Editor’s Introduction 
 

Welcome to our eleventh issue of Compass, Journal of Learning and Teaching. This issue 

contains a balance of opinion pieces, case studies and articles tackling a variety of issues 

related to teaching and learning in Higher Education. Two of the papers, one by Jennifer 

Field and one by Ray Stoneham were presented at the University of Greenwich annual 

SHIFT conference entitled Sparking Ideas: Sharing Educational Innovation. The conference 

offered colleagues from the University of Greenwich an opportunity to discuss learning and 

teaching issues, and we see Compass as a means of taking those debates forward and 

opening them to a wider audience. 

Jennifer Field opens the ‘Opinion pieces’ section of the Journal with her reflection on the 

contrasts between English and Chinese pedagogy in mathematics. She suggests that the 

Chinese nationally-consistent emphasis on mastery of conceptual understanding, rather than 

the English preoccupation with differentiation and accelerated learning, might well serve to 

meet the British Government’s aim to improve maths capability from primary school to HE, 

making graduates more employable and the nation better able to compete globally. She 

considers the huge value placed by China upon the training and continuing development of 

teachers to provide specialist maths tuition for all children from primary school onwards and 

upon daily provision of sufficient time outside class to enable staff to support individual pupils 

to meet whole-class expectations.  She advocates English selection only of those features of 

Chinese practice which fit the UK cultural context, avoiding excessive pressure on children. 

In the second Opinion Piece, Patrick Ainley depicts the growth of what he regards as a new 

model of Higher Education, and analyses the ways in which Business Schools have become 

multi-faceted, creating what he terms ‘The Business Studies University’, embracing a 

plethora of disciplines and courses (‘collections of study’) loosely linked by the title 

‘Business’.  Students within this have choice, the ‘central guiding activity’ of The BSU, by 

which they may acquire mastery not of all business knowledge, but what will equip them well 

for future employment.  He considers the possible negative effects of a student choice-led 

environment governed by contemporary market forces, including the possible creation of a 

two-tier HE education system, but concludes that positive results might be the reconstituting 

of an academic community and development of the various specialist interests and expertise 

of staff. 

Ray Stoneham sets out to consider the value to universities of productive application of big 

data and learning analytics, not only in predicting outcomes for students but also in making 

appropriate interventions to support their learning. The author emphasises the importance of 

tailoring the system and interpreting the data to suit the context and the individual student; 

he also underlines the need for transparency and institutional agreement on ethical issues to 

minimise risk and maximise benefits. 

The section concludes with Dorothea Fadipe’s opinion piece; a cheerfully cynical view of the 

measurement of the quantifiable by means of summative assessment – which is given more 

and more emphasis by demands for institutional accountability in a market-driven world, and 

by the expectations of students who see themselves as paying customers - nevertheless 

celebrates the challenge to reductionism by a perception of the recent growth in risk-based 

curriculum design, significant student contribution to the conversation of education and 

verification of achievement by a more phenomenological consideration of student learning.  

The author of this opinion piece believes that a balance struck between summative 

assessment and phenomenological aspects might just be achievable.  



Editor’s Introduction 
 

The two case studies deal with the use of technology for teaching and learning. Greenwich 

University’s Faculty of Engineering and Science investment in a humanoid robot led to 

experimentation with student-robot interaction during an assessment activity. In order to 

make a self-timed, audio-visual presentation on a technical matter, MSc students could 

choose between the now more traditional PowerPoint/video productions and the novelty of 

filming their engagement with the robot. Richard Seals hoped that their having to program 

the robot with a combination of voice and movements would lead them to consider the 

impact of kinaesthetic elements in their own delivery upon an audience and therefore make 

adjustments to their personal approach, an editing process rarely evident in the work of 

those using PowerPoint and video. Seals concludes that, though there were some 

challenges in terms of time and accessibility to the robot and though its touch-screen user 

interface proved to be a laborious way of programming it, fascinating contrasts between the 

approaches of each of the students who used it were evident in the outcomes and indicate 

its future applicability. 

The second Case Study by Barry Spencer describes the use of a 3D virtual world to meet 

the needs of Years 1 and 2 students studying for Foundation Degrees in Software 

Development and Network Computing at Bromley College. Such use of technology seems to 

have generated interest, enthusiasm and collaboration as the students produced a desktop 

program modelling rocket flight. The author chose this visual, guided and interactive medium 

to ensure that students with no prior understanding of the maths, physics and technology of 

rocketry would acquire the knowledge and skills to meet the project requirements. College 

facilities provided appropriate hardware for the task. Spencer outlines the theoretical 

foundation of the exercise and provides student feedback information confirming 

considerable user satisfaction and enjoyment. 

 

Finally, the article section contains two articles. The first one is by Craig Morris, responsible 

for the development and delivery of a core employability course for Year 2 University of 

Greenwich Sociology undergraduates, considers the tricky implications of such a course 

within the context of a critical discipline. The author explores the conflict between neoliberal 

discourses on employability and critical responses within sociological approaches to it, 

concluding that a pragmatic attitude adopted by many sociology students at the end of their 

course reflects both their critical stance and yet also their awareness and understanding of 

the realities of inequality in the employability game that they play; with the support of an 

institution which itself is aspirational and already vigorously pursuing employability goals 

whilst sustaining a critical view, they will increasingly be able to take advantage of 

Greenwich’s growing social capital in their quest for desirable jobs. 

 

The final article and the final piece in this edition is by Patrick Baughan, Sian Lindsay and 

Pam Parker. With the aim of enhancing Higher Education teaching development, City 

University London TDP team members report on their review of ten years of published 

research into programmes for continuing development of staff. They identify well-

documented themes, such as the evaluation of programme impact, and areas as yet barely 

researched: the inter-professional nature of TDPs, participants’ motivations for undertaking 

them and their experiences of them.  The authors recognise the relevance of their review, 

not only to their own further research towards improving the quality of the City University 



Editor’s Introduction 
 

London TDP, but also, more widely, to those in other HE institutions who wish to develop 

teaching staff to meet challenge and change and to better the learning of their students. 

All of the opinion pieces, case studies and articles presented in this issue offer interesting 

insight into current practice within HE across a variety of disciplines. We hope that you enjoy 

reading the accounts and look forward to receiving your responses and your publications. 

 

Monika Pazio  

Editor 

Educational Development Unit, University of Greenwich