Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (UHPED)

UHPED is offered every semester but only taught in English every third semester.

Do you want to be notified when it is possible to apply again? Please leave your e-mail in our online form (nettskjema.no).

The pedagogy course Teaching and learning in higher education at OsloMet is offered every semester and taught in English every third semester. 

The course is next offered in English: Fall semester 2024.

Course description

• Participants must attended at least 80% of all seminars to be eligible for examination.
• Attendance at the first seminar is mandatory.
• Course participants must participate in a peer mentoring process involving observation of and feedback to each other’ teaching.

Please read the course description for more information (student.oslomet.no).

• August 21-22 (Soria Moria Hotel)
• October 9-10
• October 30-31
• November 13-14
• December 4-5

Attendance at the first seminar in Soria Moria Hotel is mandatory. Participants are free to choose whether to spend the night.

OsloMet covers all costs, but participants will be invoiced for any cancellations after August 6.

There is no course fee for OsloMet employees.

For external participants, the course fee is 25,000 NOK

OsloMet covers all hotel costs for the first seminar, but participants will be invoiced for any cancellations after August 6.

Some changes might occur

Readings for Seminar 1 – Student learning in higher education

• Aditomo, A., Goodyear, P., Bliuc, A.-M., & Ellis, R. A. (2013). Inquiry-based learning in higher education: principal forms, educational objectives, and disciplinary variations. Studies in Higher Education, 38(9), 1239-1258
• Baeten, M., Kyndt, E. Struyven, K. & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review 5, p. 342-260.
• Børte, K., Nesje, K., & Lillejord, S. (2020). Barriers to student active learning in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 1-19
• Damşa, C., & Lange, T. D. (2019). Student-centred learning environments in higher education. Uniped, 42(01), 9-26
• Deslauriers, L., McCarty L.S.,, Miller, K., Callaghan, K., & Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom, PNAS, 116(39), 19251–19257.
• Freeman, S. et al. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (PNAS), 111(23), 8410–8415.
• Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven Affordances of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: How to Support Collaborative Learning? How Can Technologies Help. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247-265
• Lillejord, S., Børte, K., Nesje, K. & Ruud, E. (2018). Learning and Teaching with Technology in Higher Education – A systematic review. Oslo: Kunnskapssenteret for utdanning
• Rohrer, D & Pashler, H. (2010). Recent research on human learning challenges conventional instructional strategies, Educational Researcher, 39(5), 406-412

Readings for Seminar 2 – Designing teaching in higher education

• Azer, S. A. (2005). Challenges facing PBL tutors: 12 tips for successful group facilitation. Med Teach,27(8), 676-681
• Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57-75
• Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977
• O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The internet and higher education, 25, 85-95.
• Goodyear, P., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2013). In media res: reframing design for learning. Research in Learning Technology, 21.
• Havnes, A., & Prøitz, T. S. (2016). Why use learning outcomes in higher education? Exploring the grounds for academic resistance and reclaiming the value of unexpected learning. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(3), 205-223.
• Healey, M. (2005). Linking Research and Teaching to Benefit Student Learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29(2), 183-201
• Nerland, M., PrøItz, T. S., & NIFU. (2018). Pathways to quality in higher education: Case studies of educational practices in eight courses. NIFU & University of Oslo Report 2018: 3.
• Northedge, A. (2003). Enabling participation in academic discourse. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 169-180
• Schmidt, H. G., Rotgans, J. I., & Yew, E. H. (2011). The process of problem-based learning: what works and why. Med Educ, 45(8), 792-806

Readings for Seminar 3 – Assessment and evaluation in higher education

• Bloxham, S., den-Outer, B., Hudson, J., & Price, M. (2016). Let’s stop the pretence of consistent marking: exploring the multiple limitations of assessment criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 466-481. 
• Carless, D. & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43 (8), 1315-1325
• Carless, D., & Winstone, N. (2020). Teacher feedback literacy and its interplay with student feedback literacy. Teaching in Higher Education, 1-14.
• Fraile, J., Panadero, E., & Pardo, R. (2017). Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 69-76. 
• Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback, Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112
• Molloy, E., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2020). Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 527-540
• Nicol, D. J. & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218
• Norton, L. (2010). Using assessment criteria as learning criteria: a case study in psychology. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 687-702.
• Villarroel, V., Boud, D., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., & Bruna, C. (2019). Using principles of authentic assessment to redesign written examinations and tests. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1-12

Readings for Seminar 4 – Forms of knowledge in professional education

• Hermansen, H. (2020). Knowledge Discourses and Coherence in Professional Education. Professions and Professionalism, 10(3), 1-21
• Hontvedt, M., & Øvergård, K. I. (2020). Simulations at work—A framework for configuring simulation fidelity with training objectives. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 29(1), 85-113
• Jensen, Karen; Nerland, Monika & Enqvist-Jensen, Cecilie (2015). Enrolment of newcomers in expert cultures: an analysis of epistemic practices in a legal education introductory course. Higher Education. ISSN 0018-1560
• Kvernbekk, T. (2012). Argumentation in Theory and Practice: Gap or Equilibrium? Informal Logic, 32(3), 288-305
• Muller, J. (2009). Forms of knowledge and curriculum coherence. Journal of Education and Work, 22(3), 205-226
• Smeby, J. C., & Heggen, K. (2014). Coherence and the development of professional knowledge and skills. Journal of Education and Work, 27(1), 71-91

Readings for Seminar 5 – Research supervision 

• Hovden, J. F., & Mjøs, O. J. (2020). Research Director, Colleague, Schoolmaster? Preferred and Experienced Supervising Styles of PhD-Students at Four Faculties. Uniped, 43(03), 187-204
• Dysthe, O., Samara, A., & Westrheim, K. (2006). Multivoiced supervision of Master’s students: a case study of alternative supervision practices in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 299-318
• Lee, A. (2008) How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision, Studies in Higher Education, 33:3, 267-281
• Nordentoft, H. M., Thomsen, R., & Wichmann-Hansen, G. (2013). Collective academic supervision: a model for participation and learning in higher education. Higher Education, 65(5), 581-593
• Wichmann-Hansen, G., Thomsen, R., & Nordentoft, H. M. (2015). Challenges in Collective Academic Supervision: supervisors’ experiences from a Master Programme in Guidance and Counselling. Higher Education, 70(1), 19-33

In order to pass the course, participants must complete all compulsory assignments during the course. In addition to final submissions. Participation and submission of final assignments will be assessed as passed / failed.

Participants who have completed and passed the course can obtain documentation of this themselves.

Transcript of records can be ordered on Studentweb (fsweb.no) or downloaded from The diploma registry (Vitnemålsportalen.no). You will find more information about Transcripts and diplomas (student.oslomet.no) on the student pages.