Representing Academic Development
Keywords:academic development, evaluation, higher education policy, quality enhancement initiatives
This article outlines strategies designed to meet the challenge of reporting on the influence of academic development work to different stakeholders. The broad scope of the work is illustrated by examples of initiatives at sector, institution, programme and practice levels. The examples demonstrate how the aims and approaches of academic development have evolved in recent years and why evaluating the expanded range of activities is challenging. This ‘evaluation challenge’ delays growth of a body of knowledge and gives rise to an ever-present risk of removal or restructure facing academic development centres in a rapidly changing higher education sector. The challenge should, therefore, be addressed as a matter of the highest priority.
Bamber, V. (2010). An institutional programme: A national model for evaluation? In L. Stefani (Ed.), The effectiveness of academic development (pp. 183–196). New York & London: Routledge.
Bamber, V. (Ed.). (2013). Evidencing the value of educational development. London: Staff and Educational Development Association (SEDA).
Browne, J. (2010). Securing a sustainable future for higher education: An independent review of higher education funding and student finance.
Centre for the Study of Education and Training. (2008). Evaluation of the impact of the Quality Enhancement Themes. Lancaster University.
Chalmers, D., Stoney, S., Goody, A., Goerke, V., & Gardiner, D. (2012). Identification and implementation of indicators and measures of effectiveness of teaching preparation programs for academics in higher education. Canberra: Office of Learning and Teaching.
Creanor, L. (2013). Raising the profile: An institutional case study of embedding scholarship and innovation through distributive leadership. Innovations in Learning & Teaching International.
Fulbright-Anderson, K., Connell, J. P., & Kubisch, A. (1999). Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: Progress, prospects and problems. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Volume 2 – Theory, Measurement, and Analysis, 2.
Gibbs, G. (2013). Reflections on the changing nature of academic development. International Journal of Academic Development, 18(1), 4–14.
Gill, J. (2012, 1 November). Universal lesson to be learned. Times Higher Education.
Glasgow Caledonian University. (2013). Blended learning report.
Gordon, G., & Owen, C. (2006). Cultures of quality enhancement: A short overview of the literature for higher education policy makers and practitioners. Glasgow: QAA Scotland.
Gosling, D. (2008). Educational development in the United Kingdom: Report to the heads of educational development group. London: Association of Commonwealth Universities.
Grant, B. (2013). The rush to scholasticism – or the long road to critical scholarship? A response to Gibbs’ commentary. International Journal of Academic Development, 18(1), 15–17.
Gunn, C. (2010). Sustainability factors for e-Learning initiatives. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, 18(2), 89–103.
Gunn, C., & Donald, C. (2010). Tracking the invisible: An e-learning group’s approach to evaluation. In L. Stefani (Ed.), The effectiveness of academic development (pp. 133–142). New York & London: Routledge.
Harper, S., Gray, S., North, S., Brown, S., & Ashton, K. (2009). Getting the most from staff: Using talents to the full. In S. Denton & S. Brown (Eds.), A practical guide to university and college management: Beyond bureaucracy. New York & Oxon: Routledge.
Kolko, J. (2012). Wicked problems: problems worth solving, Available from https://www.wickedproblems.com/
Lefoe, G. (2010). Creating the future: Changing culture through leadership capacity development. In U. D. Ehlers & D. Schneckenberg (Eds.), Changing cultures in higher education. A handbook for strategic change (pp. 189–204). Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Lefoe, G., Smigiel, H., & Parrish, D. (2007). Enhancing higher education through leadership capacity development: Progressing the faculty scholars model. Enhancing Higher Education, Theory and Scholarship. Proceedings of the 30th HERDSA Annual Conference, Adelaide.
Lent, N., & Machell, J. (2011). A social practice approach to the evaluation of enhancement strategies in the Quality Enhancement Framework for Scottish Universities. In M. Saunders, P. Trowler & V. Bourdieu (Eds.), Reconceptualising Evaluation in Higher Education (pp. 105–112). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Mahoney, C. (2011, 14 July). Knowledge is not enough. Times Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/416772.article
Maynes, T., Morrison, D., Mellar, H., Bullen, P., & Oliver, M. (Eds.). Transforming higher education through technology enhanced learning, p. 13. The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/learningandtech/Transforming-01.pdf
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting educational design research. UK: Routledge.
Nicol, D., & Draper, S. (2009). A blueprint for transformational organizational change in higher education: REAP as a case study. In T. Mayes, D. Morrison, H. Meller, P. Bullen & M. Oliver (Eds.), Education through technology-enhanced learning. The Higher Education Academy.
Parsons, D., Hill, I., Holland, J., & Willis, D. (2012). Impact of teaching development programmes in higher education. York: The Higher Education Academy.
Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Saunders, M. (2009). Theme 2 Introduction. In V. Bamber, P. Trowler, M. Saunders & P. Knight (Eds.), Enhancing learning, teaching, assessment and curriculum in higher education. Maidenhead, UK: Society for Research in Higher Education & Open University Press.
Saunders, M., Knight, P., Trowler, P., Machell, J., Williams, S., Lent, N., & Spencer, A. (2006). Enhancing the quality of teaching and learning in Scottish universities: The final report of the first evaluation of the Quality Enhancement Framework to the Scottish Funding Council’s Quality Enhancement Framework Evaluation Steering Committee. Edinburgh: Scottish Funding Council.
Saunders, M., Machell, J., Lent, N., Ashwin, P., Williams, S., Trowler, P., … Gelston, A. (2009). First annual report of the evaluation of the SFC Quality Enhancement Framework to its QEF Evaluation Steering Committee. Edinburgh: Scottish Funding Council.
Sherer, P., Shea, T., & Kristensen, E. (2003). Online communities of practice: A catalyst for faculty development. Innovative Higher Education, 27(3), 183–194.
Stefani, L. (Ed.). (2010). The effectiveness of academic development. New York & London: Routledge.
Strickland, K., McLatchie, J., & Pelik, R. (2011). Reflections on the development of a dynamic learning, teaching and assessment strategy. Campus Wide Information Systems, 28(4), 294–298.
Sword. (2010). Archiving for the future: A longitudinal approach to evaluating a postgraduate certificate programme. In L. Stefani (Ed.), The effectiveness of academic development (pp. 127–132). New York & London: Routledge.
Trowler, P., Saunders, M., & Bamber, V. (2009). Enhancement theories. In V. Bamber, P. Trowler, M. Saunders, & P. Knight (Eds.), Enhancing learning, teaching, assessment and curriculum in higher education (pp. 7–16). Maidenhead, UK: Society for Research in Higher Education & Open University Press.
Walker, R., Voce, J., & Ahmed, J. (2012). Survey of technology enhanced learning for higher education in the UK. UCISA.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice has made best effort to ensure accuracy of the contents of this journal, however makes no claims to the authenticity and completeness of the articles published. Authors are responsible for ensuring copyright clearance for any images, tables etc which are supplied from an outside source.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.