Contributing to our BMERG blog series on building community, our BMERG Journal Club lead Dr Claire Hudson reflects on the discussions at our journal club about co-learning and co-teaching.
Paper reviewed: Claessen, Roy J M et al. “Co-learning and co-teaching in a newly introduced research learning community.” The clinical teacher vol. 21,3 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13683
I really enjoyed discussing and reflecting on this paper. It captures what is great about our Journal Club; taking a small break in your day to chat about research with colleagues, and generating new ideas that could be applied to your own teaching practice at the same time!
First, I’ll give an overview of the publication, followed by key takeaways from our discussion.
What was the research?
The research is based within a Dutch Medical School, and the paper evaluates the move from traditional research project supervision (one-to-one) to a more collaborative model involving co-learning and co-teaching, something they call Research Learning Communities (RLCs). The format paired small groups of students with two teaching staff and a floating ‘research expert’ (visualised in one of the paper’s figures). This idea arose from the flip to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, however the emphasis of the paper is on collaborative, rather than online, learning.
Before reading the full article, I checked a couple of definitions to ensure I fully understood their approach. Here they are, in case you are also unsure!
- Co-learning – breaching the traditional teacher-student hierarchy, and everyone is considered a learner. Knowledge is constructed together, with all participants contributing their expertise and experience.
- Co-teaching – multiple educators collaborating to plan and deliver teaching based on their different expertise. This enhances the student experience and supports ongoing professional development for staff.
Essentially, the RLCs are a highly collaborative approach in which students learn from teachers, teachers learn from students, students learn from each other, and teachers also learn from each other – that’s a lot of learning! I really liked the idea and was keen to read on.
What were the findings?
The study assessed both student learning (in terms of research skills) and the perceived value of the collaborative learning. They collected research reports and reflections from students and conducted focus groups with both staff and students.
Learning goals around research skills were met. Students found the structure supportive and valued peer-learning, reporting that they learned beyond their individual topic. Educators also reported that the structure supported their professional development and recognised benefits for students; although they were unsure whether the approach was time-efficient overall.
Why did this study resonate?
The co-learning model mimics a real-world research team, supporting the development of teamworking and research skills in authentic contexts. Co-creation with students, peer-learning, and authentic learning align with current pedagogic trends, and also with the ‘student-centred’ pillar of our institutional education strategy.
At the same time, there are ongoing discussions about reducing staff workload while maintaining the quality of teaching, plus an increased demand for research projects. The study sparked particular interest as it suggested ways to rethink research supervision while increasing authenticity.
How could this model be applied or adapted for our own practice?
Many features of this approach are already evident within teaching in the Bristol Medical School, such as case-based learning, group projects for ‘Student Choice’, and other small-group activities. After identifying these, we applied similar principles to research projects in both undergraduate and postgraduate contexts:
- Facilitating group themes: A group of students work on a broad, overarching theme, with students pursuing individual but linked research questions within that theme. The collaborative work could involve exploring the wider topic and co-creating individual sub-projects.
- Adjunctive research collaboratives: Alternatively, collaboratively learning groups could be created for students undertaking similar types of research (e.g. systematic review, data analysis or lab projects). The collaborative group would foster development of research skills, but the projects themselves could be different.
Potential benefits:
- Multiple ‘supervisors’ and peer-interactions may improve student support and mitigate the common issue that some primary supervisors are less engaged than others…..
- I often find myself saying the same things again and again in one-to-one supervisory meetings with students—group formats could definitely reduce this inefficiency!
- Research projects can feel isolating and lonely for students, as they often involve extended periods of independent study. Collaborative models would introduce peer interaction and support.
Additional reflections and comments
Describing the activities: Details of the group activities were somewhat vague, at least to me. Specific examples of how a single research project was supported within the RLCs would help readers understand how this model could be applied.
Inclusivity concerns: We questioned whether all students would benefit equally from this approach, or whether it inadvertently disadvantages more introverted students or those who prefer more structured guidance.
The digital context: While the redesign was partially in response to COVID-19, the digital aspects were not well explored in the paper.
Overall reflections
This paper invites us to explore co-learning and co-teaching in greater depth, and has already prompted me to generate ideas that could be integrated into my own teaching practice. The overall approach aligns well with contemporary trends in education and facilitated valuable conversations about sustainable and inclusive project supervision in higher education.
If you already integrate collaborative elements into student research projects, I’d love to hear about your experiences and what works well for you!
Author Biography
Dr Claire Hudson is a Lecturer on the Teaching and Scholarship Pathway within the Bristol Medical School. Claire’s early research career was in biomedical sciences, but she has now made a transition to pedagogic research. She has a special interest in student autonomy and the use of reflective practice in developing academic and feedback literacy skills, as well as exploring MSc student skills development in different demographic groups.
