’d have a sense more of who they are and where they want to
go, and that maturity to take responsibility for whatever direction they want to go in.’

All on the team observed a change in the students after the internship, evidenced by their
development of workplace skills, and that they could talk the language of recruitment. It was
perceived by the team that it would be a disservice to the students if they did not have a
significant piece of work experience as part of the degree programme. Thinking ahead to the
next iteration of the programme, it was agreed that there was a need for more of a focus on
innovation: ‘In terms of innovation, I would say we didn’t concentrate enough on it at all that first
time round.’ ‘If we’re looking at workplace competencies we should have innovation and
creativity right in there as one of the competencies.’ However, it was acknowledged that in this
current year, the ePortfolio had greatly improved: ‘What I see as regards a development and
what worked well this year was the use of the e-portfolio to showcase their work internship, and
I think it was a huge step up and development from the year before.’

The learning ecology aspect of learner choice and teacher imperative was discussed from the
Programme Team’s perspective, moving from instructor to learner control, and back again:

‘After the placement, they now have a clearer sense of ‘self’ and what their interests
are, and the direction (that) they want to put their degree into.’

‘In the internship we really did see them grow, all of us who visited them, but when they
came back into college, into the dissertation mode, they fell back into relying on the
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 28

teacher.’

Figure 5 shows the learning ecology dimensions discussed earlier and how they align with the
programme team’s vision for the Education Studies programme going forward: pedagogic
context; processes; relationships; resources and tools; spaces.

Figure 5: Curriculum selected for exploration through the lens of Learning Ecologies.

Relationships: students,
lecturers and learning
support staff
Processes: T&L
Resources & Tools: activity, assess-
technology-mediat- ment, feedback
ing artefacts

Pedagogic Con-
text: curriculum,
Spaces: real discipline, LOs,
and virtual teaching stance

5. Conclusions and Recommendations.

This study has reported on the impact on the student experience and engagement of the
curriculum design of the final year of a professionally-oriented degree in education studies. The
research findings presented in this paper can inform the development of similar type
programmes at other institutions. Students were in the main very positive about the impact of
the programme on preparing them for their chosen professional pathway. They identified the
development of skills, knowledge and competencies for the workplace through the internship,
and highlighted the value in undertaking the dissertation process as it enabled them to research
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 29

a topic of personal interest, and develop research skills, but was also a challenging and intense
experience. Balancing the internship and the dissertation to provide a holistic learning
experience appears to be working, so that the students can fulfil their potential through
undertaking their final year more closely aligned to their needs and aspirations. The importance
of appropriate and different types of support for students facing the challenges of a final year
undergraduate programme was a significant outcome of the study.

After synthesising different perspectives from students and staff on the curriculum design of the
final year of the BSc in Education Studies, a number of areas emerged for the programme team
to concentrate on in order to improve the final year student experience:

• Workshops to provide students with opportunities to synthesise the learning from the first
three years, with a view to providing students with a platform to bring cohesion to their
learning over the four years, culminating in their chosen pathway post-graduation.

• A scaffolded approach to the use of the ePortfolio from year one in order that students can
construct more innovative portfolios.

• Workshops to support dissertation supervisors and students through this challenging

process.

• A formalised support structure for students in order for them to have a greater understanding
of the range of choices available to them post-graduation.

We suggest that these recommendations are applicable across a wider international audience
and to other related disciplines.

6. References.
Arora, M. (2015). A comparative study between professional and non-professional course
students: Social Adaptability. International Journal of Humanities & Social Science Studies,
1(5), 26-31.

Arter, J., & Spandel, V. (1992). Using Portfolios of Student Work in Instruction and Assessment.
Educational Measurement, 11(1), 36-44.

Baume, D. (2003). Supporting Portfolio Development. LTSN Continuing Professional

 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 30

Development Series: No. 3.

Bass, R. (2014). Designing Undergraduate Curricula for 2030: A Catalyst for Change.
Washington: Georgetown University.

Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society.
Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167.

Brookfield, S. (2009). The concept of critical reflection: Promises and contradictions. European
Journal of Social Work, 12(3), 293-304.

Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Davies, I. & Hogarth, S. (2002). Evaluating Education Studies. Evaluation & Research in
Education, 1(2), 82-94.

Drudy, S. (2010). “Foreword” In B. Walsh (ed.) Education Studies in Ireland (pp. ix-x), Dublin:
Gill & MacMillan.

Dearnley, C. & Matthew, B. (2007). Factors that contribute to undergraduate student success.
Teaching in Higher Education, 12(3), 377-391.

Devonport, T.J. & Lane, A.M. (2006). Cognitive appraisal of dissertation stress among
undergraduate students. The Psychological Record, 56(2), 259.

Dorman, J.P., Aldridge J. M., & Fraser, B.J. (2006). Using students’ assessment of classroom
environment to develop a typology of secondary school classrooms. International
Education Journal, 7(7), 906-915.

EUFOLIO Project (2015). The EU Classroom ePortfolios Project. Available www.eufolio.eu.

Fanthome, C. (2017). Maximising the benefits associated with internship learning for
undergraduates. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 12.

Feather, D., Anchor, J.R., & Cowton, C. J. (2014). Supervisors' perceptions of the value of the
undergraduate dissertation. The International Journal of Management Education, 12(1), 14-
21.

Fung, D. (2015). A Connected Curriculum for Higher Education. London: UCL Press. Available
https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1558776/1/A-Connected-Curriculum-for-Higher-
Education.pdf
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 31

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by Doing: A Guide. Birmingham, UK: SCED.

Greenbank, P. & Penketh, C. (2009). Student autonomy and reflections on researching and
writing the undergraduate dissertation. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 33. 463-
472.

Greene, J.C. Caracelli, V.J., & Graham, W.F. (1989). Toward a Conceptual Framework for
Mixed-method Evaluation Designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-
274.

Grosemans, I., Coertjens, L., & Kyndt, E. (2018). Work-related learning in the transition from
higher education to work: The role of the development of self-efficacy and achievement
goals. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1-24.

Harris, S. (2005). Rethinking academic identities in neo-liberal times. Teaching in Higher

Education, 10(4), 421-433.

Healey, M., Lannin, L., Stibbe, A., & Derounian, J. (2013). Developing and Enhancing
Undergraduate Final-year Projects and Dissertations. University of Gloucestershire: HEA
Academy.

Hills, J., Robertson, G., Walker, R., Adey, M., & Nixon, I. (2003). Bridging the Gap between
Degree Programme Curricula and Employability through Implementation of Work-related
Learning. Teaching in Higher education, 8(2), 211-231.

Holmes, L. (2013). Competing perspectives on graduate employability: possession, position or

process? Studies in Higher Education, 38(4), 538-554.

Hunt, C. (2011). National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030. Dublin: Department of
Education and Skills.

Jackson, N. (2011). “An imaginative lifewide curriculum.” In N.J. Jackson (ed.) Learning for a
Complex World: A Lifewide concept of Learning, Education and Personal Development
(pp.100-121). UK: Authorhouse.

Jackson, N. (2016). Exploring Learning Ecologies. Chalk Mountain.

Jacobs, R.L., & Park, Y. (2009). A proposed conceptual framework of workplace learning:
Implications for theory development and research in human resource development. Human
Resource Development Review, 8(2), 133-150.

Jenkins, A., & Healey, M. (2012). Research-led or research-based undergraduate curricula. In

 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 32

L. Hunt & D. Chalmers (Eds.) University Teaching in Focus: A Learning-centred Approach

(pp.28-177). Camberwell, Victoria: Acer.

JISC (2012). Guide to Assessing ePortfolios. Available https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/e-

portfolios/assessing-e-portfolios

Johns, C. (2009). Guided Reflection: Advancing Practice. London: John Wily & Sons.

Lee, H. (2005). Understanding and Assessing Preservice Teachers’ Reflective Thinking.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 699-715.

Maguire, M. & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a Thematic Analysis: A Practical, Step-by-Step Guide
for Learning and Teaching Scholars. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, (AISHE-J), 9
(3), 3351-33514.

Malcolm, M. (2012). Examining the implications of learner and supervisor perceptions of

undergraduate dissertation research in Business and Management. Teaching in Higher
Education, 17(5), 565-576.

Malloch, M. (2010).. The SAGE Handbook of Workplace Learning. London: Sage Publications.

Marshall, S. (2009). Supervising projects and dissertations. In H. Fry, S. Ketteridge & S.

Marshall (eds.) Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (pp.150-165).
Abingdon: Routledge.

Marsick, V., Watkins, K., & O’Connor, B.N. (2011). Researching workplace learning in the United
States. The SAGE Handbook of Workplace Learning (pp.198-209). Sage.

Mercer, J. (2007). The challenges of insider research in educational institutions: Wielding a

double‐edged sword and resolving delicate dilemmas. Oxford Review of Education, 33(1),
1-17.

Minnighan, N. (2010, September 16). Graduate view: Why a dissertation can boost your
employability. The Guardian. Available http://www.theguardian.com/careers/graduate-view-
why-a-dissertation-can-boost-your-employability

Moon, J. (2004). A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory & Practice.
London: Routledge Falmer.

Moon, J. (2013). Reflection in Learning and Professional Development: Theory and Practice.
London: Routledge.
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 33

Moore, T. (2013). Critical thinking: Seven definitions in search of a concept. Studies in Higher
Education, 38(4), 506-522.

Murphy, L., Mufti, E., & Kassem, D. (2009). Education Studies: An Introduction. Berkshire:
McGraw Hill.

Niglas, K. (2004). The Combined Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Educational
Research. Tallinn, Estonia: Tallinn Pedagogical University Dissertation on Social Sciences.

Nixon, S., & Williams, L. (2014). Increasing student engagement through curriculum redesign:
deconstructing the ‘Apprentice’ style of delivery. Innovations in Education and Teaching
International, 51(1), 26-33.

O'Connor, B.N., Bronner, M., & Delaney, C. (2007). Learning at Work: How to Support Individual
and Organizational Learning. Dublin: Human Resource Development.

Orell, J. (2004). Work-integrated Learning Programmes: Management and Educational Quality.

Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2004, AUQA Occasional
Publication.

Penttinen, L., Skaniakos, T., & Lairio. M. (2013). Supporting students’ pedagogical working life
horizon in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(8), 883-894.

Petrella, J.K., & Jung, A.P. (2008). Undergraduate Research: Importance, Benefits, and
Challenges. International Journal of Exercise Science, 1(3): 91-95.

Raelin, J.A. (2000). Work-based Learning: The New Frontier of Management Development.
London: Addison-Wesley.

Resnick, L.B. (1987). The 1987 presidential address: Learning in school and out. Educational
Researcher, 16(9), 13-54.

Rodger, S., Murray, H.G. & Cummings, A.L. (2007). Effects of teacher clarity and student anxiety
on student outcomes. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(1), 91-104.

Shadforth, T. & Harvey, B. (2004). The undergraduate dissertation: Subject-centred or student-

centred. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 2(2), 145-152.

Sharp, J., Ward, S., & Hankin, L. (2010). Education Studies: An Issues-based Approach. Exeter:
Learning Matters.

Sheppard, S., Gilmartin, S., Chen, H.L., Donaldson, K., Lichtenstein, G., Eris, O., Lande, M., &
 AISHE-J Volume 12, Number 2 (Summer 2020) Page 34

Toye, G. (2010). Exploring the Engineering Student Experience: Findings from the
Academic Pathways of People Learning Engineering Survey (APPLES). TR-10-01. NJ:
Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education.

Seimens, G. (2007). Connectivism: Creating a learning ecology in distributed environments. In

T. Hug (ed.) Didactics of Microlearning: Concepts, Discourses and Examples (pp.53-68).
Munster: Waxman.

Stefani, L., Mason, R. & Pegler, C. (2007). The Educational Potential of e-Portfolios. Routledge:
London.

Strandler, O., Johansson, T., Wisker, G., & Claesson, S. (2014). Supervisor or counsellor?
Emotional boundary work in supervision. International Journal for Researcher
Development, 5(2), 70-82.

Sutherland, S., & Powell, A. (2007). e-Portfolios: An overview of JISC activities. JISC Web.
Available http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/briefingpapers/2007/eportfoliooverviewv2

Thomas, L. (2012). Building Student Engagement and Belonging in Higher Education at a Time
of Change. York: Higher Education Academy.

Todd M., Smith, K., & Bannister, P. (2006). Supervising a social science undergraduate
dissertation: staff experiences and perceptions. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(2), 161-
173.

Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experiences. Albany: State University of New
York Press.

Ward, S. (2008). A Student’s Guide to Education Studies. Oxon: Routledge.

Watkins, K. (1989). Business and Industry. In S.B. Merriam & P.M.Cunningham (eds.)
Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Watkins, K.E.& Callahan, M.W. (1998). Return on knowledge assets: Rethinking investments
in Educational Technology. Educational Technology, 38(4), 33-40.

Wisker, G., Exley, K., Antoniou, M., & Ridley, P. (2013). Working One-to-one with Students:
Supervising, Coaching, Mentoring, and Personal Tutoring. London: Routledge.

Zeni, J. (2009). Ethics and the ‘Personal’ in Action Research. In S. Noffke & B. Somekh (Eds.).
The Sage Handbook of Action Research (pp.254-266). London: Sage Publications Ltd.