Reshaping the Higher Education System in Ukraine through Improvements in the Student Experience: A Pan European Action Research Approach Abstract Debates about the purpose, importance and process of education are as old as civilisation itself. Every age has its own version of what should be taught and how to deliver this to the next generation. This paper examines five key aspects of the education process: purpose, methods, quality, transparency and independence, how these relate to modern Ukraine and the challenges this brings to their higher education system. It reports on a project working with partners across the European Union and four leading Ukrainian universities to improve the student experience and address these challenges. The results demonstrate that mentoring and communities of practice integrated into the action research process can support transformational change and a shift to a more open, student centred and constructivist education system. The resources and initiatives from this project form a roadmap to inform future development of student services across the Ukrainian Higher Education system.

1 1.1

Theoretical Framework A Review of Education and its Application in the Ukraine

Education is multifaceted. This paper starts by analysing five key concepts of the education process: purpose, method, quality, transparency and independence, and their application within the Ukraine Higher Education system.

1.2

Purpose

A basis question is ‘why do we educate?’ There have been different approaches throughout history. In Plato’s time, a principal purpose of education was to contribute to Civic Affairs and governance. An educated person would know how to write, reason and express themselves and understand the harmony of music and the heavens. This can be viewed as a model of the ‘learning society’, a concept similar to the learning organisation advocated by Peter Senge (2000) and underpins the main philosophy of the European education system today. While the Romans adopted many aspects of Greek education, an area of study was only beneficial if it served a higher purpose. These two competing ideas – education as an end in itself and education as a utility to society are reflected throughout history. The Ukraine education system is built from the Soviet philosophy where systems were installed so as to give the same to all, including education. However, possessing a university degree certificate became an aspiration in itself rather than the education behind it. This mentality lies at the root of many of the problems endemic in Ukraine today.

1.3

Method

Method is about how to impart education through learning and teaching. Plato believed that educators have a moral duty and must have a deep care for the well-being and future of those they work with. They employed the ‘Socratic teaching method’ which used the power of dialogue to jointly explore a subject. This approach underpins more recent educational theories such as

constructivism advocated by Jean Piaget, and action and peer learning (De Lisi, 2002; Strachan and Liyanage, 2015). It contrasts with the more didactic approach common in the Ukraine where ‘knowledge’ is handed down to the learner who is expected to assimilate and then reproduce it in the assessment process. There is little room for debate and discussion and alternative viewpoints are not encouraged.

1.4

Quality

Today the emphasis is on enhancement and delivering a quality student experience. The University of the 21st century should be an enriching life experience preparing students for the workplace and society (Sursock, 2015). The Ukraine has started on this path but there is a long way to go (British Council, 2015).

1.5

Transparency

Education should teach ethics and develop values in society. When a sector is corrupt itself, it teaches instead that the world only functions through corrupt means. Transparency implies openness, communication, and accountability. It means operating in such a way that it is easy for others to see what actions are performed. Surveys conducted by Transparency International and by the World Bank picture Ukraine as a very corrupt country and this also applies to Higher Education (British Council, 2015).

1.6

Independence

There is always a tension between academic freedom and infringement of institutional autonomy on the part of ‘the state’, and the perceived failures of public accountability on the part of institutions. The Ukraine Ministry of Education and Science has a role to ensure all HE institutions follow the same pattern and teach exactly the same curriculum. This affects what they are allowed to teach, number of hours students are taught, assessment procedures and decision making processes. This control is a great barrier to university autonomy. Although there have been many initiatives to change this process, in reality they have made little change.

2

Methods

The relationship between higher education and students is changing. Students expect much more than just knowledge. They want a wider experience that prepares them for their future. This paper reports on IMPRoving the Experience of Student Services (IMPRESS), a pan European project whose primary aim is to improve the student experience and student services in Ukraine to reach a comparable level with Europe. It achieves this by creating ‘Student Support Service Centres (SSSCs)’ at four classical Ukrainian Universities. The primary approach is collaborative action research combined with mentoring programmes and communities of practice. The cyclical action research approach is appropriate as practically it is based on the process of systematic reflection, enquiry and action allowing improvements to the current systems. Many studies in action research also signify that the success of an action research project depends on the researcher’s success of working with other people and working within communities of practice ((Mitchell et al., 2009; Bruce & Easley, 2000). This combination of action research with mentoring and communities of practice have underpinned the approach for this

project and supported the Ukrainian institutions, staff and students move from a position of dependency to one of greater independence and professional autonomy (Manesi and Betsi, 2013). IMPRESS is a consortium of 14 partners with European Union partners in the UK, Spain, Czech and Belgium, four of the leading state universities in the Ukraine, student bodies and the Ukraine Ministry of Education and Science (see Appendix for full list of partners). The focus is the SSSCs which support students during their journey from recruitment to alumni and transform education across the five key areas: purpose, methods, quality, transparency and independence. There were five areas of work: 1. Modernisation of the recruitment process building closer links with secondary schools and involving students at the outset. 2. Improvement of placement services by using technology to strengthen communication between the students, enterprises and the university. 3. Educating students in ‘soft skills’. 4. Development of the social and wider roles of student societies. 5. Harnessing the power of alumni to support all of the above. Inter-institutional teams were established to work on each area with project oversight by a steering group comprising a lead from each partner. A mix of face to face and online communication were used to facilitate the action research process.

3

Expected Findings and Conclusion

The team successfully established SSSCs at each Ukrainian university and improved the student experience and services. The following factors have been critical:    

Buy in at senior level by the Ukraine universities/Ministry Exchange visits for staff/students to build communities of practice Student involvement at all levels from individual to institutional, national and European bodies Use of external bodies (industry/commerce) as ‘independent critical friends’

This has benefited education: Purpose: The introduction of a ‘soft skills’ course and enhanced placement support have broadened the curriculum and started to develop the ‘learning organisation’. Method: There have been many opportunities to develop from a didactic educational approach to a Socratic approach incorporating active and peer learning and encouraging greater dialogue. The soft skills course for example includes a student debate within its assessment process. Quality: Universities, student bodies and government working together has helped move the quality agenda from assurance to enhancement and break down traditional hierarchies. For example with recruitment activities, staff have shared good practice across institutions freely. Transparency: One exemplar of moving to a more transparent system is the design and delivery of the soft skills course. Staff shared resources and ideas across institutions resulting in a common module descriptor and delivery pattern. Student feedback has also been widely shared.

Autonomy: A great example is how the student bodies (Northumbria, European, Ukraine) have worked together and with university staff to exchange ideas, share practice and establish better representation and autonomy within the Ukrainian universities. Although this has been a steep learning curve and uncomfortable at times for both students and staff, the benefits are evident. In conclusion the student experience and student services has been improved and a roadmap created to support roll out across the Ukraine Higher Education sector to help it become comparable to the rest of Europe.

Keywords: student experience, soft skills, student centred, education autonomy, action research References British Council (2015). Higher Education in Ukraine: Briefing Paper. December URL: https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/ukraine_he_briefing_paper.pdf. Bruce, B.C. and Easley Jr, J.A., 2000. Emerging communities of practice: Collaboration and communication in action research. Educational Action Research, 8(2), pp.243-259. Lisi, R.D., 2002. From marbles to Instant Messenger™: Implications of Piaget's ideas about peer learning. Theory into Practice, 41(1), pp.5-12. Manesi, S., and Betsi, S., 2013. Collaborative Action Research Projects: the role of Communities of Practice and Mentoring in enhancing teachers’ Continuing Professional Development, Action Researcher in Education, 4, pp.109-121. URL: http://www.actionresearch.gr/AR/ActionResearch_Vol4/i4p6.pdf. Mitchell, S.N., Reilly, R.C. and Logue, M.E., 2009. Benefits of collaborative action research for the beginning teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2), pp.344-349.

Senge, P.M., 2000. Give me a lever long enough… and single-handed I can move the world (pp. 13-25). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Strachan, R. and Liyanage, L., 2015. Active Student Engagement: The Heart of Effective Learning. In Global Innovation of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (pp. 255-274). Springer International Publishing. Sursock, A., 2015. Trends 2015: Learning and teaching in European universities. Brüssel: European University Association. URL: http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepagelist/EUA_Trends_2015_web.

Appendix: List of IMPRESS Partners 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

University of Northumbria at Newcastle upon Tyne (United Kingdom) University of Cordoba (Spain) Tomas Bata University in Zlin (Czech Republic) European Students Union (Belgium) British Ukrainian Reach Out Centre (United Kingdom) Shoofly Publishing Ltd (United Kingdom) Fundecor (Spain) Donetsk National University (Ukraine)

9 10 11 12 13 14

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (Ukraine) V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University (Ukraine) Ivan Franko Lviv National University (Ukraine) Ministry of Education and Science, Youth and Sport of Ukraine (Ukraine) Ukrainian Association of Students' Self-Government (Ukraine) Donetsk Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Ukraine)