Teaching Excellence for Career Progression PDF

Teaching excellence as a vehicle for career progression Stephanie Marshall and Gus Pennington SCOPE AND RATIONALE OF CHAPTER Accomplished university teachers have always been well regarded by their former students and are frequently remembered with gratitude and affection in later life (Glasser, 198...

Teaching excellence as a vehicle for career progression Stephanie Marshall and Gus Pennington SCOPE AND RATIONALE OF CHAPTER Accomplished university teachers have always been well regarded by their former students and are frequently remembered with gratitude and affection in later life (Glasser, 1988; Steiner, 1997). Equally, recognition of an individual’s teaching prowess by their peers and institutions has been somewhat muted and, until relatively recently, has been given little or no formal attention in the determination of professional advancement and reward. This situation is changing significantly in some countries, including the UK which is the focus of this chapter. Here national policies, funding incentives, market forces, institutional missions and the rapid growth of teaching-only posts (Court, 2007) place a new emphasis and enhanced value on competent teaching in all its forms. In virtually all UK universities and institutes, even top-flight researchers with some formal responsibilities for students are expected to possess and demonstrate continuing expertise in teaching, including the supervision of research students. Where once the nature, volume and scope of individual professional development for teaching was a private matter it is now clearly in the public domain and subject to various forms of review and regulation. Appraisal of performance, quality assurance procedures, institutional and subject-level audits and requirements for professional body membership have exposed a once ‘secret garden’. Changes in the post-Dearing (NCIHE, 1997) higher education landscape, such as confirmation of the role of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), the establishment of the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and Learning and Teaching Committees within Higher Education Funding Councils have kept learning and teaching matters to the fore and high on the national agenda. More recently, the advent, enhanced public profile and external leverage of the National Student Survey (NSS) has provided a fresh impetus for institutions to ensure they have structures and policies in place to assure and enhance all forms of effective academic practice. The intrinsic value of securing quality in this core element of every university’s mission has been bolstered by a more demanding, fee-paying student population and the pragmatics of increased competition for students both indigenous and from overseas. Establishment 29 ❘ 485 ❘ of means by which they can bring about a positive student experience has led many HEIs inter alia to introduce a range of career paths to ensure that their most competent teachers are identified, formally acknowledged and rewarded. A PLATFORM FOR CAREER PROGRESSION It is against the above background that career progression needs to be considered; thus this chapter seeks to explore approaches that a number of higher education institutions (HEIs) have adopted to acknowledge these trends and to better integrate learning and teaching into career advancement once initial competence has been established. Its other concern is to provide suggestions as to how individuals might extend their experiential profile and develop a documentary evidence base to satisfy teaching-related promotion criteria. Use of paper-based or e-portfolios (Brenton, 2003; Kimball, 2005) which strike a balance between flexibility and structure, and institutional and individual needs, are ideal for this purpose (Seldin, 1997; Baume and Yorke, 2002). What follows might usefully be augmented with ideas found in the preceding chapter as the two are complementary. In terms of its distinctive contribution, however, this chapter is based on four key propositions: 1 That continuing professional development (CPD) for learning and teaching (including supervision) can no longer be conceived as a voluntary, private activity for academics; this function of their role is underpinned increasingly by contractual requirements and the need for quality enhancement based in a nationally recognised code of practice. In essence, the management of career-long teaching competence is no longer an aspirational ideal but part of the organisational fabric of contemporary university life (QAA, 2003, 2006). 2 That whatever the specifics of CPD (and irrespective of age, career status, subject specialism or particular pedagogic expertise) it is increasingly necessary for individuals to engage with activities which ensure they are competent to perform both their current role (maintenance learning) and foreseeable future demands (anticipatory learning) (Pennington and Smith, 2002: 254). 3 That while career routes which make it worthwhile for academics to pay particular attention to learning and teaching have tended, hitherto, to be the preserve of post- 1992 HEIs (see Case study 1), this trend is spreading to all parts of the UK higher education sector. Initiatives across all types of institution are accelerating the establishment of well-defined career routes based on ‘teaching excellence’ comparable to those for research excellence. A normative process is taking place that will be hard to resist in the long term. 4 That individuals, if they are so minded, can prepare to meet the above challenges by systematic engagement with a range of developmental activities which, when aggregated, leave them better placed to seek career advancement on the basis of their learning and teaching expertise. It is clear that if this process is started early and is 486 ❘ Enhancing personal practice given career-long attention it has the potential to open up an attractive, alternative career route to that which has conventionally existed. Differing requirements in different contexts Traditionally, it has been suggested that the majority of pre-1992 universities paid lipservice only to promoting a culture where learning and teaching are formally integrated into career pathways. Indeed, a general lack of any means to demonstrate and be rewarded for excellence in teaching has been a common complaint from staff in these institutions for at least a decade. Examination of a range of promotion criteria from this group of ‘research-intensive’ institutions suggests, however, that a potentially farreaching shift in policy has begun and that where career progression on the basis of teaching is now actively encouraged, detailed work has been undertaken to codify requirements, to determine appropriate indicators and to identify elements to be addressed and evidenced (see Case study 2). Academics who work in contexts in which there is a pressure ‘to publish or perish’ and who are required to respond to the increased use of metrics as a major determinant of research performance may question, understandably, the wisdom of paying too much attention to teaching. Fortunately, there is growing awareness not only of the validity of promoting the teaching–research nexus as a means of ‘growing’ institutions’ own cadres of potential research students (see Chapter 12) but also as a means of enriching a distinctive form of teaching (Elton, 2005; Jenkins et al., 2007). In short, the argument has moved on and is now centred on the balance to be struck between differing permutations of individual teaching–research profiles in particular contexts. What are the key elements? As the first two case studies illustrate, in seeking promotion through a teaching ‘route’, UK HEIs aspire to an extensive profile of significant activities at a level considerably higher than the Associate and Fellow categories of the UK professional standards (see Chapter 28). Institutional requirements for the award of Chairs line up better with criteria established in 2007 for award of a Senior Fellowship of the HEA (see Further reading). Common components focus on personal excellence in teaching and learning, leadership, a national and/or international reputation, successful securing of competitive external funding and contributions to scholarship in the field. For many universities an established record in supervising research students through to completion in an appropriate time-scale is also essential. Despite the potentially contested nature of such concepts (Skelton, 2007), weight is given to criteria by the use of ‘qualifiers’ such as ‘excellence’, ‘outstanding’, ‘distinguished’ and ‘respected’. Curriculum innovation or a distinctive approach to pedagogy are additionally identified as defining features of superior performance. Teaching excellence and careers ❘ 487 488 ❘ Enhancing personal practice Case study 1: Northumbria University: criteria for promotion to Chair in Teaching and Learning Case study 2: University of Manchester: criteria for promotion to Chair in Teaching and Learning Production of a portfolio which includes evidence of distinctive, innovative and influential examples of programme development, pedagogy and/or learning enhancement both within the university and at national level. The Appointments Board will take into account all forms of evidence including published works and other examples of dissemination. Evidence should demonstrate some of the following: The delivery of nationally recognised teaching-related professional service to other universities and organisations. Active involvement and/or leadership of national committees relating to learning and teaching. Recognition of significant adoption at national level of learning and teaching innovations originally developed by the individual. Keynote addresses at teaching-related conferences. Learning and teaching leadership across the university. The development of appealing and innovative programmes that have attracted significant numbers of students. The development of successful corporate programmes. The development of successful short courses. Leading teaching collaborations with other institutions. Publications on teaching and learning in refereed journals, textbooks and conference papers. A substantial number of significant learning and teaching-related grants secured on behalf of the university. Outstanding ability... will be demonstrated by academic leadership and distinction in Teaching and Learning, including contributions to the advancement of knowledge and understanding or its creative or professional application in the field of learning at the highest level, and the ability to influence, stimulate and inspire others; and outstanding achievement in contribution to student learning as evidenced in either peer-reviewed or peer-reviewable outputs including excellence in practice in the field. Teaching excellence and careers ❘ 489 The award is designated to recognise distinguished teachers and scholars regardless of subject or pedagogic approach, and to recognise in a more formal and distinctive way the centrality of teaching and the management of learning and assessment as core activities within the university. The aim in part is to encourage teaching excellence by the creation of role models, and to aid the dissemination of good practice. But it is also to recognise outstanding performance and professional reputation in the field at an international level. Applicants must be able to provide evidence of: an established reputation as an excellent teacher and scholar, in addition to showing that they are reflective practitioners, respected by peers and students for their contribution to the learning and assessment process; experience of leading curriculum development teams, introducing changes and innovations in teaching and learning and experienced in the evaluation of teaching, learning and assessment; ability to demonstrate a powerful commitment to the future development of teaching and learning within their field and a capacity to contribute to the leadership of learning development within their area of subject expertise and more broadly within the university; recognition in terms of a reputation that is recognised at an international level, and also scholarly outputs, which may include publications that are either peer reviewed or peer reviewable. Applicants should include details of achievements and accountabilities which indicate that their work is of international standing, including, for example, details of successful teaching approaches, including, as appropriate, student, peer and external assessments and evaluations, and original materials used in teaching; innovations made in support of student learning; curriculum development; publications centred on teaching of the subject; participation in international conferences and so on, concerned with the development of the teaching of their subject in higher education; membership of international committees and so on, concerned with the teaching of their subject in higher education; collaboration with external bodies; evidence of their external reputation as a teacher and scholar of note. There is no single, prescribed or guaranteed way in which individuals can satisfy the emerging criteria for appointment to a ‘teaching excellence’ Chair or similar type of post. The criteria for such promotion may differ widely not only among HEIs, but also among disciplines. Each case, necessarily, is judged on its merits and to a large extent is context dependent (see Case study 3). Even so, it is possible to identify a broad trend of experience from ‘novice’ to ‘expert’ which leads towards this goal (see below). A starting point is the formation of a strong personal base of effective practice, possibly initiated through successful completion of an institutional postgraduate HE teaching qualification. It is perfectly possible, of course, to build a strong subject-based competence as a teacher without recourse to a formal programme, but well-delivered, ‘fit-for-purpose’ programmes present opportunities for structured engagement with key issues and processes in relation to learning, teaching and assessment, skilled support, mentoring and feedback, and an initial exposure to the scholarship of the field. MOVING ON: BUILDING A BASE OF EXPERIENCE After achieving and demonstrating initial competence in teaching there are a number of proven ways to secure continuing career development. In broad terms these might include some or all of the following: Gaining experience, confidence and competence across a wider repertoire of teaching, learning and assessment methods at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Leading the design and integration of larger ‘units’ of learning, for example, clusters or sequences of modules across semesters; taking responsibility for the overall quality of a substantial part or the whole of a course programme. Leading or managing curriculum innovation, both to enhance the student experience and to provide a ‘market advantage’ to the institution, faculty or department. Securing small institutional grants and competitive national funding for developmental projects or trialling of leading-edge practice. Success of this kind develops project management and leadership capabilities as well as generating academic outputs for dissemination. Gaining internal teaching awards or similar external recognition such as a National Teaching Fellowship or HEA Senior Fellow status. Providing support, coaching and mentoring to colleagues and external, teachingrelated consultancy or training to other institutions nationally and internationally. Helping to deliver a formal postgraduate teaching programme for new staff is an excellent way of sharing expertise and contributing to the next generation of teachers. Building a base of expertise as an external examiner, including chairing examination boards. Undertaking this kind of role exposes individuals to the fine-grained workings of a range of other institutions and helps develop more rounded judgement about teaching quality and standards. Significant responsibility within a graduate school. Contributing to the activities of, or taking a formal role in, appropriate national committees, learned societies and HEA Subject Centres. Contributing to the accreditation and CPD activities of professional, regulatory and statutory bodies. Engagement of this kind provides extensive opportunities for subject/professionally specific CPD and may be particularly relevant to career 490 ❘ Enhancing personal practice progression in areas such as law, medicine, dentistry and social work which are regulated through a ‘licence to practise’. Participating in internal subject reviews and QAA academic reviews and institutional audit activities. Undertaking further formal and accredited study to update, extend or replace initial qualifications. This may be particularly relevant where individuals feel they have ‘hit a ceiling’, choose to change roles or are required by their institution to add new skills to existing expertise (see Case study 3). Engaging in teaching-related scholarship, research and editorial activity of a generic and/or disciplinary nature. Individuals who can demonstrate a convincing profile across most of the above categories and who additionally evidence commitment to reflection and continuous professional improvement should be well placed to respond to promotion criteria for senior ‘teaching-focused’ posts irrespective of institutional mission or their own teaching specialism. A strategic decision at Coventry to make ‘third-stream’ activities the second major activity in the university led to the revision of academic contracts to include significant amounts of such activity. The opportunity was taken to review and revise an existing Master’s programme that had previously focused solely on teaching and learning. New modules were introduced. Developing an Applied Research Profile offered an opportunity for participants to take stock of their expertise, to learn new skills and to plan their future applied research. The Centre for the Study of HE (CSHE) worked closely with the university’s applied research support staff in order to offer the programme. A module in Academic Leadership was designed to complement existing non-certificated provision offered by human resources. The module focused on issues that were specific to leadership in an academic setting, including distributed leadership, collegiality and interdisciplinarity. An existing module, Perspectives on Professional Practice, was revised to provide a core experience for participants. Each module was made available on both a stand-alone basis and as part of a full Master’s award. These changes, which brought provision into alignment with the institution’s strategic plan, together with more focused and energetic marketing, have meant that Coventry staff participation in the Master’s provision has increased considerably. (Prof Paul Blackmore, now King’s College London, and Dr Andrew Rothwell, Coventry University) Teaching excellence and careers ❘ 491 Case study 3: A Master’s award at Coventry University What is it to be scholarly, what is it to be competent? Demonstrable personal competence in teaching and the production of a range of appropriate scholarly outputs are interrelated and indispensable elements of appointment to a senior ‘teaching excellence’ post. Indeed, understanding the myriad connections and syntheses between ‘doing’ teaching and concepts derived from theoretical frameworks for learning and other professional literature lies at the heart of what it is ‘to profess’ and to earn the title ‘professor’ or ‘professorial fellow’. It is this kind of praxis which promotion procedures attempt to interrogate. It might be argued further that scholarship is the vehicle which draws the tacit knowledge (Polanyi, 1958) of excellent teachers into the public domain and, hence, makes it available to other practitioners. Moreover, scholarship is the means whereby ‘reputation’ is built and ‘esteem’ validated. It is not surprising therefore that promotion boards give it close attention, nor that valid forms of scholarship are now more frequently interpreted as ‘action- ‘ or ‘policy-based’ as opposed to discovery-led ‘blue sky’ research. It would seem that Boyer’s (1990) plea for a reconsidered view of scholarship and new respect for a ‘scholarship of applications and teaching’ has been not only heard but enshrined in the promotion criteria of the most forward-looking HEIs. Activities associated with reflection, action learning and action research are now well documented (see Chapter 28) and widely accepted as precursors of praxis, leading to continuing professional development. Numerous studies of ‘professionals’ trace the development of practitioners from novice to expert, and Case study 4 provides an interesting account of one such journey and gives insight into the kind of profile presented for promotion to a ‘pedagogic’ Chair. Progression in a practice-based activity such as university-level teaching has been described as passing through a number of stages (Dreyfus and Dreyfus, 1986). Level 1, the novice stage, is characterised by adherence to taught rules and little discretionary judgement; level 2, the advanced beginner, takes more account of the global characteristics of situations but tends to treat all aspects and attributes as having equal importance. At level 3 the practitioner is considered competent, is beginning to see actions as part of longer-term goals, and is able to undertake conscious and deliberate planning and perform standardised or routine procedures. At level 4, that of proficiency, situations are seen more holistically, important aspects are more readily recognised, decision-making is less laboured and guiding axioms can be interpreted differently according to situation. The expert, the level 5 practitioner, no longer relies on rules and guidelines and has an intuitive grasp of situations based on deep understanding, knows what is possible, and only uses analytic approaches in novel situations or when new problems occur. Thus the expert stage is characterised by implicit and unconscious practice. For the experienced mid-career teacher in higher education, and particularly for those applying for promotion via the learning and teaching route, much practice will be at levels four and five. This type and level of accomplishment need to be evidenced in the documentation presented for progression to a promoted post and triangulated with data derived from students, direct peer observation and other metrics. 492 ❘ Enhancing personal practice Professor Mick Healey holds a Chair in Geographical Education at the University of Gloucestershire. His main interests include links between research and teaching, learning styles, active and enquiry-based learning, and promoting the scholarship of teaching and learning. Mick sees his career since 1980, as falling into two overlapping stages, each about 15 or so years long. The first phase was dedicated to working as an economic geographer. During this period he developed a reasonable publication record, including about 50 articles and chapters, four edited books, a textbook and a number of consultancy reports. Despite this profile he felt he was never going to develop more than a modest reputation as an economic geographer. ‘I owe in large part, my chair, my National Teaching Fellowship, and my opportunity to visit universities around the world, to my involvement with the scholarship of teaching and learning’, says Professor Healey. However, it was not until his midcareer that he engaged seriously with this particular aspect of academic activity. In the early 1990s, ‘My interest in teaching geography led me to start investigating aspects of my practice, I gave a few conference presentations and wrote a few articles and within a few years I became a joint editor of the Journal of Geography in Higher Education.’ But perhaps the key event was winning one of the first Fund for Development in Teaching and Learning projects in 1996, which led to directing the Geography Discipline Network and ultimately laid the foundation for the University of Gloucestershire’s successful bid for a Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) in 2005. The other key milestone in Mick’s career came in 2000 when he was awarded a National Teaching Fellowship. His project was concerned with embedding the scholarship of teaching and learning in disciplines and institutions, a ‘hugely overambitious project,’ he now admits, ‘but it did allow me to go and discuss this kind of scholarship with people in many different parts of the world.’ Mick has subsequently exploited his international network to collect examples of interesting teaching and learning practices, which he uses to inform the many workshops, keynotes and consultancies he presents and undertakes. Since 1995 he has delivered over 250 educational workshops, seminars and conference presentations in Australasia, mainland Europe and North America, as well as the UK. He has also written and edited over 100 papers, chapters, books and guides on various aspects of teaching and learning in higher education. He talks enthusiastically about the scholarship of teaching and learning and says that ‘one of the most enjoyable things is working with like-minded colleagues on a project’. He particularly values discipline-based approaches, but notes that Teaching excellence and careers ❘ 493 Case study 4: Extending experience and building expertise: a personal account though he started work as a geographer, nowadays he is more frequently involved with research and development projects spanning all disciplines. He gives much credit in this aspect of the development of his career to working collaboratively with a mentor, who is also a colleague and co-author, and says, ‘I wouldn’t be where I am now without his help and support.’ (Professor Mick Healey, in conversation with Stephanie Marshall) For many institutions, the evidence of teaching expertise is required in the form of a teaching portfolio. Teaching portfolios have been written about extensively over the years (Fry and Ketteridge, 2003) and Case study 5 provides an example of the long-established use of teaching portfolios for tenure and promotion purposes from McGill University. Interest in teaching portfolios first emerged in Canada in the 1970s, with the idea developed and promoted by the Canadian Association of University Teachers. Since then, portfolio use has become relatively commonplace throughout North America. McGill University, a research-intensive university in Montreal, has had a portfolio-related policy in place since 1994 when its Senate approved the requirement of a teaching portfolio for all promotion and tenure decisions. Initially, basic requirements were outlined by the university, but by 1997, Faculties had begun developing specific protocols for portfolios that best represented the particular teaching demands of their own disciplines. Although university policy has subsequently been reviewed and refined, the basic conception remains largely the same, namely a teaching portfolio is required for any tenure and promotion decision, including (1) promotion to the rank of full professor, and (2) hiring with tenure from outside McGill. The portfolio includes a teaching statement (five to ten pages) plus appendices of no more than 30 pages. The statement addresses: (1) an individual’s teaching approach or philosophy, (2) their teaching responsibilities, (3) evidence of teaching effectiveness, and (4) teaching development activities. A full description of the relevant policies and portfolio may be found in the references (under McGill University). Policy implementation was secured with developmental support from the teaching development unit which worked with heads of departments to help define criteria for interpreting and assessing teaching portfolios. All orientations for new academics include information about the requirement. The development unit regularly offers workshops on creating and maintaining teaching portfolios; these workshops include a panel of individuals who review 494 ❘ Enhancing personal practice Case study 5: Use of teaching portfolios for tenure and promotion at McGill University, Montreal dossiers for tenure and promotion. The unit also works with individuals who request help in constructing such portfolios. At this point, the policy has become embedded in university practices. (Professor Lynne MacAlpine, McGill University, Montreal) TOWARDS THE FUTURE In thinking about their future institutional needs, the demands of an internationalised student market and the evolving nature of academic roles, some universities have recently undertaken fundamental reviews of their selection and promotion procedures to ensure continuing fitness for purpose. Progressive human resource policies have seen the widespread adoption of job evaluation schemes aimed at parity of esteem and reward between different career routes and greater transparency in grading decisions. As HR policies and procedures have become more codified, HEIs have also recognised the imperative of retaining flexibility and responsiveness to both individual cases and their own circumstances. This is particularly true for senior appointments. In furtherance of its strategic aim to attract and retain high-quality staff, the University of Bath (2007) recently instituted a major review of its academic career development and promotions procedures. Inter alia, the university has created posts with the titles of Professorial Research Fellow and Professorial Teaching Fellow; it regards each as broadly equivalent in status and contribution to the institution. Criteria have been identified in three areas: management and leadership, research and scholarship, and teaching. To facilitate promotion to Professorial Fellow, applicants need to demonstrate how they meet the criteria in different combinations for different career routes. Thus, for a Professorial Teaching Fellow applicants provide evidence of teaching as a major strength with supplementary evidence of effective performance in one of the supporting areas of ‘Management and Leadership’ and ‘Research and Scholarship’. Appointment to a full Professorship is possible on the basis of excellent teaching and an effective contribution to both of the other elements. It is interesting to note that while an ‘excellent’ or ‘major’ teaching contribution can be evidenced in a variety of ways, considerable weight is attached to data generated from the university’s own online student evaluation system. Monash University in Melbourne, a member of Australia’s Group of Eight researchintensive universities, has well-developed career routes for academic staff including promotion between Senior Lecturer, Reader, Associate Professor and Professor. Teaching portfolios are not used for promotion purposes, although the university produces clear guidelines in terms of its requirements. To make a case for promotion, staff have to identify their academic achievements under the headings ‘Research’, ‘Education’ and ‘Service’. The distinctive feature of the Monash system is that candidates are able to allocate a relative weighting to each of the three areas of performance. The total weighting must add up to 100 per cent, the minimum weighting allowed for each of ‘Research’ and ‘Education’ is 30 per cent and the minimum for ‘Service’ 10 per cent. Candidates are advised that the Teaching excellence and careers ❘ 495 relative quality and depth of supporting evidence they provide should reflect the balance of weightings declared in their application. This approach requires candidates to think carefully about the basis of their application and to analyse their individual strengths while providing the university with a flexible, consistent and transparent mechanism (for promotion guidelines, see Monash University in References). POSTSCRIPT Contrary to some negative (and frequently uninformed) external opinions about the capability of the UK higher education sector to manage change, many institutions have demonstrated a willingness to overhaul traditional practices. A new emphasis on teaching quality, the student experience and responsiveness to student opinion, coupled with policy-led initiatives in the area of HR management and workforce restructuring, have created a culture more inclined to innovate. Shifts in attitude and behaviour abound in relation to the valuing of human capital, the motivational dimension of performance management and the appropriateness of reward systems. The move towards the establishment of the ‘Teaching Chair’ or ‘Professorial Teaching Fellow’ is part of a dynamic which is opening up new promotional pathways for individuals at, or approaching, mid-career. It also acknowledges the almost imperceptible growth of ‘teaching-only posts’ in the past decade, now amounting to a quarter of all academic positions (Court, 2007). The means deployed to test the quality of individuals seeking advancement via such routes is becoming clearer and the criteria more refined. Providing criteria are applied with rigour and integrity, and the flow of candidates is of a high calibre, there is no reason why these initiatives should not succeed and become permanent features of the HE environment. As Félix Fénéon reminds us, ‘there is no such thing as the avant-garde; only people lagging behind’. REFERENCES