Dear colleagues,
We’re seeking offers to undertake blind peer-review of the following submissions to the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education (JLDHE).
If you would like to complete a review of one of the submissions, please email the designated editorial contact below.
If you haven’t reviewed for us before, please include a brief description of your interest in the topic, your relevant qualifications, expertise and/or experience in relation to the submission (up to 200 words). This might include your knowledge of the subject and/or your experience acting as a peer reviewer for academic papers or as an author or researcher in the field.
Please also join our register of reviewers and list your interests via http://journal.aldinhe.ac.uk/index.php/jldhe/user/register.
New reviewers are very welcome! We provide a developmental environment for those interested in this important community service. Why not try something new today?
| No. | Type | Title and abstract | Editorial contact |
| 1996 | Paper | Attitudes toward educator self‑disclosure: implications for power and pedagogy in higher education Educator self‑disclosure is increasingly recognised as a relational teaching practice with the potential to shape learning experiences and classroom power dynamics. This qualitative study explores student and educator perspectives on the use of self-disclosure (SD) in teaching, with particular attention to its pedagogical value. Semi‑structured interviews were conducted with six participants (three educators and three students) involved in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) education and were analysed using thematic analysis. Five themes were identified, highlighting how SD can reduce perceived power imbalances, support reflective learning through modelling, and enhance teaching by making learning more accessible and engaging. Participants also emphasised the importance of relevance, boundaries, and intentionality, noting that poorly judged disclosures may alienate students or disrupt learning. While conducted within a clinical education context, the findings are presented as context‑specific insights that can inform pedagogy across disciplines. | Amy Sampson: A.Sampson@greenwich.ac.uk |
| 2013 | Paper | Factors influencing perceptions of the Vevox interactive tool within higher education psychology lectures The purpose of this investigation was to look at factors which may influence psychology undergraduate students’ perceptions of Vevox, an interactive tool used within lectures. 103 psychology undergraduate students completed an online questionnaire in relation to their own perceptions of Vevox alongside questionnaires relating to mental health, resilience, personality and motivation. Results were analysed using correlations and a standard multiple regression. Findings demonstrated that intrinsic motivation was the only factor to predict positive perceptions of Vevox, however, there were relationships between Vevox perceptions and depression, amotivation and resilience. While the evidence suggests that a student’s intrinsic motivation may directly impact their perceptions of Vevox, further research is warranted on the mental health challenges of undergraduate students and different types of resilience. Implications and future research have been suggested in light of this. | Craig Morley: c.morley@mmu.ac.uk |
| 2000 | Opinion piece | The friction problem: why learners don’t read learning outcomes and what design can realistically fix Learning outcomes are everywhere in higher education. Many learners do not engage with them. This piece argues that friction in design contributes to this gap: the cognitive effort created by sentence length, syntactic complexity, and abstract performance criteria. Psycholinguistic evidence and the limited empirical literature on learner engagement support this claim. When friction exceeds perceived benefit, learners choose more efficient paths. They scan assignment briefs, consult peers, or draw on prior experience. This is one layer of a multifactorial problem; learner maturity, motivation, and context also matter. Seven evidence-informed design principles are proposed to reduce friction and increase the probability of engagement. Better design does not guarantee changed behaviour. Poor design creates an unnecessary barrier. This piece is a provocation: are our well-intentioned instruments actually usable by the learners they are meant to serve? | Laura Barnett: l.barnett@surrey.ac.uk |
| 1990 | Case study | Fostering academic literacies in international postgraduate students via scaffolded peer review and formative feedback cycles This case study sets out the conceptualisation, design and implementation of an initiative that sought to develop MA TESOL Studies students’ assessment and feedback literacies via iterative formative assessment and group peer review. Characteristics of the scheme that contributed to its success included repeated opportunities to engage with ‘the language of assessment and feedback’, as well as the low-stakes environment created by the peer-led elements. The case study also discusses revisions that were made to the initiative in response to initial mixed levels of engagement, highlighting the importance of carefully scaffolding student-centred initiatives, particularly for those coming from a prior educational background where learner autonomy and student-led activities may be less commonplace. Key takeaways for those implementing similar initiatives include not only the consideration of scaffolding outlined above, but also ensuring formative tasks are well-aligned to the summative assessment and exploring opportunities for a cyclical structure to provide multiple opportunities to develop assessment and feedback literacies. | Paula Villegas Verdu: pvv1@st-andrews.ac.uk |
| 2005 | Paper | Improving AI prompt literacy: experimental evidence on the effect of an online tutorial among university students This study investigated university students’ use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, focusing on prompt literacy and satisfaction with AI‑generated outputs. Ninety students from diverse subject areas completed a range of tasks using a generative AI tool of their choice, with half first completing a short online tutorial on effective prompting and output evaluation. ChatGPT was used by most participants. Overall, students reported high levels of satisfaction with AI outputs, particularly for tasks involving fixing broken codes, while satisfaction was lower for image creation and data organisation tasks. Students who completed the tutorial were significantly more likely to produce well‑structured prompts aligned with the CLEAR framework and to critically evaluate AI outputs. The findings suggest that prompt literacy is a learnable skill and that short, targeted tutorials can support more effective and reflective use of generative AI in higher education contexts. | Lee Fallin: Lee.Fallin@hull.ac.uk |
| 2006 | Paper | The use of ChatGPT in academic writing: exploring the perspectives of graduate students The developments in Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology have revolutionized various domains of human life, including the field of education. Among AI technologies, chatbots have garnered notable attention in research due to their potential to innovate the way learners write for academic purposes. Accordingly, this qualitative study aims to contribute to the ongoing research by exploring the perspectives of graduate students regarding the integration of ChatGPT in academic writing. Written surveys and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 graduate students to investigate their views. Results revealed that most participants held a positive perspective on using ChatGPT for academic writing and acknowledged its benefits in supporting their writing process. However, participants also expressed concerns about the drawbacks arising from using ChatGPT, such as inaccuracy, copyright, authorship, and plagiarism. By comprehensively analyzing the participants’ perspectives as real users, this in-depth examination provides insights that can inform and inspire further research in this field. | Lee Fallin: Lee.Fallin@hull.ac.uk |
| 2010 | Opinion piece | Inclusive in name only? Rethinking academic skills support through the lens of cultural capital Academic skills support in higher education is widely promoted as an inclusive and universally accessible resource. However, persistent attainment gaps between traditional and non-traditional students raise questions about its effectiveness in addressing inequality. This opinion paper critically examines the assumption of neutrality underpinning academic skills provision. Drawing on Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital, it argues that traditional academic skills support often reflects implicit norms aligned with dominant academic practices, which may advantage students already familiar with higher education expectations. Common delivery models, including workshops and optional one-to-one provision, frequently rely on self-selection and tacit knowledge, limiting accessibility for non-traditional students. The paper calls for a shift towards more critically informed and institutionally embedded approaches, particularly through curriculum-integrated academic literacies. It concludes that rethinking academic skills provision is essential if it is to contribute meaningfully to equity and widening participation agendas. | Vic Boyd: Victoria.Boyd@cityofglasgowcollege.ac.uk |
| 1941 | Paper | Exploring the readiness of Kurdish EFL teachers for AI-based evaluation The present study aims to explore the impact of Artificial Intelligence in feedback and assessment processes within Kurdish EFL educational settings emphasizing the teachers’ viewpoints. The researchers employed a mixed methods approach to obtain the objectives of the study. Data were collected through survey questionnaires through (142) and semi-structured interviews from 20 university Kurdish EFL teachers. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 27.0, employing one-way ANOVA to compare the mean scores across academic levels of education and teaching experience. The findings indicated that lecturers viewed AI as useful in feedback and assessment, particularly in terms of its usefulness and impact, although perceptions of fairness, trustworthiness, readiness, and acceptance remained cautious. Differences by academic qualification were found only for perceived usefulness and impact, with teachers holding Master’s and PhD degrees expressing more positive views than those with Bachelor’s degrees. Qualitative results showed that ChatGPT was perceived as helpful for grammar, vocabulary, and revision support, but teachers remained concerned about its higher-order accuracy, students’ overreliance, academic integrity, and the need for teacher mediation. | Laura Dyer: L.V.Dyer@leeds.ac.uk |
N.B. it is essential to be respectful of the writers of submissions to our journal, especially when they are at the draft stages. Please do not comment publicly on the list or elsewhere on any aspect of the paper titles or abstracts above.
We look forward to hearing from you!
With warm wishes on behalf of the Editorial Board,
Chad
Dr Chad McDonald
Managing Editor, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education