Focus
We present the outcomes of research into undergraduates’ emotional experiences while reading primary scientific literature (PSL).
Background/context
Academic reading is an invisible process crucial to knowledge acquisition in higher education. Exposure to PSL is unavoidable, but reading PSL is an unpleasant experience for many (Hou et al., 2023). Readers’ emotions impact motivation and persistence, strategy use, and comprehension (Bohn-Gettler & Rapp, 2011). However, limited studies examine responses to different sections of typically structured PSL and the key contributors to emotions experienced.
Description
We asked 150 US college students recruited via CloudResearch’s Connect platform to read an open access PSL text on a psycho-social topic of contemporary interest and report their emotions.
Method
After reading each section of a scientific article, participants rated the intensity of seven epistemic emotions: surprise, curiosity, excitement, confusion, anxiety, frustration and boredom (Pekrun et al., 2017), reported other emotions experienced, and described perceived main causes of their emotions.
Evidence
Our results showed different patterns for positive and negative emotions. The highest reported intensities of positive emotions were in the Introduction. These dropped in the middle (Methods and Results) and rose again at the end (Discussion). Whereas the intensity of negative emotions was lower at the start, rose sharply in the middle (Results), and dropped in the Discussion. Overall, the most intense emotion reported during the Introduction, Method and Discussion reading was curiosity, while the Results section predominantly generated confusion.
Contribution
A clearer, more detailed understanding of cognitive and emotional responses can inform the design of research-led supports for strategic and self-regulatory academic reading skills development in undergraduates, and shed more light on the complex role of emotion in higher learning.
Engagement
Participants will be invited to brainstorm with us possible implications of these findings for our practice as academics and academic developers.

Focus: This showcase focuses on cross-institutional Collaborative Reflective Circles (CRC) as a method to support dialogic and reflective learning in higher education curricula. Participants gather in small groups to voice, share, listen and offer feedback in a combination of modalities.

Background/Context: Emerging from the HERDSA Conference 2022, 8 staff from 4 universities initiated a research group to explore CRC as one dialogic method. Motivation included developing a pedagogical approach to enhance critical reflexivity in inclusive teaching and learning, and gather evidence around experience and impact.

Description: CRCs follow a dialogic, turn-taking, active listening, reflective process utilised across educational, community, and industry settings. By enhancing reflection literacy (Chan & Lee, 2021) participants speak beyond recounts of lived experience, or retelling their biographical stories, (Lim & Thavour, 2021) towards a more critical engagement in learning.

Methods: McCormack & Kennelly’s (2011) social model of reflection was adopted to structure the relational nature of circle talk in education. Research during 2022 and 2023 gathered participant data via online surveys, interviews, peer reflections, and classroom observations.

Evidence: CRCs positively impacted academic-participant experience in a Capstone assessment, which corroborated with the authentic, transforming nature of deep reflection in and on learning. Outcomes include the intention for academic-participants to lead CRCs within their teaching and industry workplaces.

Contribution: CRC’s equip teachers and academics with transformative pedagogic skills and dialogic competences to design critical reflexivity and lead CRCs. Further research examining the correlation between participation in CRCs and career advancement may contribute to broader implications of CRCs in higher education curricula. A comparative study between institutions integrating CRCs into their teaching methodologies may provide benchmarks and methods for wider implementation.

Engagement prompts:
(1) Is reflectively articulating what we’ve learned crucial to the learning experience?
(2) What are the drivers to move reflection into action, which methods work best?

Focus: We present the outcome of an initiative involving the design, facilitation, and evaluation of a new group assessment for an undergraduate business course consisting of one distance cohort (approximately 150 students) and internal cohorts at two locations (approximately 20 and 140 students).
Background/context: Seeking to uphold constructive alignment, improve pedagogical practices, respond to artificial intelligence advancements, support transferable skills development for students, and maintain sustainable teaching workloads, we endeavoured to design impactful group assessment that works for staff and students.
Description: Teachers and curriculum developers collaborated to create the assessment from scratch, including group structure, task details, supporting resources, transparency for students, and learning management system (LMS) tools to support administrative processes. Design considered integration with the overall curriculum, students’ past experiences in assessed groupwork, meaningful tasks, and consistently pointing students toward decisions (Davidson et al., 2014). Student-negotiated evaluation required groups to agree and propose items for the course self and peer evaluation tool. LMS tools were leveraged to create varying milestone activities for an interesting and efficient student experience, while providing structured support to aid and monitor progress (Cohen & Lotan, 2014).
Method: Quantitative data from LMS student interaction, self and peer evaluation, and course survey reports were collected, along with open-ended feedback about the assessment, from staff and students.
Evidence: Report metrics and qualitative responses, along with overall course grades and on-time submission comparisons with prior cohorts, demonstrate the positive outcome and effectiveness.
Contribution: We provide an example of designing, facilitating, and evaluating assessed groupwork for diverse cohorts, including large and online classes. We also contribute to the scholarship of collaborative learning.
Engagement: We ask for audience experiences with groupwork assessment, including fears, hesitations, or resistance to implementation, specifically for large or online cohorts. We provide practical examples to overcome actual and perceived barriers through pedagogy-led design.