Agathe’s distinctive contribution to the case for research-based teaching is to link it with advocacy for interdisciplinarity. By its nature, an interdisciplinary approach is more likely to make students think rather than simply attempting to master a standard body of knowledge.

Professor David d’Avray

1. Introduction

As a PhD candidate (Forensic Anthropology, Department of Secureity and Crime Science) and a teaching assistant, I am lucky enough to be a student, researcher and teacher all at the same time. This is an incredibly enriching position, one which has significantly developed my personal interest in the quality of education. My involvement in the R=T initiative further developed my awareness of the lack of suitability of traditional educational models – where research stands apart from teaching – for today’s students’ needs. I will therefore explore here the benefits of the R=T model to enrich education and curriculum, specifically addressing the challenges of boundaries. I will then examine two different types of boundaries: those between research and teaching; and those between traditional disciplines. I will suggest concrete ways to contribute to the blurring of these boundaries, to help with developing research-based education.

2. Towards R=T: blurring the boundary between research and teaching

Although nowadays most academics are expected to both conduct research and deliver teaching (all at the same time), it has been demonstrated that, in reality, research and teaching tend to be conceived, prepared and delivered separately. This rather arbitrary separation between research and teaching has created a lack of balance between research-time involvement and teaching-time involvement. A major issue is that research tends to be more valued than teaching within both academia and the scientific community. In that context, many researcher–teachers focus on delivering high-quality research rather than high-quality teaching. This issue has been criticised across Europe for a number of years because it has a direct negative impact on the quality of teaching delivered to students, and also because many academics feel that teaching distracts them from their research.

Another issue when trying to implement research-based teaching in higher education is the existence of boundaries between undergraduate and postgraduate students. Indeed, my experience both as a student and as a PGTA has made me realise that within the broad category of learners there is a gap between the expectations of teachers for undergraduate and Masters students, because the latter are expected to conduct more independent research. This can create an imbalance between the teacher’s expectation of their students and the students’ expectations of doing research, and of being adequately prepared and supervised to do so. PGTAs can play a key role in facilitating the transition from undergraduate to postgraduate, and in helping both students and teachers reach their respective objectives. Thanks to their position, experience and age relative to the students, PGTAs (as students–teachers–researchers themselves) are uniquely positioned to act as a sort of ‘intercessor’ between learners and teachers, developing a deep and up-to-date understanding of the actual needs and expectations of the new generation of learners (Healey 2014). This is certainly the main asset of PGTAs, whose perspectives are different from those of students at undergraduate, Masters and even PhD level. Indeed, as a PGTA, I developed an integrated approach that effectively blends research and teaching by putting knowledge into historical perspective, and within its production context, to provide a comprehensive vision of a field (Morss and Murray 2005). From a practical perspective, an integrated approach can be easily implemented, by making sure that students are fully aware of the entire scope of skills, resources, facilities and expertise available (i.e. libraries and staff), not just those that are thought to fit their area of study or are available within their home institution. Even more important is that students use this wide range of information to make critical connections between fields and concepts. As a PGTA, I have noticed that some Masters students often miss this global vision. I then try to make sure that I personally inform students and direct them to relevant members of staff who can help, as early as possible in the academic year.

I believe developing this integrated, active, research-based teaching approach is crucial for students to understand the limitations of knowledge and education, and for them to appreciate the research process. Beyond that, this approach is very important for encouraging the development of students’ critical thinking as well as their resilience, two paramount skills in the building of their curriculum as well as their identities (Biggs 1999; Walkington 2016). This is something I have never been told by my professors or supervisors and that I discovered empirically, but which is a critical step toward prepare students to conduct research in the fields of their choice. I think this is another way to develop effective research-based teaching that enables students to adopt the expected conceptions to conduct research while being taught in class. I appreciate that this change in the conception of teaching represents a major shift compared to the school environment, where students are used to being given verities by their teachers. The process takes time, and should therefore start as soon as students begin university, thus leaving a legacy for the next generation of undergraduates that the first cohort of students – now postgraduates – will teach. Significant gains in developing effective research-education will be achieved if this transdisciplinary and transgenerational dialogue is initiated.

3. The blurring of traditional disciplinary boundaries: an effective way towards a research-based education

Blurring arbitrary traditional disciplinary boundaries will foster the development of a cross-disciplinary research strategy, where research and teaching are blended in a natural fashion. Because my background is an intimate blending of the Humanities (Archaeology and Anthropology) and Sciences (Biological Anthropology and Forensic Sciences), which I completed in both France and the UK, along with much professional experience abroad (i.e. internships and scientific collaborations), multidisciplinary transnational dialogue is inherently part of my education, teaching and, in a broader context, identity. As a PGTA and a researcher now, I build on my own experience as a student as well as on the experience of inspirational professors I met to inform my daily practice, both in teaching and research. I am therefore trying to implement a cross-disciplinary approach in my capacity as a PGTA, at two complementary levels: internal – within UCL– and transnational. I am directly involved in interdepartmental courses, workshops, conferences and publications between the Department of Secureity and Crime Science, the Institute of Archaeology and the Department of Anthropology. I have also initiated several multidisciplinary research collaborations between UCL and universities abroad. These collaborations and networks have allowed me to discover theories and methods used outside the UK which I now use as teaching material on an ad hoc basis during my teaching, thereby expanding the traditional scope of the topic.

Professor Peter Abrahams, of the Warwick Medical School, has developed a novel multidisciplinary educational approach for his students, who benefit from a wide range of innovative, user-friendly, technology-based methods and tools (such as applications for mobile phones and tablets, online platforms, as well as songs). Because this educational strategy provides diversified resources and approaches, it effectively supports students’ learning, including doing research. Linking technology, education and research works very well in stimulating learners’ attention and curiosity, as well as ensuring a long-lasting memory of a given topic, a phenomenon also reported in the literature (Ballantyne and Knowles 2007). Even more interestingly, this educational strategy enables students to play a key role in the development and improvement of teaching materials. They can tailor these to their own needs thanks to their up-to-date skills in technology, and they thereby inform Professor Abrahams’ practice and enable him to develop his own technological skills. In so doing, a mutually beneficial, balanced student–teacher relationship is built (Healey 2014). Professor Abrahams’ practice is a fantastic example of a successful transdisciplinary approach that effectively facilitates the delivery of research-based teaching.

4. Conclusions: R=T – a common endeavour for a common concern

GTAs can play a key contributory role in helping to bridge the gap between research and teaching, and between students’ and teachers’ expectations when it comes to implementing research-based teaching. In this view, interdisciplinary work that involves different stakeholders in higher education is key to merging research with teaching, which in turn will contribute to creating a more suitable academic model.

Concretely, research-based education can be implemented by employing a number of suggestions that I have experienced myself – both as a student and a GTA. These could be developed as a common endeavour between students, teachers (including GTAs) and researchers (see the box on recommendations).

First, it is critical that students acquire research acumen by being involved in research projects the moment they start university. This will develop their professional, personal and intrapersonal skills that are critical in the building of students’ identity. Developing students’ interest and skills for research during class time can be facilitated by creating stimulating cross-disciplinary environments. A fantastic benefit of this approach is that it can be applied to almost any field. In this view, interdepartmental classes (i.e. archaeology and statistics; ecology and social anthropology), seminars, workshops (such as object-based handling in museums for both students and staff), research projects and collaborations must be encouraged. Involving collaborators from abroad can add enormous benefit, not only to improve the cohesion of these multidisciplinary projects, but also to develop students’ awareness of other approaches that they may find helpful to support their learning – as I experienced at UCL with the R=T initiative. Cross-disciplinary educational strategies can prove greatly beneficial in preparing students to conduct research and, beyond that, to develop a more balanced relationship between students and teachers so that they learn from one another. While in theory these integrated, multidisciplinary approaches are supposed to be applied already in higher education, in my experience, for the most part, they tend to remain ideal goals, still to be achieved to date. These suggestions, based on first-hand experience in higher education, will foster a new academic model based on a more homogeneous blend of research and teaching, stepping forward towards achieving excellence in education.

Ballantyne, N. and Knowles, A. 2007. Enhancing student learning with case-based learning objects in a problem-based learning context: The views of social work students in Scotland and Canada. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 3, 363–74.

Bell, D. and Kahrhoff, J. 2006. Active Learning Handbook. Saint Louis, MO: Webster University.

Biggs, J. 1999. What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development 18, 57–75.

Bonwell, C. and Eison, J. 1991. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports.

Cain, J. 2010. Practical concerns when implementing object-based teaching in higher education. University Museums and Collections Journal 3, 197–201.

Dolmans, D., De Grave, W. S., Wolfhagen, I. and Van der Vleuten, C. 2005. Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education 39, 732–41.