During the last decade, the relationship between university and non-university higher education institutions has changed. As a contribution to the knowledge economy, non-university higher education institutions are expected to educate their students in research activities. Previously, teaching was the main responsibility of lecturers in non-university higher education, while research hardly played a role. This paper is about the belief of lecturers in non-university higher education in their own research ability (research self-efficacy). In a survey study conducted among Dutch lecturers (N = 790), the research self-efficacy has been measured. A structural equation model shows the effects of personal aspects, mastery experience and organisational context on the research self-efficacy of lecturers. Research self-efficacy is also modelled in relation to lecturers’ need to work on professional development in research skills. Results show that research self-efficacy is mostly affected by aspects of mastery experience, in which the context is similar to the given task. Implications are discussed.
In today’s era of content abundance, education has to deal with changed practices for the dissemination of knowledge. Many digital resources are available, and they have the potential to take the place of textbooks. ‘The role of the classic textbook as the key, immutable reference point for any class subject, is rapidly fading’, says Good (2016). Educational publishers like Pearson see a decline in textbook use (Sweney, 2017), and a study at a Dutch university of applied sciences (Leighton, 2015) indicates that lecturers in higher education move away from core textbooks towards a variety of materials, including powerpoint slides, websites, and videos. Baron & Zablot (2015) complement this, saying ‘teachers now have the possibility to create and modify resources’. This development carries the risk that the structure, continuity and coherence textbooks are supposed to provide (Littlejohn, 2011), disappear. One could argue that when structure and coherence disappear from learning materials, the quality of education is at risk. To make the most of (digital) materials that teachers select, they must be organized well (Deschaine & Sharma, 2015). In order to do that, lecturers will have to act as skilled curators when selecting and structuring learning materials. Central in the concept of curation is that it goes beyond selection: providing coherence and context is what sets out curation from mere selection (Bhaskar, 2016). Considered from the perspective of teaching, curating means selecting and structuring learning content for students, while also providing them with context and coherence. The notion of lecturers as curators has been discussed by Siemens (2008), who describes the changing roles of lecturers and identifies ‘curational educators’ as those who ‘acknowledge the autonomy of learners, yet understand the frustration of exploring unknown territories without a map’. So far, the literature mainly focusses on providing students with curational skills, since these are important 21st century and media literacy skills (e.g. Jenkins et al., 2009; Potter, 2012). Little empirical research has been done when it comes to curational roles of lecturers. This proposed poster provides a mixed-methods research design for a PhD study.
This article explores the criteria for ‘good research’ employed by lecturers in traditional universities and institutes of higher professional education. The implementation of research-related activities in the latter created a repositioning of both types of Dutch institutions, similar as in many European higher education systems. The higher education institutes state their mutual difference is based on different types of research and research education, being more fundamental (or ‘Mode 1’) versus being more applied (or ‘Mode 2’). Lecturers’ criteria for‘good research’ potentially have a considerable influence on the research character in different higher educational types, both in education and research. Hence, this study assumes that the presumed institutional differences can be seen in their lecturers’ criteria for ‘good’ research. In a focus group and interview study, participants were asked to elaborate on personal examples of ‘good’ and ‘nongood’ research. A thematic analysis resulted in six themes on ‘good research’. The differences between both groups of lecturers found are related to the value of the research, and do not reach the core of research quality. This shows how the policy intent to steer on institutional differences actually is successful, but also limited. Implications are discussed.
MULTIFILE
Examining in-class activities to facilitate academic achievement in higher educationThere is an increasing interest in how to create an effective and comfortable indoor environment for lecturers and students in higher education. To achieve evidence-based improvements in the indoor environmental quality (IEQ) of higher education learning environments, this research aimed to gain new knowledge for creating optimal indoor environmental conditions that best facilitate in-class activities, i.e. teaching and learning, and foster academic achievement. The academic performance of lecturers and students is subdivided into short-term academic performance, for example, during a lecture and long-term academic performance, during an academic course or year, for example. First, a systematic literature review was conducted to reveal the effect of indoor environmental quality in classrooms in higher education on the quality of teaching, the quality of learning, and students’ academic achievement. With the information gathered on the applied methods during the literature review, a systematic approach was developed and validated to capture the effect of the IEQ on the main outcomes. This approach enables research that aims to examine the effect of all four IEQ parameters, indoor air quality, thermal conditions, lighting conditions, and acoustic conditions on students’ perceptions, responses, and short-term academic performance in the context of higher education classrooms. Next, a field experiment was conducted, applying the validated systematic approach, to explore the effect of multiple indoor environmental parameters on students and their short-term academic performance in higher education. Finally, a qualitative case study gathered lecturers’ and students’ perceptions related to the IEQ. Furthermore, how these users interact with the environment to maintain an acceptable IEQ was studied.During the systematic literature review, multiple scientific databases were searched to identify relevant scientific evidence. After the screening process, 21 publications were included. The collected evidence showed that IEQ can contribute positively to students’ academic achievement. However, it can also affect the performance of students negatively, even if the IEQ meets current standards for classrooms’ IEQ conditions. Not one optimal IEQ was identified after studying the evidence. Indoor environmental conditions in which students perform at their best differ and are task depended, indicating that classrooms should facilitate multiple indoor environmental conditions. Furthermore, the evidence provides practical information for improving the design of experimental studies, helps researchers in identifying relevant parameters, and lists methods to examine the influence of the IEQ on users.The measurement methods deduced from the included studies of the literature review, were used for the development of a systematic approach measuring classroom IEQ and students’ perceived IEQ, internal responses, and short-term academic performance. This approach allowed studying the effect of multiple IEQ parameters simultaneously and was tested in a pilot study during a regular academic course. The perceptions, internal responses, and short-term academic performance of participating students were measured. The results show associations between natural variations of the IEQ and students’ perceptions. These perceptions were associated with their physiological and cognitive responses. Furthermore, students’ perceived cognitive responses were associated with their short-term academic performance. These observed associations confirm the construct validity of the composed systematic approach. This systematic approach was then applied in a field experiment, to explore the effect of multiple indoor environmental parameters on students and their short-term academic performance in higher education. A field study, with a between-groups experimental design, was conducted during a regular academic course in 2020-2021 to analyze the effect of different acoustic, lighting, and indoor air quality (IAQ) conditions. First, the reverberation time was manipulated to 0.4 s in the intervention condition (control condition 0.6 s). Second, the horizontal illuminance level was raised from 500 to 750 lx in the intervention condition (control condition 500 lx). These conditions correspond with quality class A (intervention condition) and B (control condition), specified in Dutch IEQ guidelines for school buildings (2015). Third, the IAQ, which was ~1100 ppm carbon dioxide (CO2), as a proxy for IAQ, was improved to CO2 concentrations under 800 ppm, meeting quality class A in both conditions. Students’ perceptions were measured during seven campaigns with a questionnaire; their actual cognitive and short-term academic performances were evaluated with validated tests and an academic test, composed by the lecturer, as a subject-matter-expert on the taught topic, covered subjects discussed during the lecture. From 201 students 527 responses were collected and analyzed. A reduced RT in combination with raised HI improved students’ perceptions of the lighting environment, internal responses, and quality of learning. However, this experimental condition negatively influenced students’ ability to solve problems, while students' content-related test scores were not influenced. This shows that although quality class A conditions for RT and HI improved students’ perceptions, it did not influence their short-term academic performance. Furthermore, the benefits of reduced RT in combination with raised HI were not observed in improved IAQ conditions. Whether the sequential order of the experimental conditions is relevant in inducing these effects and/or whether improving two parameters is already beneficial, is unknownFinally, a qualitative case study explored lecturers’ and students’ perceptions of the IEQ of classrooms, which are suitable to give tutorials with a maximum capacity of about 30 students. Furthermore, how lecturers and students interact with this indoor environment to maintain an acceptable IEQ was examined. Eleven lecturers of the Hanze University of Applied Sciences (UAS), located in the northern part of the Netherlands, and twenty-four of its students participated in three focus group discussions. The findings show that lecturers and students experience poor thermal, lighting, acoustic, and IAQ conditions which may influence teaching and learning performance. Furthermore, maintaining acceptable thermal and IAQ conditions was difficult for lecturers as opening windows or doors caused noise disturbances. In uncomfortable conditions, lecturers may decide to pause earlier or shorten a lecture. When students experienced discomfort, it may affect their ability to concentrate, their emotional status, and their quality of learning. Acceptable air and thermal conditions in classrooms will mitigate the need to open windows and doors. This allows lecturers to keep doors and windows closed, combining better classroom conditions with neither noise disturbances nor related distractions. Designers and engineers should take these end users’ perceptions into account, often monitored by facility management (FM), during the renovation or construction of university buildings to achieve optimal IEQ conditions in higher education classrooms.The results of these four studies indicate that there is not a one-size fits all indoor environmental quality to facilitate optimal in-class activities. Classrooms’ thermal environment should be effectively controlled with the option of a local (manual) intervention. Classrooms’ lighting conditions should also be adjustable, both in light color and light intensity. This enables lecturers to adjust the indoor environment to facilitate in-class activities optimally. Lecturers must be informed by the building operator, for example, professionals of the Facility Department, how to change classrooms’ IEQ settings. And this may differ per classroom because each building, in which the classroom is located, is operated differently apart from the classroom location in the building, exposure to the environment, and its use. The knowledge that has come available from this study, shows that optimal indoor environmental conditions can positively influence lecturers’ and students’ comfort, health, emotional balance, and performance. These outcomes have the capacity to contribute to an improved school climate and thus academic achievement.
