Transcript Slide 1

Connecting Worlds:
the convergence of goals
of university professors,
faculty development and
institutional educational
policy
Heather Fry
Centre for Educational Development
Imperial College London
[email protected]
Barcelona 2007
Main Areas
• Focus on experience at Imperial College London
• Case study of Imperial’s Learning and Teaching
Strategy
• How the LTS is created and implemented
• Imperial’s case in wider perspective
• The role of a central educational unit in the
process
• Key lessons
Background about Imperial
13,293 Students in 2006-7
Batchelor’s Master’s
PhD
Full time
8,345
1,759
2,204
Part time
-
491
494
Background about Imperial
Mission
‘Imperial College London
embodies and delivers world
class scholarship, education
and research in science,
engineering and medicine,
with particular regard to their
application in industry,
commerce and healthcare. We
foster inter -disciplinary
working internally and
collaborate widely externally.’
Background about Imperial
• Ranked 3rd or 4th in UK; 9th in the world (THES
2006)
• There is strong local autonomy in departments
and faculties
• The ‘centre’ and the faculties are a classic case of
being ‘loosely coupled’ (Becher & Kogan, 1992)
The Role of the National Funding Council
• The Higher Education Funding Council for
England (HEFCE) distributes government funds
to English institutions for teaching - and research
• In 1999 HEFCE required all institutions to
produce a three year Learning and Teaching
Strategy in return for earmarked funding that
was proportionate to student numbers
• This initiative is now in its third round
HEFCE’s Current ‘Required’ LTS Priorities
• Ensuring that teaching is informed and enriched by
research;
• Supporting continuing professional development activity,
enabling staff to meet agreed national teaching standards
and building a record of attainment against these
standards;
• Broadening the learning experience through support for
student volunteering;
• Supporting success and progression for students with
diverse needs.
• Showing a ‘duty for equality’
(HEFCE 2006/11)
Imperial’s LTS Priorities for 2006-9
A. Continued enhancement of e-learning
B. Supporting university application, success and
progression for students with diverse needs
C. Enhancing the profile of teaching
D. Supporting continuing professional development
in learning and teaching for staff, including
enabling them to meet national standards and
keep a record of attainment
E. Maintaining and enhancing the links between
research and teaching
Imperial’s LTS Priorities for 2006-9
F. Broadening the learning experience through
student volunteering
G. Maintaining College membership and
participation in national learning, teaching and
student support and student experience related
bodies
H. Continued action to support and embed the
need to meet a positive duty for equality
HOW priorities are determined is vital
(Gibbs, 2001)
‘Each Faculty and School determines its plans
and priorities for learning and teaching within the
overall College direction and goals and has a
distinctive approach to its educational mission
compatible with its disciplinary base’ (Quote
from 2006-9 Imperial LTS)
Creating the LTS
• High level meetings and buy-in
• Contributes to goals of ‘corporate/academic’ plan
• Integrates with other strategies
• Takes account of previous LT Strategies
• Plurality and Consensus
• Broad brush – detail may vary locally
• Institutional ‘take’ on national guidelines
Creating the LTS, continued
• Seizes opportunity to achieve things the
institution wants
• The LTS is kept fairly low key
• Distributes funds and initiatives widely (or
opportunity to acquire funds or participate in
initiatives)
• Uses a proportion of funding for central
initiatives/units
• Looks further ahead than three years
Implementation and Evaluation at Imperial
• The strategy has elements that are not HEFCE funded –
HEFCE, central and ‘local’ funds are needed
• Having some money to use to achieve targets is vital
• Specific targets have a named person/position responsible
for overseeing delivery
• Some Faculties and departments have their own strategies
that fit with the College strategy
• Management Group Meetings, 3 annually: monitors
progress to targets, evaluations, and if usage is becoming
embedded
• HEFCE Annual Monitoring Statement submission
• Disseminate successes
Other Approaches
Many institutions:
• Use much more central direction and demand
detailed compliance – less local variation
allowed
• Place more (overt) emphasis on centrally
desired innovation and change planned through
the LTS
• Distribute higher proportions of funding through
competitive bids - that have to comply with
institutional priorities
The Role of the Centre for Educational
Development at Imperial – generally to:
• Work collaboratively across the College
• Help the College shape and fulfil its educational aspirations
• Run effective educational professional development
opportunities for staff, e.g. workshops, programmes, networks
• Offer expertise in educational matters and about professional
development opportunities
• Assist the College in meeting its obligations to external
agencies
• Help raise the profile of learning and teaching
• Promote educational research and scholarship
How CED Fulfils it’s General Role
• We seek to emphasise enhancement and good
practice based on research, evidence and example
• We see the enhancement of student learning as
being the goal of all that we do
• We seek to establish credibility – through working
history and educational expertise
• Participation in virtually everything we do is
voluntary
How CED Fulfils it’s General Role
(continued)
• We try to balance supporting people in achieving
‘necessary’ goals (e.g. quality assurance), with
out being seen as ‘enforcers’. This is
problematic
• We do not claim to be experts about the content
or minutiae of teaching of every discipline
• Lecturers/departments make their own decisions
about how they organise curricula and conduct
teaching and assessment, within the College
degree regulations
CED involvement with the LTS
• Co-ordinates and supports a teaching enhancement
fund
• Raises awareness and promotes discussion about
the links between teaching and research
• Offers an accredited professional development
programme in learning and teaching
• One person is a member of steering group for maths
technology project
• LTS money supports two posts in CED
• I edit and draft the ideas of all contributors to the
strategy into the final form for agreement, and am a
member of the management group (Percival and
Tucker 2004)
Some Concluding Points
• Devote great care to the process of creation – achieve
buy-in
• Tailor process and content to institution
• Include as part of the package money and support for
some of the initiatives – distribute across institution
• Back up with detailed targets and implementation plans
• Some external pressure can be helpful, but be creative
in using this to own advantage
• Local evaluation and central monitoring may aid
‘embedding’
References
• Becher, T and Kogan, M (1992) Process and Structure
in Higher Education; Routledge
• Gibbs, G (2001) Strategies for learning and teaching
in higher education. A guide to good practice;
HEFCE (2001/37)
• HEFCE (2006) Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund;
HEFCE (2006/11)
• Percival, F and Tucker, S (2004) ‘Developing institutional
policy and strategy for academic development’, pp 18-35
in Baume, D and Kahn, P, (Eds) Enhancing Staff and
Educational Development; RoutledgeFalmer
• Times Higher Education Supplement (2006) World
University Rankings; THES
Heather Fry
Centre for Educational Development, Imperial College
London
Barcelona 2007