http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5069-2779
The theme of this edition is about relationships and partnerships in academic development in a variety of contexts, problematizing some sticking points. From building the capacity of educational leaders in faculties, to stepping in to support visiting international academics in resolving the tensions of border-crossing, to probing threshold concepts and finding care and kindness in learning communities: this compilation gets to the heart of the multifaceted academic developer’s role.
The creation of communities for connection, communication, and caring is a central but often implicit thread in academic development. In a nutshell, academic developers provide opportunities for faculty to share, develop, and learn about teaching to enhance student learning. The facilitation of interpersonal engagement takes many shapes and forms, but no matter how academic developers seek to build community, the promise of transformation in teaching, learning and student engagement persists – yet remains a challenge.
The articles here examine how academic developers bring faculty together, underscoring the importance of faculty connections. The context for faculty engagement varies. Authors here reflect on the value of faculty partnering with students, educational leadership development, academic developers partnering with faculty, and the value of academics and developers connecting with one another. The mainstay of these connections is building the capacity, courage and capability of academics to teach well, to the benefit of students, and increasingly in partnership with them.
Fields, Kenny and Mueller examine building educational leadership capacity through an academic development programme in a Canadian university. Their study identifies five characteristics of leadership from interviews with 11 educational leaders, several of which signal the significance of relationships – affective qualities, mentoring and empowering colleagues. The participants benefited from a program which enabled innovation, exploring their leadership identities, and belonging to an interdisciplinary community, commenting specifically on the value of ‘informal networking, partnership-building, and collaboration within and across the disciplines’ (p. 228). The article demonstrates that informal and local leaders are vital actors in bringing faculty together around teaching and learning and SoTL.
Similarly, Smart et al. show the value of professional conversations for teacher development in an article about an alternative approach to benchmarking teaching to achieve Fellowship of the UK’s Higher Education Academy. Traditionally UK Higher Education Academy Fellowships are achieved through written reflections. Here the authors showcase providing a choice between written or oral submissions, and articulate some of the benefits of peer professional dialogues. While the authors note that faculty choice between the two approaches is important, they reflect on the inherent value of working through dialogue with a peer, rather than through writing in isolation from others, in developing one’s ability to articulate beliefs about teaching and learning.
Matthews’ et al. shine the light on a different part of the kaleidoscope of relationships in which academic developers are involved. Their systematic review of the Students as Partners (SaP) literature demonstrates that there are both rewards and challenges in fostering partnerships between faculty and students. The theme of building relationships is again central as they assert that they ‘celebrate partnership as a relational process, rather than merely a transactional one’ (p. 253). Yet in most universities, there are transaction costs, organizational structures, and pockets of resistance to be negotiated. The article calls on academic developers to work to overcome resistance and build structures which facilitate student partnership.
At another Canadian university, Sharif et al. explore the experiences of Faculty Liaisons embedded in Faculties. In this context, academic developers have the opportunity to be contextually and culturally aware of the teaching development needs of a particular disciplinary unit and the politics at play therein to best support teaching development communities. But they must also build relationships with other academic developers in the central institutional teaching unit. While tensions may arise in and between both contexts (local and central), it is necessary to work to allay them despite ‘competing interests, identities, and requirements associated with the diverse range of their projects’ (p. 260). They assert the inherent value in ‘third space’ developers bridging local and central within their institution.
Jeannin’s study investigates the troublesome idea of border-crossing for visiting international scholars at a South African university in the throes of transformation. Based on interviews with visiting lecturers her study shows that many ‘felt puzzled by the culture and requirements of their host institution, did not expect the racial interpretive framework that is pervasive in the university as a consequence of the apartheid legacy’ (p. 280). As a result lecturers ‘experienced tensions and critical incidents that are typical when “working in borderlands”’ (pp. 280–281). The implications she draws for academic developers are to facilitate conversations which probe different teaching approaches and cultures, and give air to different epistemological perspectives, particularly about decolonizing the curriculum. For Jeannin, this may involve resolving tensions by translating ‘community of differences to a community of learning’ (p. 281).
A comparative Australian study of early career academics’ development related to teaching, demonstrates uneven provision. Fraser et al. find that induction of new teaching staff is wanting in a number of ways. They call for all universities to have substantive induction programmes that include: paying sessional instructors to attend them, opportunities for faculty to work together with academic developers, and one another, peer observations, communities of practice, and reflecting through portfolios.
If relationships are at the heart of academic development, this is certainly reflected in the editorial board at IJAD. We are pleased to welcome Dr Tracy Zou from Hong Kong University to the team as our new Associate Editor. She adds fresh experience and expertise to our team. We pay tribute to Associate Editor, Dr Katie Linder, who steps off the editorial board. Katie has almost single-handedly catapulted IJAD into the twittersphere, from 0 to almost 800 followers in a couple of years! Thanks Katie for putting IJAD onto the social media map. You will be missed.
On behalf of the IJAD editorial team,