Nurturing professional growth among new academics

ABSTRACT

The complexity and challenges of higher education (HE) in recent times have been widely discussed in HE literature, as have concomitant demands on university teachers and their professional learning needs. Much attention has been paid to new academics in these conversations, but less so to international PhD and post-doctoral researchers, who are often asked to teach, yet can be precluded from attending foundational pedagogical courses. This paper discusses an interpretive-hermeneutic study based on a pedagogical course developed for new academics in this very situation. Our discussion focuses on professional growth experienced by the course participants in terms of pedagogical understanding and self-confidence, and what enabled that growth from the participants’ perspectives. On the basis of analysis of interviews, questionnaires and qualitative course evaluations, we consider the value of such purpose-built courses and offer insights into what may need to be considered by course developers to ensure that their impact is optimal.

KEYWORDS:

• Professional learning
• higher education pedagogy
• self-confidence
• doctoral education
• university teaching courses

Acknowledgement

We would like to acknowledge the generosity and insights of the study participants, and all those who have been involved with the course.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Their rate being approximately 60% compared to an average of 40% for Sweden as a whole (Sveriges officiella statistic 2018; UKÄ 2018, 10).

2 For a counter view, see the discussion of a risk-taking disposition by Sutton and Wheatley (2003, 348–349).

3 Compared with the university’s foundational course, the course investigated has fewer contact hours, attracts fewer credits (3 versus 15), takes place within a single teaching term, and is offered in English. While some of the content and general teaching approaches can be similar, the group size is smaller, and topics are not explored in as much depth.

4 Pseudonyms.

5 One of the three co-authors (co-researchers) is a former course participant. The other two were course facilitators at the time of the study. This composition of the co-researcher team has meant that both course facilitator and course participant perspectives have mediated analytical interpretations.

6 A discussion in which the course participants compared their pre-course and post course responses to the questionnaire was part of the final reflection activity in the course.