Staff and students co-creating curricula in UK higher education: exploring process and evidencing value

Student engagement in learning and teaching is receiving a growing level of interest from policy makers, researchers, and practitioners. This includes opportunities for staff and students to co-create curricula, yet there are few examples within current literature which describe and critique this form of staff-student collaboration (Bovill (2013a), Healey et al (2014), Cook-Sather et al (2014). The competing agendas of neoliberalism and critical, radical pedagogies influence the policy and practice of staff and students co-creating curricula and, consequently, attempt to appropriate the purpose of it in different ways. Using case-based research methodology, my study presents analysis of staff and students co-creating curricula within seven universities. This includes 17 examples of practice across 14 disciplines. Using an inductive approach, I have examined issues relating to definitions of practice, conceptualisations of curricula, perceptions of value, and the relationship between practice and institutional strategy. I draw upon an interdisciplinary body of literature to provide the conceptual foundations for my research. This has been necessary to address the complexity of practice and includes literature relating to student engagement in learning and teaching, conceptual models of curriculum in higher education, approaches to evidencing value and impact, and critical theory and radical pedagogies. The study makes specific contributions to the wider scholarly debate by highlighting the importance of dialogue and conversational scholarship as well as identifying with participants what matters as well as what works as a means to evidence the value of collaborations. It also presents evidence of a new model of co-creating curricula and additional approaches to conceptualising curricula to facilitate collaboration. Analysis of macro and micro level data shows enactment of dialogic pedagogies within contexts of technical-rational strategy formation and implementation.

Business model evolution and firm performance of entrepreneurial companies

This research explores the business model (BM) evolution process of entrepreneurial companies and investigates the relationship between BM evolution and firm performance. Recently, it has been increasingly recognised that the innovative design (and re-design) of BMs is crucial to the performance of entrepreneurial firms, as BM can be associated with superior value creation and competitive advantage. However, there has been limited theoretical and empirical evidence in relation to the micro-mechanisms behind the BM evolution process and the entrepreneurial outcomes of BM evolution. This research seeks to fill this gap by opening up the ‘black box’ of the BM evolution process, exploring the micro-patterns that facilitate the continuous shaping, changing, and renewing of BMs and examining how BM evolutions create and capture value in a dynamic manner. Drawing together the BM and strategic entrepreneurship literature, this research seeks to understand: (1) how and why companies introduce BM innovations and imitations; (2) how BM innovations and imitations interplay as patterns in the BM evolution process; and (3) how BM evolution patterns affect firm performances. This research adopts a longitudinal multiple case study design that focuses on the emerging phenomenon of BM evolution. Twelve entrepreneurial firms in the Chinese Online Group Buying (OGB) industry were selected for their continuous and intensive developments of BMs and their varying success rates in this highly competitive market. Two rounds of data collection were carried out between 2013 and 2014, which generates 31 interviews with founders/co-founders and in total 5,034 pages of data. Following a three-stage research framework, the data analysis begins by mapping the BM evolution process of the twelve companies and classifying the changes in the BMs into innovations and imitations. The second stage focuses down to the BM level, which addresses the BM evolution as a dynamic process by exploring how BM innovations and imitations unfold and interplay over time. The final stage focuses on the firm level, providing theoretical explanations as to the effects of BM evolution patterns on firm performance. This research provides new insights into the nature of BM evolution by elaborating on the missing link between BM dynamics and firm performance. The findings identify four patterns of BM evolution that have different effects on a firm’s short- and long-term performance. This research contributes to the BM literature by presenting what the BM evolution process actually looks like. Moreover, it takes a step towards the process theory of the interplay between BM innovations and imitations, which addresses the role of companies’ actions, and more importantly, reactions to the competitors. Insights are also given into how entrepreneurial companies achieve and sustain value creation and capture by successfully combining the BM evolution patterns. Finally, the findings on BM evolution contributes to the strategic entrepreneurship literature by increasing the understanding of how companies compete in a more dynamic and complex environment. It reveals that, the achievement of superior firm performance is more than a simple question of whether to innovate or imitate, but rather an integration of innovation and imitation strategies over time. This study concludes with a discussion of the findings and their implications for theory and practice.

An exploration of treatment burden and patient capacity in people with stroke

Background and aims: Advances in modern medicine have led to improved outcomes after stroke, yet an increased treatment burden has been placed on patients. Treatment burden is the workload of health care for people with chronic illness and the impact that this has on functioning and well-being. Those with comorbidities are likely to be particularly burdened. Excessive treatment burden can negatively affect outcomes. Individuals are likely to differ in their ability to manage health problems and follow treatments, defined as patient capacity. The aim of this thesis was to explore the experience of treatment burden for people who have had a stroke and the factors that influence patient capacity. Methods: There were four phases of research. 1) A systematic review of the qualitative literature that explored the experience of treatment burden for those with stroke. Data were analysed using framework synthesis, underpinned by Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). 2) A cross-sectional study of 1,424,378 participants >18 years, demographically representative of the Scottish population. Binary logistic regression was used to analyse the relationship between stroke and the presence of comorbidities and prescribed medications. 3) Interviews with twenty-nine individuals with stroke, fifteen analysed by framework analysis underpinned by NPT and fourteen by thematic analysis. The experience of treatment burden was explored in depth along with factors that influence patient capacity. 4) Integration of findings in order to create a conceptual model of treatment burden and patient capacity in stroke. Results: Phase 1) A taxonomy of treatment burden in stroke was created. The following broad areas of treatment burden were identified: making sense of stroke management and planning care; interacting with others including health professionals, family and other stroke patients; enacting management strategies; and reflecting on management. Phase 2) 35,690 people (2.5%) had a diagnosis of stroke and of the 39 co-morbidities examined, 35 were significantly more common in those with stroke. The proportion of those with stroke that had >1 additional morbidities present (94.2%) was almost twice that of controls (48%) (odds ratio (OR) adjusted for age, gender and socioeconomic deprivation; 95% confidence interval: 5.18; 4.95-5.43) and 34.5% had 4-6 comorbidities compared to 7.2% of controls (8.59; 8.17-9.04). In the stroke group, 12.6% of people had a record of >11 repeat prescriptions compared to only 1.5% of the control group (OR adjusted for age, gender, deprivation and morbidity count: 15.84; 14.86-16.88). Phase 3) The taxonomy of treatment burden from Phase 1 was verified and expanded. Additionally, treatment burdens were identified as arising from either: the workload of healthcare; or the endurance of care deficiencies. A taxonomy of patient capacity was created. Six factors were identified that influence patient capacity: personal attributes and skills; physical and cognitive abilities; support network; financial status; life workload, and environment. A conceptual model of treatment burden was created. Healthcare workload and the presence of care deficiencies can influence and be influenced by patient capacity. The quality and configuration of health and social care services influences healthcare workload, care deficiencies and patient capacity. Conclusions: This thesis provides important insights into the considerable treatment burden experienced by people who have had a stroke and the factors that affect their capacity to manage health. Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are common in those with stroke and levels of these are high. Findings have important implications for the design of clinical guidelines and healthcare delivery, for example co-ordination of care should be improved, shared decision-making enhanced, and patients better supported following discharge from hospital.