Thorley Embedding of employer and practitioner input into

student portfolios – results of project commissioned

by the UK Higher Education Academy

EMBEDDING OF EMPLOYER AND PRACTITIONER INPUT INTO

STUDENT PORTFOLIOS – RESULTS OF PROJECT COMMISSIONED
BY THE UK HIGHER EDUCATION ACADEMY

MARK THORLEY

Coventry University, UK
m.thorley@coventry.ac.uk

Whilst employability has become one of the main drivers in Audio education globally and in particular in the UK,
the meaningful input of employers and/or practitioners into student work is inconsistent. This project,
commissioned by the UK Higher Education Academy and carried out by Coventry University aims to highlight
the potential benefits of embedding employer and/or practitioner into the development of student portfolios.
Through a distinct two phase engagement, it seeks to examine whether the relevance and quality of student work,
together with their aspiration and performance is improved by industry-orientated involvement.

INTRODUCTION This paper focuses on a project commissioned by the

Employability has become one of the key drivers in
Higher Education in the UK and institutions are now
required to show the proportion of their graduates
entering appropriate occupations. This concept has
particular relevance for Audio education as firstly,
many students studying the subject do so due to their
career aspiration. Secondly, the industry to which they
aspire is fragmented and typified by large proportions of
freelancers and small businesses.
Industry focus within Audio, Music Technology and
similar courses can, however be inconsistent. Some
courses are accredited through particular schemes (such
as JAMES in the UK), some have piecemeal industry
input provided in the form of ‘guest talks’, whilst others
have industry professionals consulted during course
development or validation. The fragmented
characteristic of the industry is therefore reflected in an
inconsistent approach across educational institutions.
This inconsistency means that student and employer
perspectives are not always best aligned. If a student is
looking to bring together the skills, knowledge and
experience gained in their studies into a form which can
be presented to the outside world, this can be made
difficult without meeting an employer/practitioner and
fully understanding the work perspective. Similarly,
employers/ practitioners rarely get the opportunity to
see, comment or guide student work because the host
institution is generally looking to present a ‘positive’
picture to a potential employer.
UK’s Higher Education Academy and conducted by
Coventry University, the aim of which was to examine
the potential of embedding employer/practitioner
involvement into student final year portfolio
development. It presents some initial findings and
observations which are relevant to employability within
Audio, Music Technology and related fields.
1. LITERATURE AND CONTEXTUAL
FACTORS
In 2008, the Higher Education Funding Council for
England (HEFCE) released its report ‘Stepping Higher:
workforce development through employer-higher
education partnership’. As Ashton [1] notes, the report
addressed the need for industry and education to
increase their networks and collaboration in order to
include employability within the curriculum. This same
issue of employability was highlighted in the Brown
Review in 2010. Dawes and Jewell note that there has
also been an increased emphasis upon developing the
skills and capabilities which employers require in order
to prepare them for the world of work [2]. This is not
always seen as straightforward however, as some
students may not articulate these skills particularly well
[3].
Much of the recent context within UK Higher Education
is presently missing from the literature. Of particular
note is the issue of data produced by the Higher
Education Statistics Agency, and in particular the
Destinations of Leavers from Higher Education

AES 50th International Conference, Murfreesboro, TN, USA, 2013 July 25–27 1
Thorley
(DLHE) data. Some six months after graduation, UK
graduates are required to fill in a survey showing what
occupation or course of study they are engaged in. The
purpose is to reflect the benefit of taking a course of
study and provide an idea of where the study takes the
student. This data can be presented by course,
department or even institution and thus provides a
tangible snapshot to prospective students and their
parents. It is therefore now not sufficient to support
students through their studies towards a successful
degree classification – the qualification must now be
seen to place the student in a position appropriate to
their newly acquired level of skill and knowledge. This
can have a significant impact upon the reputation of a
particular course, area of study, department or
institution.
This presents a particular focus and challenge for
courses in Audio, Music Technology, and many similar
fields. Primarily, this is because many of these courses
were developed in an era of widening participation with
UK Government policy focussing on increasing Higher
Education participation. Reflective of this, since
1996/97, numbers of students in the creative sector have
increased by 37.9% [3]. During this era, the focus has
often been on developing courses which are attractive to
school leavers and may be aspirational or glamorous in
their appeal. However, as the DCMS (4) has shown,
opportunities for creative arts students (in particular
music, dance and drama) can be more limited than other
disciplines. Paradoxically, many courses developed in
the era of widening participation relate to industries
which are competitive and often not straightforward to
enter – music, film and fashion are obvious examples.
Although Higher Education institutions may not have
developed courses in contradiction of industry needs
and trends, the need to provide industry with particular
numbers of graduates with specific skill sets was not
necessarily well-articulated in course design.
2. THE CHALLENGES OF INDUSTRY
INVOLVEMENT
The involvement of industry apparently needed is not
always straightforward. Firstly, as there is often latitude
over the employers who are consulted, there is no
accepted standard of who the employer should be. The
choice could extend from consultation with a
recognised industry body, or simply involve contacting
an industry freelancer in the same town or city. As a
course team is usually looking to satisfy a validation
panel of the consultation process, the rigour of the
consultees chosen is not necessarily assured. Secondly,
AES 50th International Conference, Murfreesboro, TN, USA, 2013 July 25–27
Embedding of employer and practitioner input into student
portfolios – results of project commissioned
by the UK Higher Education Academy
industry professionals are not always best placed to
comment on course developments. For example, they
may have limited appreciation for the processes
involved, may not be familiar with the language and
protocols of, for example, Programme Specification
documents, and may be over-concerned with the
skill-set needed specifically in their own business.
Courses do, of course, involve industry professionals in
other ways, one of which is giving industry guest talks
or panels. The issue here however, is that the industry
professional is typically coming in 'cold'. They are
unlikely to have any in-depth understanding of the
student audience or their needs. This is firstly because of
time – the industry professional will only want to
commit as much time as the fee (if there is one) justifies.
Secondly, institutions are generally looking to impress
industry professionals so that the courses taught there
are taken seriously and its graduates are well thought of.
This is why the ubiquitous ‘tour of the studios’ is so
common on the misguided premise that the facilities
must somehow reflect the quality of teaching and
student experience (in actual fact, great learning can
take place in poor facilities and vice-versa). The result
then is that the industry professional is not properly
exposed to students and the work which they are
involved in producing.
The fragmented nature of the audio and music industries
also presents a particular challenge. In the music
industry, approximately 90% of people work part-time
or on a self-employed basis [3]. According to the Arts
Council, 42% are self-employed (compared with only
12.6% in the general population) [5]. This means that it
is often difficult to obtain a consensus view on what the
employability skills needed are.
3. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION
3.1 Project setting
The setting for the project is a final year module within
the Music and Creative Technologies Programme at
Coventry University. The module is a Personal
Development Planning-orientated module (PDP), and
revolves around students seeing their expertise and
capabilities within the context of the work environment.
PDP is defined by the UK’s Higher Education Academy
(HEA) and the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) as 'a
structured and supported process undertaken by an
individual to reflect upon their own learning,
performance and/or achievement and to plan for their
personal, educational and career development'[6].
2
Thorley
Within the UK, it has become in vogue in recent years,
and courses need to show how they are covering PDP
within their structure. This can commonly take a
separate route, where particular modules within courses
deal with PDP. However, PDP can also be embedded
into other modules as an alternative approach. Whilst
the initial push for PDP has now largely subsided, this
has taken place from the understanding that its
incorporation is now accepted and implemented as a
matter of course. It is important to note that PDP should
take place throughout student study. So, whilst the focus
of PDP may be towards a career as the end of a degree
programme is approached, PDP should be guiding
student development in earlier years too.
The module is assessed by a portfolio which can be in
any form - paper-based, electronic media based such as
CD or DVD or utilising some form of online delivery.
Within the portfolio, the student must show analysis of
their own capability through an audit, and show
understanding of three possible work roles through the
construction of three job descriptions one of which it
then chosen to build the remainder of the portfolio
around. The portfolio then includes extensive evidence
as to where past achievements, experiences and
knowledge map across to the chosen role. This is
combined with an action plan of how the student plans
to develop based upon the gaps in their capability. In its
existing form, it has a number of key elements which
relate to the QAA's 'Personal Development Planning:
Guidance for Institutional Policy and Practice in Higher
Education’ document.
3.2 Project Implementation
In order to examine the impact of employer embedding,
the project facilitated the involvement of
employers/practitioners in the existing module outlined.
It was decided that employer/practitioner involvement
would have an effect at two specific stages – before
development of the portfolio took place and afterwards.
The idea was therefore that the employers/practitioners
could ‘inform’ the work and later assess the work.
The involvement pre-portfolio consisted of an industry
panel with six industry professionals: a mastering
engineer, an acoustic designer, a recording engineer, a
recording engineer/producer, a high-end mixing desk
marketer, and a graduate of the Programme running his
own studio. The aim of the panel was to cover some of
the more obvious occupations which Music Technology
graduates go into. As well as the panel, social media was
used extensively to build interest in the event, to foster
AES 50th International Conference, Murfreesboro, TN, USA, 2013 July 25–27
Embedding of employer and practitioner input into student
portfolios – results of project commissioned
by the UK Higher Education Academy
some thought before the event, and to try to get students
to think of issues they wished to be raised beforehand.
On the day, the panel was managed with a series of
questions which could be tailored and changed
according to the discussion.
After the portfolios had been produced, they were made
available to the industry panel for assessment. For the
ease of this process, the portfolios were produced in
Mahara (a type of e-portfolio software). Some students
built a web site instead, but both of these methods meant
that the industry panel could assess the portfolios
remotely. The academic teaching the module also
assessed the portfolios.
4. METHODOLOGY FOR RESEARCH
In looking at the initial outcomes of the employer
embedding, this research takes a participant observation
approach. There are a number of benefits to this
approach. Firstly, as Manis and Meltzer note [7], ‘the
task of interpreting these meanings and experiences can
only be achieved through participation with those
involved.’ Secondly, it best facilitates the need for the
researcher to interpret very different cultures – namely
those of undergraduate students and industry
professionals. The researcher is therefore the ‘research
instrument’ and as Robson elaborates [8], best placed to
demonstrate the great sensitivity and personal skills
necessary for the collection of worthwhile data.
5. RESULTS, OBSERVATIONS AND LESSONS
LEARNED
5.1 The academic view
Whilst there is extensive data available on student
marks, methodologically speaking, it would be
problematic to compare the data between years without
a large degree of scepticism. Clearly, these are different
cohorts, and also the other conditions of delivery cannot
be guaranteed to be the same. However, that said, from
the academic’s point of view, there were several
changes observed and measured. Firstly, participation in
the module was greater than the previous year, and
better than other modules at the same level. Given that
the module sites student practice within a professional
setting, studying this in a real rather than theoretical
sense seems to have made the experience more
attractive for students to attend and engage with.
Attendance at the industry panel was not, however
100% which is surprising given the opportunity which it
presented. It seems that some students were still unable
to fully appreciate the value of the experience.
Secondly, the level of understanding of the professional
3
Thorley
environment was much greater when viewed from the
quality of the submitted work. There seemed to be a
much deeper appreciation of the breadth of skills which
a professional needs over and above the obvious
technical skills. This deeper appreciation ranged from
greater insight into potential jobs demonstrated by the
job descriptions, through to more targeted evidence of
capability in the portfolios. This could perhaps be
attributed to the panel as surprisingly, less of the
discussion was about technology and techniques and
more about routes into the industry, typical projects and
the breadth of capabilities needed for particular jobs.
5.2 The student view
Based upon the intervention of industry professionals,
expression of interest in the module shown through
feedback appeared higher than other modules. Students
commented positively on having the input of industry
professionals before the panel event with statements
such as the following:
As one of my personal motivations is to work in
recording, I will be looking forward to finding
out what skills are required to work consistently
with artists such as these. What the professional
demands on a recording engineer in this industry
are and how to maintain a consistent portfolio of
work.
Similarly, their expression of enthusiasm after the event
followed the same theme as typified by the following:
The panel was a great way to gain a lot of
industry knowledge, through speaking to and
taking on board the vast experience of the
professionals on the panel. I personally came
away from the afternoon with a better
understanding of working within the music
industry and the commitment that is needed to
become successful in my chosen field of work. I
found listening to and talking to the panel very
motivational, in the sense that it made me think
about things a little deeper and really push to
start my own freelance occupation. I think that
anybody that missed the panel on that Monday
afternoon really missed out!
Students additionally gained perspectives which could
not have been attained in any other way. This was
because the panel was tailored to their needs, and
because the panel discussion itself brought about
different perspectives. The following comment is
typical of this:
I felt that the session with the panel was not only
a great opportunity to gain a critical insight into
AES 50th International Conference, Murfreesboro, TN, USA, 2013 July 25–27
Embedding of employer and practitioner input into student
portfolios – results of project commissioned
by the UK Higher Education Academy
the music industry and modes of operation but to
also gain knowledge in how someone would get
to be it that in position in the first place. The
combined knowledge of the panel, as well as
their contrasting experiences I felt was a great
way to learn about the jobs in the industry, the
panel themselves were very forthright about the
industry.
There was also evidence from student feedback that
knowing that their work would be assessed by someone
other than an academic introduced an interesting
uncertainty. Not only was their work being looked at by
someone unfamiliar with their studies, it was also clear
that more risk was involved. For example, if they were
to approach one of the employers/practitioners in the
future, an opinion of their work was already formed and
it would be difficult to persuade the
employer/practitioner of much change. From this point
of view, their capability became more clearly set not just
at this point of time, but also for the foreseeable future.
Additionally, the student cohort became aware of the
opportunity and implications of presenting a group of
industry professionals with a fairly accurate view of
their collective capability. This would have future
implications for any graduates of the institution and
course in that the industry panel (and many of their
contacts) would already have an informed opinion of the
course.
A positive response was also received on the way in
which the process fostered a partnership approach to
learning. The learning took a partnership approach as
students were able to shape their own learning by
having so much influence over the information gained
from the industry panel.
5.3 The employer/practitioner view
From the employer/practitioners’ perspective, initial
feedback indicated that the experience provided a much
better understanding of the role of education in bringing
new entrants to the industry. As the
employers/practitioners spent considerable time with
students and in looking at their work, they achieved a
much greater appreciation of their position.
The panel did however, find assessing the portfolios to
be more challenging and time consuming than they
expected. As they received a variety of portfolios to
look at, it was difficult to compare and make meaningful
comments. From an overall perspective, this was not
problematic as the work was also marked by an
academic.
4
Thorley Embedding of employer and practitioner input into student
portfolios – results of project commissioned
by the UK Higher Education Academy

6. SUMMARY
Overall then, the approach resulted in better
engagement and a deeper level of learning on the part of
students. It fostered a partnership learning approach and
had advantages in allowing the employers/practitioners
to get a more accurate insight into the student work. As
a process, it can be challenging to manage though as the
employers/practitioners are not initially equipped to
assess student work. Additionally, it is somewhat risky
as the reputation of a course and institution can be
readily formed through the interaction, with
implications for future employment prospects for
graduates.

REFERENCES
[1] D. Ashton, “You just end up feeling more
professional: Media production and
industry-ready personhood” Networks, 10; 14-19
(2010).

[2] F. Dawes and M. Jewell, “Creating Enterprise:

Developing partnerships between Universities and
Creative Industries” Paper presented to the
Creative Enterprise in Higher Education
Conference, PALATINE, Lancaster University
(2005).

[3] R. Brown, “Enhancing Student Employability?:

Current practice and student experiences in HE
performing arts” Arts & Humanities in Higher
Education, 6(1); 28–49 (2007).

[4] DCMS, Creative industries: the definition of the

creative industries Available [online] (2006).

[5] L. Ball, E. Pollard and N. Stanley. Creative

graduates, creative futures. Creative Futures
Higher Education Partnership and the Institute for
Employment Studies (2010).

[6] The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher

Education. Personal development planning:
Guidance for institutional policy and practice in
Higher Education (2009).

[7] J. G. Manis and B. N. Meltzer, Symbolic

Interactionism: A reader in Social Psychology.
Allyn and Bacon (1967).

[8] C. Robson, Real World Research. Blackwell

(2011).

AES 50th International Conference, Murfreesboro, TN, USA, 2013 July 25–27 5