Academic developers as ‘romantic incubators’? The role of growth and professional support in our work

Although initial descriptors vary globally, terms such as educational development, academic development, and faculty development are joined by the common word, ‘development’. The idea of development implies a function oriented towards growth, encouragement, and professional support. Land (2001, p. 6), focusing on the individual academic developer, titles this orientation the ‘romantic (ecological humanist)’, which is ‘concerned with the personal development, growth and well-being of individual practitioners within the organization’. Others, looking at academic development organisations, have labeled this function the ‘incubator’ role (POD Network, 2018; Wright, 2023). As an incubator, academic development units support individual growth and development through one-on-one initiatives such as consultations and coaching, as well as programmatic approaches such as orientations and mentoring.

In both cases, the romantic (ecological humanist) orientation and incubator strategies are presented as approaches that individuals and academic units might intentionally occupy. For example, in Land’s work, romantic is one of 12 possible orientations. Similarly, an incubator approach is one of four change strategies that an academic unit, such as a centre for teaching and learning, might leverage. Therefore, what are the affordances of this particular orientation or strategy, compared to other possibilities?

There are compelling reasons to implement romantic/incubator approaches to academic development. As Timmermans et al. (2018, p. 370) write, ‘Care is arguably part of the underlying ethos of our work as educational developers’. This core value is embodied in these supportive and developmental orientations. An additional foundational component of the work of academic development is change (Grupp, 2014; Timmermans, 2014; Weston & Finkelstein, 2017). Critically reflective change or reflection-in-action are guiding threads woven through many of these approaches, with the objective of promoting transformation or self-realization. Finally, at the level of the group or institution, these approaches contribute to institutional enhancement, by enabling career success and pathways to leadership, in ways that align with definitions of the field (Felten et al., 2007; Sutherland, 2018)

The articles and book review in the current issue illustrate the romantic/incubator approaches in various endeavours. One important form of these initiatives is mentoring. Bojko and Kowalczyk (2023) found that mentoring enhances the growth of early-career academics in Poland and enables them to make steady scientific progression. However, Bojko and Kowalczyk also highlight that mentoring in their context was found to be in a rather traditional form, with senior scholars passing knowledge to their junior counterparts. Alkhatnai (2023) discovered that a year-long mentoring programme for university administrators across eight Saudi universities benefited mentees when trust is established. Like in Bojko and Kowalczyk’s study, certain cultural biases were found to limit the reciprocal relationship as some mentors interpreted mentoring as supervision (Alkhatnai, 2023). When mentoring or a similar supporting structure is lacking in academia, the result could be the loss of talent. Interviews with eight early-career academic women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine who recently left academia showed that uncertainties, lack of support, and intolerable culture were the main reasons for their departure (Christian et al., 2023).

While the romantic orientation in Land’s (2001) conceptualisation mainly concerns individual academics, mentoring programmes reported in this issue can also be at an institutional level. This might be more aligned with the incubator strategy that cultivates individuals and communities and promotes institutional capacity building. In Adiningrum et al.’s (2023) article, a mentoring programme, as part of a transnational collaborative academic development project, helped six Indonesian institutions build their capacity for student-centred learning. Other than mentoring, a romantic/incubator approach can also manifest in various forms of professional support and consultations. Ruge et al. (2023) highlight that developing teaching philosophies benefits both academics’ personal and career growth and institutional capacity building. Based on these promising findings, Ruge et al. argue for the importance of academic developers providing sufficient support through consultations, workshops, and communities of practice for academics to reflect on and craft their teaching philosophies. Research mentoring is also highlighted in this volume. Grimwood and Hetherington’s (2023) research highlights the positive outcomes of a development programme for doctoral students who mentor undergraduate- and master’s-level projects. Most frequently, participants reported greater clarity on expectations and boundaries, and other benefits included increased confidence and a ‘sense of legitimacy’ (Grimwood & Hetherington, 2023, p. 81) about the role.

In addition to the evaluation of professional development, attention has also been paid to the content and design of professional development for academics. Based on the views of various stakeholders in Sweden, including students, academics, administrators, and the government, Silander and Stigmar (2023) showed different perceptions of how academics frame professional growth. For example, teachers demanded more practical teaching knowledge, whilst the government tended to focus on theoretical pedagogical knowledge. The implications for academic developers, drawn by Silander and Stigmar, are to exert more of their influence on the content design of the pedagogical courses. Clarke et al. (2023) studied perceptions of teaching of early-career academics in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics who participated in an accredited teaching and learning programme in an Irish university and found that some adopted new teaching approaches after the programme but soon discontinued, whilst some others did not implement any new approaches. Their findings imply that professional development programmes need to take a holistic approach with sufficient room for participants to voice their concerns in the structural and cultural contexts of the institution (Clarke et al. 2023).

Finally, the book review written by Siegel and Lohner (2023) invites readers to appreciate insights into the ‘expanding lifeworld’ (Mårtensson & Roxå, 2021, p. 1, as cited in Siegel & Lohner, 2023) of academic developers at individual, group, and institutional levels in the German context. This broad view aligns with our earlier discussion on the change of academic development towards both self-realisation and institutional transformation.

It is encouraging to see how the romantic/incubator approach manifests in different ways in this issue of the International Journal for Academic Development. However, we are also reminded that there are still many unresolved challenges in the development of reciprocal, supportive relationships in today’s higher education system, as reflected in several of the aforementioned contributions to this issue. Future attempts might need to take into consideration the still largely hierarchical structure in many institutions around the world and its impact on academic development.

While there are many affordances to romantic/incubator approaches, it is also important to acknowledge the accompanying challenges of this academic development strategy. Many romantic/incubator approaches are relational and resource intensive, and therefore, also difficult to scale. Additionally, the largely micro- or meso- focus of many related initiatives may make it more challenging for academic developers to enact institutional change. Because each change strategy brings affordances and challenges, we look forward to seeing how additional scholarship in this journal might highlight other individual and organisational orientations as a frame for academic development strategy.