The workplace is a key environmental determinant of health and well-being. Food choices can be influenced by several workplace-related factors including, but not limited to, working hours, the workplace food environment, job roles and workplace culture. Therefore, the workplace is increasingly viewed as an important place for public health nutrition interventions. However, research in this area is fragmented and heterogeneous due to the wide range of workplace settings and occupational groups. This editorial summarises the research presented at The Nutrition Society Workplace Diet and Health Special Interest Group Satellite Symposium in July 2024 as part of the inaugural Nutrition Society Congress.

Doctors’ and nurses’ (DNs) wellbeing in the National Health Service is important for safe healthcare for those in need. However, their demanding duties, including irregular shift work, can significantly impact their health. Unfortunately, irregular working patterns are associated with higher sickness rates and stress among healthcare professionals due to the inherent challenges of the work (1,2) . For example, shift work disrupts sleep and impairs cognitive function and performance, leading to poorer physiological and cardiovascular health (3) , workforce shortages and difficulties adapting to a consistently demanding workload, which can impact patient care delivery (4) . Despite the importance of workplace health and nutrition for DNs, our understanding of their dietary practices during shift work remains limited. Therefore, gaining insights into DNs’ eating habits during shifts is imperative to supporting their health. Our research aimed to understand DNs’ eating practices during their work, including the types of food consumed throughout the day. Online semi-structured interviews (n=16) were conducted with a convenience sample of current practising medical doctors (n=11) and nurses (n=5) in England. This provided an opportunity to compare and contrast the research data between DNs on workplace nutrition. All participants did shift work, encompassing varied working patterns, including day and night shifts, short and long days and weekends. Following Braun and Clarke’s (5) approach, an inductive thematic analysis presented the findings. Results elucidate six areas of DNs’ eating practices and dietary intake: before and during shifts, on long shifts, after shifts, during night shifts, and on non-working days. Our data suggests that DNs prioritise their clinical responsibilities over their dietary intake at work. Consequently, they often miss eating opportunities and consume caffeine to stay alert during their shifts. Furthermore, DNs viewed night shifts as involving less healthy food choices. While participants expressed their intention to eat healthily during their shifts, their clinical responsibilities made maintaining regular and nutritious dietary practices throughout the day challenging. Nevertheless, DNs value their meal after a shift as the most important, as this could be the only meal they eat throughout the day. Our results suggest that DNs’ eating practices and dietary intake are sub-optimal to recommended dietary guidelines. It also suggests that eating practices are varied, individualised and not applicable to all, considering the many environmental and occupational factors contributing to DNs’ nutritional behaviours. Therefore, dietary workplace interventions are recommended to improve DNs’ dietary behaviours at work. Future research should explore DNs’ eating practices through follow-up interviews at various time points. This approach will provide valuable insights into DNs’ dietary and nutritional behaviours during shift work, helping to uncover additional barriers and challenges beyond DNs’ daily experiences.

Research into academic literacy or literacies, however the term is defined, and how the field relates to disciplinary practice, has been debated in recent decades (Lillis and Scott, 2007; Lillis, 2019). Consideration of academic literacies is also a key component of the Learning Development community as the profession has evolved and developed its own identity. Is the term defined as ‘literacy’ or ‘literacies’? Is it a core component of Learning Development practice, or is it more tied to disciplinary and curriculum-based delivery? By understanding the literature around the definition and the development and application of academic literacies, can we consider how this relates to current perceptions and understanding of the field in a Learning Development context and what impact it may have on student learning? This workshop provided participants with the opportunity to hear about current research being undertaken by the ALDinHE research virtual Community of Practice (vCoP) to investigate our current understanding of academic literacies, how they are (or it is, if considered a singular literacy) perceived across the Learning Development community, and how we might measure its impact on our practice and student learning. For simplicity within this paper, academic literacies will be referred to as a plural form. Due to the historical creation of Learning Development teams in response to sector changes in higher education, this workshop provided participants with the opportunity to hear about the current research on academic literacies. Participants were also able to discuss their own experiential views to develop a shared understanding of how we may apply this understanding to practice, and what the impact on our work may be. The workshop aimed to help define our understanding of academic literacies—both in terms of the literature and in practice—and take away ideas and examples of practice that we can apply in our own work.

Students whose educational and personal development as 16–18-year-olds was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the associated isolation, and alternative assessments are having to adapt to the challenges of higher education. Our peer-assisted learning (PAL) scheme encourages engagement and aims to overcome the stigma of asking for help and struggling alone. PAL not only supports academic development but also has a social aspect. PAL attendees typically want to push boundaries and get the most from their degree. Often the same students attend each week, so friendships begin. Social connections and positivity are good for well-being. A STEM career has particular characteristics, being team oriented. PAL promotes collaboration and communication, which encourages social confidence and more articulate interactions with others, which boost well-being. For many, the industrial placement year within the degree is their first proper job, but the application process, including being rejected, is stressful. PAL leaders, having recent similar experiences, prepare students to be more resilient for this challenge.

Many PhD researchers have the opportunity to take up teaching responsibilities during their doctoral studies to enhance their employability and interest in academia. Aside from their formal teaching training, little is known about the types of resources and support from professional services that PhD students (PhDs) use to fulfil their teaching responsibilities. On the other hand, learning development is a relatively new profession within higher education. As such, there are varied perceptions on the necessity for PhDs with teaching responsibilities to engage with learning development support. This opinion piece shares the experience of a STEM UK PhD student with teaching responsibilities and a learning development practitioner when establishing support for modules taught by PhDs. Through a dialogue, the authors explore the challenges faced in the interaction between learning developers (LDs) and PhDs, in two different UK universities, and recommend how to further develop the relationship. Through this dialogue possible solutions like increasing the visibility of available LD support for PhDs with teaching responsibilities within higher education institutions (HEIs) and including LD support in PhDs teaching training were identified.

"Collaboration in Higher Education," edited by Sandra Abegglen, Tom Burns, and Sandra Sinfield (2023), delves into the intricacies of engaging in collaboration and partnerships within higher education. The book editors adopt an inviting approach in a world marked by complexity and pressing challenges that demand authentic conversations and collective actions. They warmly invite readers, encouraging them to delve into the collection's pages to reflect on their circumstances. This invitation fosters an opportunity to recognise past, present, and future contributors, paving the way for constructive progress through co-creation endeavours. The book eloquently articulates and illustrates the value of collaboration within, throughout, and beyond higher education. Organised into six sections, the volume showcases over thirty case studies contributed by a diverse array of over 100 individuals across different disciplines, institutions, and national boundaries. These carefully selected case studies serve as tangible examples of authentic practices. The book's structure encompasses the following segments: Staff Collaborations to Enhance Teaching and Learning, Students as Partners, Collaborations with Stakeholders, Creative and Digital Partnerships, Decolonising Relationships and Partnerships for Social Justice, and Reflections on Collaboration. Consequently, the book is an essential reference, providing readers with an intricate map of the terrain and narratives, guiding them on a collaborative journey exploring innovative curriculum design and delivery methods, ultimately enriching student learning and success.

This workshop discussed how collaborative reflection and writing provides us, as a group of Learning Developers, with insights into our role and sense of identity. The wider potential for using collaborative writing to develop topics of mutual interest was also explored. Our reflections on the collaborative writing process arose from our first-hand experience of collaborative writing (Bickle et al., 2021). Therefore, we aimed to introduce participants to the tools we used for our writing and encourage them to experience the tools themselves to stimulate a discussion on the potential and challenges of collaborative writing for LD research and practice. We hoped to increase participants’ understanding of collaborative writing through practice and reflection and provide ideas on how others can initiate a collaborative writing community. The introduction briefly outlined the insights we gained from our study, focussing particularly on the way collaborative writing served as a tool to examine and broaden our identities as Learning Developers. It also introduced the methodologies for creating (collaborative writing) and analysing (collaborative autoethnography) data. Next, participants were invited to try out collaborative writing activities and reflect on their potential use as part of their own practice. We used a Google document (Figure 1) to collect their spontaneous responses to short writing prompts related to the challenges and potential of collaborative writing. Finally, at the end of the session, participants left with tips and techniques on how to develop a collaborative writing group of their own.

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This issue contains fourteen articles that explore the experiences, the creativity and the highs and lows of staff and students from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups who are working in partnership to improve the quality of higher education. It specifically seeks to open up difficult conversations that have hitherto been largely neglected within the field of staff-student partnerships. These conversations are different and hard – the scholarship here exposes emotion, passion, care and fragility; they deal with shifts in perspective; they reverberate with the traces of movements and their splinters. The writing is creative and mirrors a dynamic and fluctuating use of language. At the core is the recognition that underneath the habitual usage of well-worn expressions – ‘equality’, ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusivity’ – lie systemic biases, racial discrimation and under-representation. As editors, we recognise the intrinsic contradiction of using the acronym ‘BAME’. Though this term is well established across the sector to describe the varied experiences of people from diverse backgrounds, it serves to marginalise many within our diverse higher education community. For some, it’s a convenient (and originally well-intended) catch-all term, the use of which helps to identify complex inequalities between minority groups and the white majority. For others, it’s cold officialese that obscures their lived reality as individuals from specific communities, individuals with particular needs and challenges. To persist in using language that fails to embrace their unique individualities is to disregard and exclude them even further.

A student reflection on the challenges and barriers of an ethnic minority student through higher education.

The idea of staff–student partnerships was once non-existent. Yet, in recent years, staff–student partnership projects in higher education (HE) have been identified as beneficial for everyone across a variety of universities and colleges. Developments from networks such as RAISE and Jisc have enhanced strategies and inspired practice to ensure better collaborations, not just within the staff population but with students also. As such, we are seeing the shift of pedagogical research to involve students as partners and changes in the language relating to learning and teaching development. The question that this chapter will be addressing is: “Why are staff–student partnerships better than academics doing it on their own?” Using existing examples and personal reflections, this chapter will explore the benefits of working in partnership in HE from the student partner perspective.

Through a #SocMedHE19 conference workshop, the aim was to provide a supportive and open way to discuss the use of social media and to explore any concerns or barriers raised; as well as to gain insights into their professional use of different social media in learning and teaching. A generic overview of Twitter, LinkedIn, Snapchat and Flipgrid were given, drawing on examples of our own learning, teaching and sharing practices in our local institutions. We then wanted to engage the delegates (staff and students) to explore these specific tools themselves and consider how they could be utilised in their own practice. An innovative approach was taken to facilitate and capture this discussion using Lego® Serious Play®, Padlet and Flipgrid. This paper considers how effective this interactive approach was and to what extent it encouraged open discussion about the perceived enablers and barriers to using this selection of social media tools. Key findings highlight the benefits of using social media tools in a classroom setting, enabling participants to increase understanding and confidence of each available tool and exposing them to utilising it pedagogically. The workshop enabled participants to connect with one another, expanding their network and to share potential ideas for learning and teaching. The need for ongoing support for colleagues who are not familiar with the approaches used and implementation in a classroom setting was strongly recommended by participants.

Background: The increase in the global population has placed extra burdens on health services. This is due to the increased risks of cardiovascular disease, with more people falling into the overweight and obese categories. Developed public health interventions prevent risks of health complications, promoting healthier lifestyles and prolonging the quality of life. Those motivated adopt new methods to become healthier. On the other hand, those less motivated are at risk of being overweight and leading a sedentary lifestyle. In 2014, the World Health Organisation (WHO) established that non-communicable diseases were the leading cause of global deaths. Aim: This systematic review critically evaluates the effects of physical activity interventions in adults (18–65 years), and the impact on risk factors of cardiovascular diseases and obesity. Methods: Nineteen items of literature published between 2000 and 2016 were examined using quality of assessment tools. These provided a greater understanding of the effectiveness of physical activity interventions. Outcomes: The complexity of this topic was experienced, with many aspects (such as inter- and intra-personal factors) affecting the effectiveness of physical activity interventions. It was noted that continuous support should be provided during the intervention period, motivating participants by increasing engagement through peer support and group activities, providing long-term sustainability of the willingness to adopt lifestyle changes. Further recommendations examining quantitative data analysis were suggested, exploring how physical activity intensity affects the risks of metabolic syndromes. Social behaviour and its effects on food consumption was also highlighted for further research, enhancing future public health interventions.