Transitioning Students into Higher Education

Philosophy, Pedagogy and Practice

Angela Jones, Anita Olds, Joanne G. Lisciandro

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781000712407
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Transitioning Students in Higher Education focuses on the relationship between philosophy, pedagogy and practice when designing programs, units or courses for transitioning students to new educational spaces in the university environment. The term 'transition' is used to describe the academic as well as social movement and acculturation of students into new higher educational spaces.

This book offers both theoretical perspectives and real-world practical examples that reveal the successes and challenges of implementing philosophically driven pedagogies with diverse transitioning cohorts. Drawing on examples from Australia, New Zealand, US and Canada, it writes through the relationship between philosophy, pedagogy and how it can effectively shape the practice of transition and develop the flourishing student. This book is split into three main sub-themes: Flourishing in Transition, Engaging Diverse Cohorts and Challenges for Educators, and sits at the intersections between philosophy and pedagogy in the practice of effectively engaging and transitioning different enabling groups.

This book will be of great interest to postgraduate students, researchers and educators working in the areas of enabling or bridging education, higher/tertiary education, distance learning, and indigenous as well as culturally diverse cohorts.

1

Philosophy, pedagogy and practice in transitional education

An introduction

Dr Joanne G. Lisciandro, Anita Olds and Dr Angela Jones

John Dewey is considered a godfather of twentieth-century educational philosophy, and his musings remain relevant and applicable in the flux of today’s global higher education economy. A firm believer in growth, Dewey’s pedagogies were deeply rooted in philosophies that recognised the impact of culture on humans, especially in the realm of education. His work inspired contemporary understandings of social constructivism, student-centred and problem-based learning, all of which acknowledge the role of culture within them. Let’s pause for a moment and reflect on Dewey’s impact on historical and contemporary education; what would have happened if Dewey had not acknowledged the philosophical foundations for his pedagogies? And what if he had never shared them? As Garrison, Neubert, and Reich (2012) articulate:

In the field of education, there is a tendency to think one can get by with a little theory and perhaps no philosophy of education at all. However, we all have a tacit theory of teaching and learning as well as a philosophy of education, whether or not we ever articulate it to others or ourselves.

(p. X)

When we read Dewey and his contemporaries’ work, it is explicit. It moves the theoretical into the practical and provides the reader with a rationale for their practice. However, these texts tend to focus on K to 12 education or higher education, and in the emerging field of transition education, examples are lacking. As more and more generations of non-traditional students hit physical and digital campuses, understanding the ‘back story’ of educational practice within the space of transition is paramount.

Intention and purpose

This monograph focuses on the relationship between philosophy, pedagogy, and practice when designing programs/units/courses for transitioning students to new spaces in higher education. It offers both theoretical perspectives and case studies that reveal the successes and challenges of using philosophically driven pedagogies with diverse transitioning cohorts. The explicit goal of this book is to encourage educator reflection on the philosophies that influence pedagogy and practice, to improve education in transitioning spaces, and to provide practical examples of how to make it happen. While other manuscripts have offered insight into the transitional space, such perspectives have been predominantly macro, focussed on implementation or changing of educational policy. This book journeys the reader into the minds and classrooms of educators as they theorise the space of transition across Australia, New Zealand, United States of America and Canada. Drawing on these examples, this manuscript writes through the relationship between philosophy (including the programs’ philosophies, educators’ philosophies, and cultural beliefs), pedagogy and how it can effectively shape practice in transitional education. While these chapters mainly focus on transition of domestic students to undergraduate or Bachelor level studies, it is worth noting that many of the principles explored and tips offered are transferrable to a wide range of other educational contexts including those that engage postgraduate and/or international students in transition.

A little context …

The term ‘transition’ in the context of higher education is used to describe the academic as well as social movement and acculturation of students into new educational spaces. The process of transition to higher education begins in the pre-university educational context (for example, in high school, college, vocational education, sub-bachelor or alternative access pathways) with the building of aspiration and expectations for university study, and continues into the first months or even year(s) of university, with the development of a learner identity and acquisition of the capacity to “act autonomously as a university student” (Briggs, Clark, & Hall, 2012, p. 6). This liminal space is the bridge into higher education and “support is needed on both sides of the transition bridge to enable students to adjust to university” (Briggs et al., 2012, p. 6). Research shows that the transitional period is the time when the highest attrition and academic failure rates are recorded (Mills, Heyworth, Rosenwax, Carr, & Rosenberg, 2009). However, once progressing into second year, students are more likely to continue to completion (Hillman, 2005; Marks, 2007; McInnis, Hartley, Polesel, & Teese, 2000). Therefore, if we want to ensure positive outcomes for our students, we need to examine closely and critically the transitional education space and our influence over it as educators. As Tinto and Engstrom (2008) put it, “access without support is not opportunity”.

Part of this is understanding the context in which universities operate, which is constantly evolving under the influence of political, economical, educational, and institutional processes (Bradley, Noonan, Nugent & Scales, 2008). Universities are no longer simply spaces for learning, they have also become businesses offering education as a commodity in a global marketplace; and students are not just learners they are now also clients. “Globally, neoliberalism in higher education policy reforms has been characteristic of capitalist societies, including Australia, since the 1980s” (Zajda, 2013, p. 234). Alongside government policies aligned with “market-oriented ideologies” (Zajda, 2013, p. 246) and designed to bolster the knowledge economy across developed countries, national policies with widening participation agendas that aim to create “a fair chance for all” have also emerged (DEET, 1990). In Australia, recent transformation and massification of higher education was prompted by the 2008 Review of Higher Education (Bradley et al., 2008) which set in motion targets for increasing and widening participation, particularly for under-represented groups. Following this review, a demand-driven system for government funding of university places was introduced, and substantial investments made to support identified equity groups including provision of alternative pathways to access university (Harvey, Burnheim, & Brett, 2016). Similar trends and policy reforms have also emerged across Northern America, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Oceania (Brett & Pitman, 2018). This has led to enhanced uptake by students and a diversifying demographic profile of incoming cohorts. More students from disadvantaged, low socioeconomic and/or first-in-family backgrounds are coming to university than ever before. Importantly, the nature and needs of these incoming cohorts are not necessarily the same as the traditional, middle-class student typical of the former elite system of higher education (Trow, 2007) who had always envisioned university as a part of their future. Moreover, access to university is simply not enough to ensure successful participation and completion. An understanding of the factors within our control for delivering the best possible outcomes for these diverse transitioning cohorts, within the current neoliberal climate, is of paramount importance to educators, universities, and governments alike.

A major emphasis of this monograph is on transition in the context of alternative access or pathway programs. As localised responses to contextual factors and global trends shaping higher education, these pre-degree programs have become a key widening participation and university recruitment strategy across many English-speaking countries (Agosti & Bernat, 2018; Brett & Pitman, 2018). In Australia, these are generally known as enabling programs (NAEEA, 2019), and defined by the government as “a course of instruction provided to a person for the purpose of enabling the person to undertake a course leading to a higher education award” (DotAG, 2003, p. 302). Apart from the rare long-running enabling program such as that offered by the University of Newcastle, enabling education has had a short history of rapid expansion in Australia following the 2008 Bradley Review. In 2017, the number of students commencing enabling courses nationally was 23,933 compared with only 7796 in 2007 (Australian Government, 2018). Further, national audits identified that across 27 Australian universities, there were 35 enabling programs offered in 2013 (Hodges et al., 2013), with that number rising to at least 48 more recently (McKay et al., 2018). An equity strategy turned mainstream marketing strategy, there is no doubt that enabling programs are becoming less ‘alternative’ or ‘non-traditional’ and more normalised as a “legitimate pathway” to university in Australia (Hodges et al., 2013).

Enabling programs in Australia share many similarities with ‘access programmes’¹ in the United Kingdom, which have had a longer and more established history, and differ in that they tend to lead to a qualification in their own right (QAA, 2019; SWAP, 2019). ‘Bridging or foundation programmes’ in New Zealand (Trewartha, 2008), and ‘developmental education’ in the United States (NCDE, 2019), are also similar to Australia’s enabling education sector, but delivered through different types of institution. In “nations with a colonial past such as Canada and New Zealand”, pathway programs are considered of particular importance for servicing students “from First Nation or Indigenous populations” (Brett & Pitman, 2018, pp. 39–40). Notably, while the overarching goals are generically similar in aiming to “prepare students for the rigours of university” (Taylor, van Eyk, & Syme, 2018), differences exist in university pathway program offerings both within and between these countries in the duration, content, structure, modes of delivery, and types of institutions that deliver them, as they attempt to meet the specific needs of the local communities in which they serve (Agosti & Bernat, 2018).

Philosophy, pedagogy and practice

The philosophy of education is a highly complex and contested (Davids, 2018) area of research. Volumes have been written on the topic and further work on this topic alone would likely not end the contention. Bailey (2010) argues that the very meaning of philosophy is not agreed upon. Educational philosophy offers an attempt to capture the “unique purposes, concepts, learner roles and instructional methods” (Coello & Casanas, 2004, p. 385), and can describe many aspects of the teaching (Lal & Ebrary, 2006). Most poignantly educational philosophies provide “a holistic conception of people making and world-making” (Freeman-Moir, 2014, p. 118). It is recognised that the authors in this book possess different knowledges and come from a range of disciplines, and that this tints the individual interpretations of “philosophy” and indeed the particular approaches to each chapter. Some chapters in this book refer in more depth to particular educational philosophies. For example, emancipatory philosophies and philosophies of flourishing are reoccurring themes in this space, possibly because they are so well aligned with the purposes of widening participation. Upon encountering any educational philosophies that resound, we encourage the reader to explore beyond our conceptualisations. For the context of this book, however, we ask that the word philosophy be understood in a broader sense, as an attitude that acts as a guiding principle for behaviour, or as a form of intellectual inquiry (Carr, 2004). Here we invite a philosophical imagination (Carr, 2004) to guide reflection.

There is much to be gained from making explicit the philosophies and pedagogies that drive our practice. Our own beliefs surrounding the purpose of education can greatly shape not only our curriculum design but the way in which we relate to students. Reflecting on educational philosophies allows one to examine which educational values are promoted and which are marginalised (Carr, 2004). Furthermore, Carr (2004) argues that there are those that focus on educational philosophy, yet fail to let it influence practice, and on the opposing side, those that focus on practice yet lack philosophical rigour. Articulating and making explicit these values and beliefs, and how they influence our choice of pedagogy and in turn practice, can guide more conscious choices when creating appropriate learning experiences for students in transition.

Yet, how can we make these sometimes covert parts of our work more overt? We offer an iceberg analogy for seeing the interconnectedness. The tip of the iceberg, seen above the water, is practice, the daily activities an educator engages in to enhance learning. During our development as educators we receive training and accumulate theoretical concepts that guide us in choosing these learning activities. This accumulation, located just beneath the surface of an iceberg, can be conceived of as pedagogy. The deeply submerged parts of an iceberg, formed not only through educational training but also from life experience, are our beliefs, values, and attitudes about education. These can be considered our underpinning philosophies. It is this third layer that truly influences practice. Zinn (2004) similarly asserts that our life beliefs lay the foundation of our educational philosophies. It is our philosophical lens that leads us to either claim or discard certain pedagogies. For example, if I believe my job as an educator is to impart only academic skills, then I will ignore any pedagogy the extols the virtue of holistic education and will likely focus only on activities that build academic literacies. We will struggle to implement anything that is in discord to our educational philosophies.

The term pedagogy is often associated with ideas of training and discipline (Hinchliffe, 2000) and provides justification for the inclusion for certain learning activities. It refers to the contents of teaching through a human‐specific social learning system (Gergely, Egyed, & Király, 2007). In this context, we offer that pedagogy be understood as a set of theories that guide practice, and practice is understood as the series of processes and activities implemented in a learning environment. It is useful to mention that a number of teaching and learning pedagogies specific to undergraduate transitional spaces have been recognised in the field for their merit and influence on practice. Kift, Nelson, and Clarke (2010) proposed that an ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of illustrations
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• List of contributors
• 1. Philosophy, pedagogy and practice in transitional education An introduction
• PART I: Flourishing in transition
• PART II: Engaging diverse cohorts
• PART III: Challenges for educators
• Index