Contextual fluidity and contextual interventions

The focus on disruptive contexts (DC) had recognised that the attribution of blame could lead to the polarisation of students and lecturers, leading to animosity and misunderstandings (Luparell 2004; Clark and Springer 2010). The concept of contextual fluidity emerged from the exploration of DC and the following contextual approaches and associated intervention framework can be used to enable a way of seeing and promoting a deeper understanding of incivility and as a model to inform and guide interventions accordingly (Clark 2008c; Williams and Lauerer 2013). These will be used integrally in the training and education programmes, recommending strategies for engaging with the relative contexts

.

9.4.1 Contextual definition of Incivility

The participants had worked collaboratively, without my direct involvement, to develop both a definition of incivility and to identify contextual management interventions. As a consequence the recommendations are based upon these contributions and my personal interpretations. To begin with I am promoting the following contextual definition of incivility;

―Incivility involves a personal internal reaction to both active and passive behaviour characterised by the absence of civility as defined by a consensus of individuals (at a group, professional, organisational and societal level) implicitly or through a formal code of conduct‖.

This primarily reflects the participants‟ contributions; however I have included the internal perspective and highlighted the passive nature of incivility, where inaction can lead to what Krause (2005) terms as “inertia” and Mann (2001, 2008) believes this can exponentially lead to student alienation. Within the study I highlighted my concerns with the various words and terms that are used to capture literature relating to, for example, disruptive behaviour, bullying and misconduct. This I believe can lead to uncertainty, missed opportunities and confusion. I am recommending the use of the singular word “incivility” which can be a unifying term, accommodating the other elements together under one “umbrella”.

168

This definition of incivility emerged from the collaborative process, accommodating the contextual perspective and it acknowledges the importance of having a “code of conduct”. This could originate from a professional governing body, such as the NMC (2008) and equally pertinently, as espoused by Suplee et al (2008), evolve from ongoing discussions and reflect initiatives such as student charters, developed within the HE institution itself. This definition will be integral to the following contextual recommendations and the associated contextual intervention framework (CIF) (see diagram 14 on next page). Equally as important, I am also recommending the use of the 6 Ds framework62 _{which explicitly reflects the devaluing effect of incivility if it is not}

managed effectively. This will be used as a structure to explore some of the main issues, complementing and accommodating some of the key studies and associated definitions of incivility (Luparell 2004; Burns and Pope 2007; Clark and Springer 2007b) and civility (Clark & Carnosso 2006; Clark 2010). I will now go on to develop recommendations as proposed by the research participants themselves, beginning with the internal context.

9.4.2 The Internal Context

This focuses upon the promotion of reflection, self awareness and empathetic relationships (See [a] in diagram 14 the applied contextual framework on next page, this is a development on from the earlier diagrams 10, 11 & 13). Forni (2003) and Hallewell & Mousley (2003) all believe that empathising enables a deeper understanding of incivility and is developed and nurtured through the notions of the internal context, personal narratives and internal dialogues (Ignatow 2009). Clark and Davis Kenaley‟s (2011) dimensional model of empowerment63 _{can be used as a}

structure to facilitate both the application and exploration of these. This process of engagement with the self, through reflection, can develop self confidence and esteem (Reason & Bradbury 2001, 2008; Smith et al 2009). Practically Clark and Springer (2010) recommend the use of stress management exercises, complemented with supportive coaching and mentoring programmes, as an intervention to build confidence and minimise anxiety associated with the learning and teaching process, for both students and lecturers. These can be developed linking with the existing expertise within the mental health nursing team and the student counselling services. See a) “internal contextual interventions” in diagram 14. These “internal” strategies have a fluid relationship with the other identified contexts, where the individual is situated centrally and relates to and engages with the contexts accordingly.

62 _{See page 103.}

169

170

9.4.3 The Immediate Context

The participants, as identified within the study at a number of stages, recognised the integral importance of the pivotal basic essentials (PBE). Working closely with the estates department and linking this into the existing students and staff forums, an open and ongoing debate should be promoted, reinforcing the importance of these basics, especially with respects to their relationship with incivility. It was also recognised that the open discussion associated with the development of the civility contracts was most likely to take place with a classroom and that the environment should be a “congenial space” (Mann 2008) which enables this to happen (see b in diagram 14). Once again the dynamic and fluid nature of context is reinforced, where the individual relates to the contexts which surround them and these reciprocally are influenced by what is inside them, the internal context.

9.4.4 The Institutional Context

Bayer (2004), Clark and Springer (2007a, 2007b) and Altmiller (2012) all reinforce the importance of developing and disseminating policies and good practice in promoting civility within the wider organisational context. Clark (2008c) is an advocate of providing training and education and the research participants equally recognised the integral role that these initiatives could play. Having already discussed the importance of promoting ERS, the use of civility contracts and the notion of contextual fluidity, I will now make further organisational recommendations, building upon these participant foundations.

9.4.4a Teaching Workshop/Module

Participants had been clear that civility could be disseminated through workshops and/or teaching sessions for both groups. These could be planned and delivered as preparation for the development of the civility contracts. This was also seen as an opportunity of capturing useful content and ideas which would be fed into an in house “training programme”. This could involve a specific module, developed as part of the institution‟s academic learning and teaching portfolio (Bayer 2004; Clark and Springer 2007a, 2007b), although it is accepted that this would have to be negotiated and navigated through the existing structures.

Practically I have developed a structure for a specific teaching module (for staff) with elements that can be accommodated into the student curriculum, integrating them into the existing enhancement initiatives (Tippitt et al 2009). The following indicative module

171

content reflects both the structure of this study and the key findings and recommendations provided by the participants and focuses upon student engagement and the enhancement of learning. The actual plans for these sessions can be structured using the sessional templates adopted for the workshop programme (see appendices) and the contextual and power pro-formas can be utilised or adapted accordingly (see table 9 below).

172

As recommended by Clark and Springer (2007a, 2007b) the key issues and good practice arising from the workshops, with the agreement and consent of the participants, could be introduced and integrated into staff induction programmes (Suplee et al 2008). This could equally be incorporated within the existing support structures, for example;

 Peer review system  Mentorship framework

 Encourage cross university engagement by linking with the learning and teaching strategies from different faculties.

Obviously a case would have to be made for this to happen and this could be linked to the potential improvement in quality measures, both for students and lecturers alike.

9.4.4b Organisational Quality Assurance

As highlighted in the findings chapter, the participants believed that civility should become part of the ―measuring process‖. Outcome measures based upon the research findings and other associated studies (Clark & Springer 2007a, 2007b; Marchiondo et al 2010) could provide a baseline for measuring improvements. Existing structures can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions:

 Through ongoing module evaluations in course committee meetings  Feedback from the NSS, especially in relation to organisation and delivery  Use of institutional driven surveys: feedback from students and lecturers  Anecdotal evidence; reduction in incivility

Clark et al (2013) are clear that interventions, at all levels, should be founded upon the development of collegiate relationships, and achieved through the provision of open forums promoting a collective responsibly for managing incivility. These spaces also offer up the opportunity of “demystifying” some of the institutional rules and regulations. Contextualising these and linking them in a meaningful way to some of the key thematic findings, is a way of bringing them to life and grounding them in the groups‟ personal awareness, enhancing their knowledge and understanding, enabling them to “look beyond the obvious”.