Shifting dimensions of autonomy in students’ research and employment

Abstract

This study considers the conceptual space, or extent of autonomy, given to coursework Masters students before, during and after a Business Ethics course that explicitly developed and assessed their research skills. This vocationally oriented and academically challenging course used the Research Skill Development framework as its conceptual model to reshape the learning and assessment environment, articulating to students not only the research skills required, but also clarifying the resulting autonomy in their research-orientated learning. In the study, seven students attended semi-structured interviews and transcript analysis of interviews revealed the level of student-declared autonomy before commencing coursework Masters, while completing the Business Ethics course, and near the end of their Masters degree. All of the students interviewed were studying part-time and working parttime, and so the applicability of the research skills to students' work environment emerged as a major issue of interest. This paper richly represents the students' perceptions, and is the first paper to directly address coursework Masters student autonomy in research in a longitudinal manner; as such it provides a deep and nuanced understanding of the conceptual space that students need for success in study and as preparation for employment.

Student perceptions of their autonomy at University

“…Our study highlights the need to provide students with opportunities to be autonomous (which can be limited in higher education; Fazey and Fazey 2001;Thomas et al 2015;Willison et al 2016), but also the need for students to recognise their autonomy (Fazey and Fazey 2001;Macaskill and Denovan 2013). We cannot currently distinguish whether the lack of change across levels of study supports our moving goalpost model or indicates a lack of student development.…”

“…For example, student self-efficacy (an aspect of autonomy) responds positively to experiences that confirm that the student is capable of working autonomously, such as work or research placements (Willison et al 2016;Qenani et al 2014). Many students report that their interaction with literature resources and learning independence, potential measures of selfmanagement, have increased as a result of studying at University (Thomas et al 2015).…”

What Do We Trust?

“…Further out, with modelling and guidance, each student learns how to add sophistication and rigour to their learning, and then when the student applies this learning by herself, she works with higher learning autonomy in the edge of the zone that is proximal to the student's capacity. For this reason, MELT implies the need for movement from low learning autonomy to high, and back [28], like a tidal zone in the complex ecosystem of learning.…”

What Is Our Purpose?

“…Students may emulate, then improvise, then initiate sophisticated learning and then proceed to emulate once more, for example, if the learning context shifts so that students are unfamiliar with new content, if conceptual demand goes up or as the expected rigour increases. In other words, learning autonomy in MELT is not unidirectional towards high autonomy, but rather shuttles back and forth, according to the young child's or the Ph.D. student's learning needs [27].…”

“…Frequently, considerations regarding the extent of learning autonomy are left buried below the level of teachers' and students' consciousness. However, implicit understandings of learning autonomy permeate classrooms and supervision contexts in which teachers seek to develop sophisticated thinking [27]. The question below, associated with the continuum of learning autonomy, is arguably the most pressing concern in education, whether for face-to-face, online, augmented, virtual or blended realities.…”