STUDENT ENGAGEMENT ON THE TRU 2010/11 RESEARCH CONFERENCE
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
By
Vivianne Zirnhelt-Yew

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
BACHELOR OF INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES

We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standards:
_________________________________________
Mark Rowell Wallin (Ph.D.), Thesis Supervisor, Dept. Communication
_________________________________________
Elizabeth Rennie, M.L.S., Reader
__________________________________________
Cindy Piwowar, B. Ed., M.Ed., Reader
__________________________________________
Mark Rowell Wallin (Ph.D.), Co-ordinator, Interdisciplinary Studies

Dated this 10th day of May, 2012, in Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada
Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee
Vivianne Zirnhelt-Yew

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

ABSTRACT
Through problem based Interdisciplinary study of student engagement, this paper will explore
student and faculty findings by using student and faculty primary research. The findings of
student engagement research will show if the goals of Thompson Rivers University work
experience on an undergraduate conference organizing committee were met, or not. The student
and faculty experiences of service learning show the adaptations and transformations taking
place on the committee.
Keywords: problem based interdisciplinary study, student engagement, service learning.

ii

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I offer my enduring gratitude to the faculty, staff and my fellow students at TRU, who have
inspired me to continue my work in this field. I owe particular thanks to Dr. M. Wallin, whose
penetrating questions taught me to question more deeply.
Special thanks are owed to all my family, who have supported me throughout my years of
education.
Also, special thanks to the Helen MacDonald Carlson Scholarship fund for the financial award.

iii

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

DEDICATION
To all my family and especially my daughters: Jacqulyn, Leigh and Synneva for their belief in
me.

iv

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Table of Contents
Abstract..................................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. iii
Dedication................................................................................................................................................ iv
Introduction: 1.0 ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Methodology: 2.0 ........................................................................................................................................ 2
Student Engagement: 3.0 ............................................................................................................................ 5
Student Adaptation and Transformation: 3.1....................................................................................... 6
Faculty Support and Transformation: 3.2 ............................................................................................. 9
Advantages and Disadvantages: 3.3 ................................................................................................... 13
Conclusion: 4.0 ........................................................................................................................................... 15
References by Theme.................................................................................................................................. 18
References .................................................................................................................................................. 23
Appendices.................................................................................................................................................. 27
Ethics Approval Certificate .......................................................................................................................... 29

v

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

INTRODUCTION: 1.0

The following project review and findings look at the student engagement at the
Thompson Rivers University 2010/2011 Research Conference through the lens of
interdisciplinary principles. For such a project, primary and secondary research data collection
was important to my consideration of student engagement goals, specifically to examine the
question of whether the 2011 TRU Undergraduate Conference met the university strategic plan’s
goals for student engagement: social and cultural learning opportunities, incorporating research
in the curriculum, providing stimulating academic experience, and promoting their physical,
social, and cultural, emotional and intellectual development (TRU Strategic Plan 2012). In order
to evaluate the conference’s success or failure, I have brought five main critical perspectives to
bear: adaptation and critical theories, public relations, event management, and sociology.
The goal for this research paper is to introduce a qualitative analysis of student
engagement. The question proposed is: Were the goals of student engagement met by the
Thompson Rivers University 2010/2011 Undergraduate Research Organizing Committee (TRU
UROC)? This study of student engagement involves a post-conference examination of that
organizing committee.
An examination of such a complex system as student engagement dictated a
consideration of many disciplines. In order to prepare for this project, I made a decision to study
a broad, multi-disciplinary group of courses to better understand the full spectrum of student
engagement through conference organization. I came to realize an interdisciplinary connection
takes place when primary research and secondary research themes connect in the study of the
given problem. This project may take understanding the language of different disciplines such as
“and people, data, information concepts, methods [and] theories in order to….analyse and better
1

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

understand the dependency of borrowed explanations of becoming an interdisciplinary study”
(Klein, 1990, p. 58). In the primary research, I have incorporated the subjects’ answers with
varied and diverse disciplinary perspectives through a narrative of the conference itself in order
establish whether or not student engagement goals were met in the movement from a multidisciplinary perspective to an interdisciplinary perspective.
METHODOLOGY: 2.0
When one approaches a complex subject of study, such as the success or failure of
student engagement in a particular conference setting, one must consider not just a) the structural
analysis of the conference itself in reference to both pedagogical expectations as well as the
university goals, but also b) the perspectives of the participants. The former problem is addressed
from five critical perspectives: adaptation and critical theories, public relations, event
management, and sociology, while the former was gleaned from a series of interviews with
participants after the conference had concluded.
The secondary research data collection drew from many different disciplinary
perspectives of the complex problem of engaging students in the planning and development of a
interdisciplinary research conference. Additionally, the subject position of the researcher played
a significant part in the development of the process, as my experience and knowledge formed the
starting point for all the subsequent research; the process of interdisciplinary research involves a
complex pattern of modification, testing, retesting, and transformation, exemplified in
DeWachter’s “philosophical technique” whereby all disciplines:
1. Abstain from approaching the topic along lines of their own monodisciplinary
methods;
2. Acknowledge all aspects as well as the total network;

2

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

3. Translate the global question into the specific language of each participating
discipline;
4. Constantly check the answer to this translated question by checking for its relevance
in answering the global question, and
5. Finally, agree upon a global answer that must not be produced by any one particular
discipline but rather integrating all particular answers (Klein, 1990, p. 192).

Thus, the readings for this thesis were expanded and enhanced by the challenges of extracting
and assessing concepts as the project grew. Reading through the applied and pre-existing
research in the chosen disciplines, the following diagram shows how the different disciplines and
resulting themes came together to reach a conclusion (See figure 1.).
In the primary research, the exploration into ethnography and ethics was important. If
movement forward is required within academic research on student engagement, then “English
for Specific Purposes (ESP) has an established tradition which has undoubtedly provided
leadership, as well as an intellectual ‘nudge’” (Johns, Paltridge, & Belcher, 2010, p. 1). Murphy
and Dingwall discuss the benefits of research with human subjects from the perspective of
“positive and identifiable benefit” (as cited in Johns, Paltridge, & Belcher, 2010, p. 339).
Madison further supports the importance of questioning in primary research, stating that
“formulating the questions is one of the most interesting and important challenges of the
interview process” (Madison, 2005, p. 27).
The primary research project was entitled “Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11
Research Conference Organizing Committee”(See Ethics Approval Certificate, p. 34), and the
purpose of the research was a post conference examination of student engagement or nonengagement, with five members on the 2010/11 organizing committee. I asked for ethics
approval (p. 34) to conduct interviews with selected individuals who were on this committee.
The interview research was used for this thesis assignment. The interviews showed support, or

3

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

not, by the interviewed subjects in their specific roles during the 2010 /11 semester, or during
their term on the conference committee. The interviews supported support, or not, my research in
relation to the seven engagement goals of the TRU Strategic Plan (see Appendices). Specifically,
I interviewed committee members (faculty, students and volunteers).
The project questions were:
Can you tell me how you came to be a part of this committee?
What is student engagement?
What is the purpose of student engagement?
What are the values of student engagement?
In what ways, from your experience on the committee, were the student’s goals met or
not met?
Can you explain, from your experience, advantages or disadvantages of having students
on the organizing committee?

The data compilation was gathered through personal interviews and each interview took
approximately 45 minutes to complete. The data will be retained for a period of seven calendar
years in accordance with TRU policy and then shredded or destroyed December of 2018. None
of the primary data (audio, visual, or written) will be used in the future. The interview
participants may receive a copy of the completed paper should they request it. Administrators
responsible for the areas of Student Engagement may be provided with summaries or a
presentation of my project outcomes, should they request it. As well, if my paper is selected, it
may be published in future proceedings of a TRU Undergraduate Research Conference.

4

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT: 3.0

The student engagement project at Thompson Rivers University (TRU) was held during
September to December of 2010, and January to April of 2011. Starting in September of 2010 to
December of 2010, two students were asked to sit on the organizing committee of the TRU
UROC as part of their service learning course. Also, from September to December of 2010,
within a service learning course, the students were required to read and understand the goals of
the university’s Strategic Plan and begin readings for their final thesis. It was in this course
where my attempt to unify divergent and diverse views and methods across various disciplines
began.
My first attempt to develop a unifying perspective of complex systems was by looking
into adaptation theory applied to text and film in the works of Stam and Wallin. My view was
metaphorical, insofar as the processes I observed in my primary research often involved
participants’ varying strategies of adapting their existing epistemological matrices to account for
new information, and although valuable in restating the given problem of student engagement, I
found the adaptation work of Stam and Wallin is not applicable in the literal sense. This attempt
could be considered a normalized mode of thought or it could become “critical
interdisciplinarity” in a future metaphorical evaluation of the problem (Klein, 1990, p. 193).
I returned to exploring the five main critical perspectives. Specifically, I found the
student engagement research available through education and communication literature; however
some scholars contributed to both lines of inquiry and have documented the frequency and nature
of student-faculty interactions which have shown the field to be relatively static and unchanged
over the last three decades (Cotton & Wilson, p. 487 - 488). If student engagement research has

5

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

not changed for the past thirty years, then this line of inquiry may provide an opportunity for
fresh research.
Student Adaptation and Transformation: 3.1

Here the idea of using service learning to engage students is supported by the research of
VanWynsberghe and Andruske (2007), as student engagement in their work is called a “colearning experience” (VanWynsberghe and Andruske, 2007, p. 354). Their analysis suggests colearning is a potential course strategy for students to enter the community-service learning
experience within the public sphere. In the case of student engagement on the TRU UROC,
implementation may “build citizenship for sustainability and community engagement for
students” (VanWynsberghe, & Andruske, 2007, p. 349) and foster a change towards
inclusiveness in a multi-disciplinary conference environment. That said, the experience “comes
with a high degree of specificity in the kinds of experiences and activities that students are asked
to do” (Belcher, Johns & Paltridge, 2011, p.7). Engaging students on a multi-disciplinary
organizing committee means asking them to adapt from their specific fields to new kinds of tasks
where they will engage with diverse methods and perspectives; furthermore, this adaptation
forms the ostensible rationale for the organizing committee experience (Belcher, Johns &
Paltridge, 2007, p. 7). Students are expected to communicate and discuss the conference goals
with the larger university community, including faculty and students from their own and other
fields of study.
Through primary research, I will show how a student’s learning and experience will
demonstrate student engagement goals being met. More specifically, when a student was asked

6

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

how they came to be a part of the conference committee, the student felt the project was
“mandatory based on their service learning course description” (Interviews, April, 2012). The
same question asked at the faculty level showed a different answer. The faculty member
responded, “I drafted a service learning course outline, then I met with another student and you
to find out if the course is something you would want to do. Then, as your supervisor, I was
asked to participate on the committee to further support your work experience” (Interviews,
April, 2012).
However, the “mandatory” course work seemed to adapt and transform the student once
they were doing the actual committee work. Here the same student, who felt the course work was
“mandatory” now answers what they thought student engagement was based on their course
outline:
We (two students on the organizing committee) were handing out brochures
and information about the conference. I talked to the new Dean of the
university [sic] and explained what the TRU Undergrad Conference was
about. At the time, I did not know who he was, but I felt confident because of
my collaborative experience on the organizing committee. After I spoke to
him, the conference chair and my course supervisor told me I did a great job of
explaining the conference to him. (Interviews, April, 2012)
In consideration of the student’s conversation with the new Dean and the support from two of
their faculty team, this particular project of student engagement and the goals being met has
“considerable potential as a multidimensional construct that unites in a meaningful way”
(Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, 2006, p. 60). If the conference chair and the student’s
supervisor “observed the results of good, PR efforts and the public’s perception [in this case the
new Dean] of the organization or conference” (Getz, 2005, p. 362), then clearly the student was
7

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

engaged. Here the student “felt confident” and (based on what they remembered) then informed,
persuaded, motivated “and built mutual understanding”(2005, p. 362) about the conference. In
the practice of public relations, Seitel calls this implication of communication “a process to
influence publics and the process of action” (Seitel, 2011, p. 5). The student explaining the
undergraduate conference to the new Dean is an example of the nature of engagement by
providing a highly interactive environment (TRU BBQ) between students, faculty and alumni.
Their engagement is an integral part of an ongoing focus on improving and enhancing learning
(TRU Strategic Plan, 2012).
This combination of student adaptation and transformation also supports the theory that
knowledge is a creation and process of participation or engagement in a cultural activity. The
outcome of such activity can be considered as a learning activity, or “co-learning” between
faculty and student. As well, the intended impact of engaging students enhances their learning
because “people need to be innovative to succeed in work and life, and education is an institution
that can both model this requirement and also support its development” (Katz, Dearl, Jaafar,
Elgie, Foster, Halbert, & Kaser, 2008, p. 2). In order to more closely examine this process,
Ratsoy looked at student engagement through service learning, social networks and engagement
for positive outcomes (Ratsoy, 2007, p. 1).
Yet there can often be conflicting and competing perspectives about the purpose of
student engagement base on subject position; students and faculty members will frequently see
such efforts very differently. From a student perspective, the context of service learning and
conference involvement shows that “the purpose of student engagement was to bridge the gap
between the faulty members on the committee and to the students at large” (Interviews, S1, p. 6).
Another student answered: “The purpose is to learn from other students, and after presenting at
8

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

this conference, I became more confident and presented at other conferences” (Interviews, April,
2012). From a faculty perspective, the context of service learning and conference involvement
indicates shared goals of a “growth of … leadership skills, mentoring…helping make academic
conference organizing less stuffy and dry, growing confidence, and engaged students doing
service learning specific to the committee” (Interviews, April, 2012).
According to the academic literature, the nature of engagement can be defined in three
ways: behavioural engagement, emotional engagement, and cognitive engagement (Fredricks,
Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004, p. 60). Yet we should add to their “nature of engagement,” the
growth of the students’ knowledge and competencies evident within Vygotsky’s (Ratsoy, 2008)
sociocultural theory – more specifically, the zone of proximal development. In the case of this
study of student engagement in the TRU UROC, the zone is one in which the mentor (the service
learning supervisor) senses the readiness of the student to face new challenges and assists the
student to adapt and experience new challenges (Introduction to Early Childhood Development,
1998, p. 491). Ratsoy posits that Vygotsky’s social aspect of learning also influences “the entire
process of growth…[and] the mutual coordination between” the students and their mentors
(Ratsoy, 2008, p. 1). The findings in the primary research support the application of the zone of
proximal development to present students as consumers of knowledge, and engage them to
become active citizens.
Faculty Support and Transformations: 3.2

My primary research showed that over the course of the conference’s history, organizers
have stressed the importance of discipline convergence by supporting engaging students. When I
asked a faculty member how they became part of the 2010 conference committee, they
9

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

responded by first explaining the history of the conference, and then why they were on the
committee:

I have worked on this committee when it was called ‘Poster Days.’ That was
fifteen years ago. At that time we would alternately go one year to the Fraser
Valley University, the next year to the UBC Okanagan, and the third year come
to Thompson Rivers University [then called the University-College of the
Cariboo]. Seven years ago, we were asked to become a part of the multidiscipline conference. At that time, the science department Poster Days
committee did not feel it was the right fit, however the following year we
married with the undergrad conference to bring poster and oral presentations
together. I was invited to be the chair of the 2010/2012, and did because I have
always worked and contributed to the university and community. (Interviews,
April, 2012)

The support and change within the above narrative showed the wider implication of student
engagement goals and how they relate directly to growth of the conference through
communication. The following ideas suggest support through the themes of event management
and public relations, and will show the value of historical knowledge linking to growth of the
university’s strategic engagement goals.
When the science department was first invited to be a part of the multidisciplinary
conference “the [Poster Days] committee did not feel it was the right fit” (Interviews, April,
2012), nor felt that the idea would work of bridging the separate undergraduate research
conferences under a single banner. However the following year the “marriage” succeeded,
largely because of a new emphasis on the ways that communication could be used to move the
community at large to social action (Seitel 2011, p. 5). As the stories of the conference’s history

10

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

and successes were told and retold, the opportunities for new student engagement grew with
them, as such “social and cultural perspectives applied to events can benefit and strengthen
values and traditions for the event and the institution” (Getz, 2005, p. 8).
If the faculty member saw the benefit and value in “movement from a science department
event to a multi-discipline conference,” and subsequently became the “chair” because they “were
invited,” clearly they were engaged in the university and helped strengthen values and traditions
for the conference. The “marriage” or movement from the science departments’ “Poster Days”
conference, to a multi-discipline conference of written and oral research was clearly supported
by the university’s engagement goals of providing growth and stimulating academic experiences.
The bridging of knowledge suggests there may be opportunities for future research.
While the history of the conference is not the primary focus for this paper, it does allow
us to discuss the university’s goal to engage students. The physical, social, cultural, emotional
and intellectual development are supported by evidence in the primary research. While history is
replete with such well-intentioned efforts to foster a culture of new knowledge creation, JeanFrancois Lyotard, in the seminal The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge
emphasizes that an adaptation of text is necessary to the performability and understanding of
knowledge (Lyotard, 1984.). However, such efforts are stymied by disciplinary assumptions built
into the process at its foundations. Lyotard’s critique forms of cross- and multi-disciplinary
“bridge building” as being limited and linear in their approach. New knowledge can only be
achieved, he posits, by placing a priority on synthetic knowledge through a process of radical
interdisciplinarity. Lyotard and interdisciplinary scholars must “seek to transform, rather than to
build bridges across existing units for utilitarian purposes” (Klein, 2005, p. 57).

11

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

An examination of whether the conference is building bridges or producing synthetic
knowledge can, in turn, be applied to the problem of student engagement. In this case, the
primary research shows students and faculty can adapt, synthesize, communicate and transfer
knowledge, adding to the context and culture of student engagement, primarily through the
process of democratizing the conference development process. When I asked two students if
their experience on the committee had met their goals, the first student answered that “a
[committee] meeting structure needed to be applied…there needed to be one person who was
head of the committee, a second in command, a treasurer, a secretary and a volunteer
coordinator” (Interviews, April, 2012). The second student felt that “all university staff are
important sources of support, but have dominated the committee” (Interviews, April, 2012).
Conversely, when faculty were asked if their experience on the committee had met their
goals, they emphasized the transformative movement that they felt had taken place over the last
few years and one faculty member commented, “I think in terms of the growth on the committee
coming from a place of thinking we were learning centered and now it is becoming a student
centered conference” (Interviews, April, 2012). While these answers suggest that a
transformation can take place, they also suggest that the relative positions of the people on the
committee can produce very different perspectives. While the student and faculty members
indicated that they felt that power and knowledge were being more evenly distributed across the
committee, the students either felt that this was not the case, or hungered for more of the faculty
control and direction. These divergent answers suggest several questions for future
consideration. Would student suggestions be considered for future committee work? Would there
be a collaborative approach in the future? What would be an indicator of the conference
committee being “student centered?” Klein (2005) offers a possible matrix for such

12

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

considerations when she posits, echoing Lyotard, that student engagement needs to not just build
bridges but also “seek to transform” (Klein, 2005, p. 57).
Undergirding the transfer of knowledge between experience and service learning, lays the
reasoning of communication and adaption. Organizers can find it particularly
“advantageous…when [they] have students who are doing Service Learning specifically for the
committee. As well, students, young or mature students, who have had experience with Guiding
or 4-H clubs, seem more engaged and are more aware of the communication required for all on
the committee” (Interviews, April, 2012). As suggested by Lyotard (1984) exercises of
interdisciplinary student engagement, such as the TRU UROC, seek to enact adaptation and
performability and transform practical knowledge to practical communication. The study of
student engagement – even interdisciplinarity more broadly – is one of adaptation and
transformation and is less an attempted regurgitation of study, but a turn in an ongoing dialogical
process (David, Flynn, Lecker, 2002, p. 35., Stam, ,2002, p. 64).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Committee-Based Student Engagement: 3.3
The Strategic Plan was designed to promote healthy, emotional engagement of
volunteerism, stating that TRU will engage students and promote their physical, social, cultural,
emotional and intellectual development (Strategic Plan, 2012). Murray and Summerice (2007)
provide further empirical evidence of how a problem-based approach would help Canadian
universities to further such engagement goals with under the weight of high demand and
underfunding. The process may help enhance the quality of education and the undergraduate
experience (Murray, Summerlee, 2007, p. 87), adding to Seitel’s (2011) widely accepted process
of setting standards “to inform, persuade, motivate and build mutual understanding” (Seitel,
13

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

2011, p.47, Getz, 2005, p. 363). Yet all this assumes that student-participation on university
committees, such as the undergraduate conference committee of 2010/11, is a boon. The primary
research suggests that there may be unanticipated problems, such as competing priorities and
values in the planning process: “If a student is all about marketing, like the importance of
lanyards for the presenters, but for me it is about the aesthetics, like the blue backdrops for the
posters and the presentation of food, [then] our time had to be spent doing the actual committee
work, which was not being done” (Interviews, April, 2012). While such situations might indicate
problems with student participation, the solutions may come not from seeing such participation
as a disadvantage, but rather a result of not using event management strategies.
In his approach to event management, Mathews (2008) emphasizes the idea of discussing
requirements of the actual event or conference and how it may be used, but the “true beginning”
is the communication or “vocalization,” and “physically doing the job” (Mathews, 2008, p. xi).
Effective communication at a conference, he posits, begins “at the true beginning,
physiologically, to understand that humans are capable of utilizing two basic modes of
communication: vocalization and physical movement” (Mathews, 2008, p. 2).
Another disadvantage pointed out was “volunteers may not be aware of the skills and
individual jobs assigned, and then this makes more work for the faculty” (Interviews, April,
2012). However, within the service learning context, there is a distinction from volunteerism in
two ways. Ratsoy (2008) alludes to this distinction, suggesting that “it is a benefit to students and
recipients of service equally, and students must synthesize the learning experience” (Ratsoy,
2008, p. 2). Secondly, in the service learning process, unlike volunteerism, “mentoring is an
important skill” (Interviews, April, 2011). Thus the research clearly shows a “true beginning”
could have become fully developed by thorough communication, but was not met.
14

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

All in all, the research points to distinct advantages of having students on the organizing
committee. One faculty response shows that “one of the important advantages of having students
on the organizing committee was seeing the growth of student leadership skills: A [good
example] is the student who stepped up to take the volunteer coordination position” (Interviews,
April, 2011). Another faculty response shows “the advantages are when we have students who
are doing service learning courses specifically for the committee” (Interviews, April, 2011). Both
of these responses clearly view the students as an integral part of the committee. In this case, we
can see the ways that Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of a student working with a skilled
practitioner to advance learning is applied for the student to gain a deeper understanding. While
at the same time, the process fosters and capitalizes on the learning and life skills students bring
to the organizing committee.

CONCLUSION: 4.0

Were Student Engagement goals met, or not met, on the TRU 2010/11 Research
Conference Organizing Committee?
First, based on the whole complex project and the need to synthesize the pre-existing and
applied research, the evidence shows there is student engagement at TRU. Some of the goals of
adapting, communicating, collaborating, volunteering, working and contributing and growth of
leadership skills were met based on the research and in accordance with the 2012 Strategic Plan.
Secondly, the feeling of disjunction at the beginning of the service learning term may be
a goal not met for student engagement: “I felt it was a challenge to incorporate our research [on
the committee] into the research to our thesis” (Interviews, April, 2011). Within the literature
review may lie some of the answers to this challenge: in order for a synthetic interdisciplinary
15

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

study of a given problem, the individual discipline silos must be turned on their side so the
critical text can spill for adaptation and transformation (Appendices: See Figure 1).
The crucial need for academic writings within different genres is necessary for current
and future academic studies. As Lyotard (1984) suggests, interdisciplinarity is a process of
adaptation: a change in the subject arising out of a response to their context (Lyotard, 1984,
Intro.). Perhaps the work of adaptation studies can be harnessed to continue to infuse the
constant quest for interdisciplinary approaches and strategies. Robert Stam (2000) argues the act
of reading is private and the imagery comes from our individual response to the text (Stam, 2000,
p. 54). This may point to the expansion experience of translations taking place and
transformations moving the reader forward to the understanding of gains and losses (Stam, 2000,
p. 62) of communication. It is necessary to go beyond within genres and re-examine a “broad
range of topics, focus on a diverse cross section of texts, and adopt a variety of disciplinary,
methodological, and theoretical perspectives” (David, Flynn, Lecker, 2002 p. 35). This may also
point to the shared idea of adaption being a part of general theory of repetition, and the
adaptation study will move from the margins to the center of contemporary…study (Naremore,
2000, p. xv). Within the context of adaptation, the need to textualize or overcome “narrative
transmutability” (Ray, 2000, p. 2) is necessary for an awareness of “cultural codes” (p. 2). These
ideas are important and support pushing future boundaries within the study of Interdisciplinary
work.
Directly, potential benefits of student engagement research are (a) for the student
benefiting directly from the interview and research process, (b) directly benefiting students and
faculty of interdisciplinary studies, (c) directly benefiting the TRU Undergraduate Research
Conference, and (d) overall enhancing the TRU Strategic Plan. Indirectly, TRU student

16

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

engagement research will or could benefit faculty and students for growing the university
culture.
The idea of crossing boundaries and bridging is necessary for the breadth of this student
engagement. The open and accessible support to learning at this institution is student engagement
through service learning. In growth of the social and culture of our community the key is
adaptation and communication for “the adaptation of a scholarly content for users in the future,
for users who have not yet been born” (Borgman, 2007, p. 263). It is because of practitioners
being aware of the Strategic Plan, understanding the concept of service learning, and utilizing the
skills of students, there is a growing interdisciplinary TRU Undergraduate Research conference
and there is a promise of growth toward a better and stronger community. But such exhortations
to disciplinary transgression and transformation are part of the post-structural project. Both
Hutcheon [“we might want to challenge the boundaries” (Hutcheon, 1988, p. 217)] and Foucault,
as cited by Hutcheon, [“we might want to move from our usual notion of history to a new one”
(Hutcheon, 1988, p. 16)] echo Lyotard’s longing for an interdisciplinary, problem-based study.

17

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

References
By Themes
The references by themes are important for my thesis to support and demonstrate my
findings for student engagement experience while participating on the organizing committee for
the TRU Undergrad Research 2010/11. This reference section is to show the foundational
readings used for this Problem-Focused Interdisciplinary research and thesis: The five themes
are: adaptation and critical theories, public relations, event management, and sociology.

Adaptation and Critical Theories
Anonymous. (2011). Collaborator and learning commons queen: Carol Koechlin speaks. Teacher
Librarian, 38(4), 62-63. doi: 2377650591.
Belcher, D., Johns, A. M., & Paltridge, B. (Eds.). (2011). New directions in English for specific
purposes research. Ann Arbour: The University of Michigan Press.
Borgman, C. L. (2007). Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, infrastructure, and
the internet. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Chambers, T. (2009). A continuum of approaches to service-learning within Canadian postsecondary education. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 39(2), 77-100.
Cotton, S. R., & Wilson, B. (2006, June). Student-faculty interactions: dynamics and
determinants. Higher Education, 51( 4), 487-519.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating
Quantitative and Qualitative Research, (4th Ed.). Boston: Pearson.
David, J., Flynn, K., Lecker, R. (Eds.). (2002). Essays on Canadian writing: Literatures,
cinemas, cultures,76, Spring. ECW Press.

18

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Essa, E., Young, R., & Lehne, L. (1998). Introduction to Early Childhood Education, (2nd Ed.).
Toronto: ITP Nelson.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: potential of the
concept, state of the evidence. Review of EducationalResearch, 74(1), 59-109.
Hirschegger, W. (2011). Strong public education. Education Forum, 37(1), 4.
doi: 2318601751.
Hutcheon, L. (1988). The Canadian postmodern: A study of contemporary EnglishCanadian fiction. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Katz, S., Earl, L., Jaafar, S., Elgie, S., Foster, L., Halbert, J., & Kaser, L. (2008). Learning
networks of schools: The key enablers of successful knowledge communities. McGill
Journal of Education (Online), 43(2), 111-137. doi: 1577443551.
Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Michigan:
Wayne State University Press.
Klein, J. T. (2005). Humanities, culture, and interdisciplinarity: The changing
American academy. New York: State University of New York Press.
Klein, J. T. (2010). Creating interdisciplinary campus cultures: A model for strength
and sustainability. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lyotard, J. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge: theory and history of
literature. G. Bennington, & B. Massumi, (Trans.). Manchester: Manchester University
Press.
Murray, J., & Summerlee, A. (2007). The impact of problem-based learning in an
interdisciplinary first- year program on student learning behaviour. Canadian Journal of
Higher Education, 37(3), 87-107. doi: 1471055821
19

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Naremore, J. (Ed.). (2000). Film and the reign of adaptation. Film Adaptation. New Brunswick:
Rutgers UP.
Ratsoy, G. (2008). The small city as classroom: Academic service learning participants reflect.
Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 2(2), 1-11.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcace.2011.1.3
Ratsoy, G. (2011). Class participation in an aboriginal theatre project: An exemplar of
undergraduate student engagement. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning, 2(3), Article 3, 1-11. doi: TD2.2.
Ray, R. B. (2000). The field of literature and film. In J. Naremore, (Ed.), Film Adaptation.
(pp. 54-76). New Brunswick: Rutgers UP.
Stam, R. (2000). Beyond fidelity: The dialogics of adaptation. In J. Naremore, (Ed.), Film
Adaptation. New Brunswick: Rutgers UP.
Scott, S. D., Perkins, D., & Rothwell, E. (Eds.). (2005). Intersections: Readings in the
sciences and humanities (2nd ed.). Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Thompson Rivers University Strategic Plan. (2012). http://www.tru.ca/_shared assets/20072012_strategic_plan8326.pdf
TWU cleans up in national ranking; Langley is ranked a centre for quality higher education in
Canada. (2010, February 26). Langley Advance, p.29. doi:1972722541.
VanWynsberghe, R., & Andruske, C. L. (2007). Research in the service of co-learning:
Sustainability and community engagement. Canadian Journal of Education, 30(1),
349-376. doi:1323307831
Wallin, M. R. (2007). An eurthythmatic response to adaptive accrual: A rhetoric of
adaptation. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Waterloo). Retrieved from

20

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

http://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/bitstream/10012/3502/1/dissubmit-final2.pdf

Public Relations
Seitel, F. P. (2011). The practice of public relations (11th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.

Event Management
Getz, D. (2005). Event management & event tourism. New York: Cognizant Communication
Corporation.
Matthews, D. (2008). Special event production: The resources. London: Elsevier Publishing.
Morgan, M. (2008). “What makes a good festival? Understanding the event experience.”
Event Management, 12, 81-93. doi:1525-9951/08
Professional Convention Management Association, (2008). Professional meeting management:
Comprehensive strategies for meetings, conventions and events (5th ed.).
Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Rogers, T. (2008). Conferences and conventions: A global industry: Events management series
(2nd ed.). London: Elsevier Publishing.

Sociology
Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., Delamont, S., Lofland J., & Lofland, L. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of
ethnography. London: Sage Publications.
Madison, D. S. (2005). Critical ethnography: Method, ethics, and performance. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications.
21

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Sandole, D. J. D., Byme, S., Sandole-Starose, I., & Senehi, J. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of
conflict analysis and resolution. London: Routledge.

22

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

References

Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., Delamont, S., Lofland J., & Lofland, L. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of
ethnography. London: Sage Publications.
Anonymous. (2011). Collaborator and learning commons queen: Carol Koechlin speaks. Teacher
Librarian, 38(4), 62-63. doi: 2377650591.
Belcher, D., Johns, A. M., & Paltridge, B. (Eds.). (2011). New directions in English for specific
purposes research. Ann Arbour: The University of Michigan Press.
Borgman, C. L. (2007). Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, infrastructure, and
the Internet. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Chambers, T. (2009). A continuum of approaches to service-learning within Canadian postsecondary education. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 39(2), 77-100.
doi:1970782161
Cotton, S. R., & Wilson, B. (2006). Student-faculty interactions: Dynamics and
determinants. Higher Education, 51( 4), 487-519. doi:10.1007/s1073-004-1705-4

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating
Quantitative and Qualitative Research, (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
David, J., Flynn, K., Lecker, R. (Eds.). (2002). Essays on Canadian writing: Literatures,
cinemas, cultures,76. ECW Press.
Essa, E., Young, R., & Lehne, L. (1998). Introduction to Early Childhood Education, (2nd ed.).
Toronto: ITP Nelson.

23

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: potential of the
concept, state of the evidence. Review of EducationalResearch, 74(1), 59-109.
doi:10.3102/00346543074001059
Getz, D. (2005). Event management & event tourism. New York: Cognizant Communication
Corporation.
Hirschegger, W. (2011). Strong public education. Education Forum, 37(1), 4.
doi: 2318601751.
Hutcheon, L. (1988). The Canadian postmodern: A study of contemporary EnglishCanadian fiction. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Katz, S., Earl, L., Jaafar, S., Elgie, S., Foster, L., Halbert, J., & Kaser, L. (2008). Learning
networks of schools: The key enablers of successful knowledge communities. McGill
Journal of Education (Online), 43(2), 111-137. doi: 1577443551.
Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Michigan:
Wayne State University Press.
Klein, J. T. (2005). Humanities, culture, and interdisciplinarity: The changing
American academy. New York: State University of New York Press.
Klein, J. T. (2010). Creating interdisciplinary campus cultures: A model for strength
and sustainability. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lyotard, J. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge: theory and history of
literature. G. Bennington, & B. Massumi, (Trans.). Manchester: Manchester University
Press.
Madison, D. S. (2005). Critical ethnography: Method, ethics, and performance. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications.
24

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Matthews, D. (2008). Special event production: The resources. London: Elsevier Publishing.
Morgan, M. (2008). “What makes a good festival? Understanding the event experience.”
Event Management, 12, 81-93. doi:1525-9951/08
Murray, J., & Summerlee, A. (2007). The impact of problem-based learning in an
interdisciplinary first- year program on student learning behaviour. Canadian Journal of
Higher Education, 37(3), 87-107. doi: 1471055821
Naremore, J. (Ed.). (2000). Film and the reign of adaptation. Film Adaptation. New Brunswick:
Rutgers UP.
Professional Convention Management Association, (2008). Professional meeting management:
Comprehensive strategies for meetings, conventions and events (5th ed.).
Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Rogers, T. (2008). Conferences and conventions: A global industry: Events management series
(2nd ed.). London: Elsevier Publishing.
Ratsoy, G. (2008). The small city as classroom: Academic service learning participants reflect.
Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 2(2), 1-11.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcace.2011.1.3
Ratsoy, G. (2011). Class participation in an aboriginal theatre project: An exemplar of
undergraduate student engagement. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning, 2(3), Article 3, 1-11. doi: TD2.2.
Ray, R. B. (2000). The field of literature and film. In J. Naremore, (Ed.), Film Adaptation.
(pp. 54-76). New Brunswick: Rutgers UP.
Sandole, D. J. D., Byme, S., Sandole-Starose, I., & Senehi, J. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of
conflict analysis and resolution. London: Routledge.

25

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Scott, S. D., Perkins, D., & Rothwell, E. (Eds.). (2005). Intersections: Readings in the
sciences and humanities (2nd ed.). Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Seitel, F. P. (2011). The practice of public relations (11th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.
Stam, R. (2000). Beyond fidelity: The dialogics of adaptation. In J. Naremore, (Ed.), Film
Adaptation. New Brunswick: Rutgers UP.
Thompson Rivers University Strategic Plan. (2012). http://www.tru.ca/_shared assets/20072012_strategic_plan8326.pdf
TWU cleans up in national ranking; Langley is ranked a centre for quality higher education in
Canada. (2010, February 26). Langley Advance, p.29. doi:1972722541.
VanWynsberghe, R., & Andruske, C. L. (2007). Research in the service of co-learning:
Sustainability and community engagement. Canadian Journal of Education, 30(1),
349-376. doi:1323307831
Wallin, M. R. (2007). An eurthythmatic response to adaptive accrual: A rhetoric of
adaptation. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Waterloo). Retrieved from
http://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/bitstream/10012/3502/1/dissubmit-final2.pdf

26

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

Appendices

27

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee
Research Ethics Committee – Human Subjects
Certificate of Approval
For Student Research

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Vivianne Zirnhelt-Yew
DEPARTMENT
Interdisciplinary Studies
NUMBER
11-12-S03
INSTITUTION(S) WHERE RESEARCH WILL BE CARRIED OUT
TRU

CO-INVESTIGATORS
Mark Wallin

SPONSORING AGENCIES

TITLE
Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee

APPROVAL DATE

Dec.12, 2011
TERM (YEARS)

28

Student Engagement on the TRU 2010/11 Research Conference Organizing Committee
1
AMENDED

CERTIFICATION
The protocol describing the above-named project has been reviewed by the Committee and the
experimental procedures were found to be acceptable on ethical grounds for research involving human
subjects.

___________________________________________________
Chair, Divisional/School Ethics Committee

This Certificate of Approval is valid for the above term provided there is no change in the experimental
procedures.

29