Education Development and Leadership in Higher Education

Implementing an Institutional Strategy

Kym Fraser

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2004
• eBook ISBN:
  9781134310487
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

In today's highly competitive and globalized higher education market, leaders and managers find themselves considering the same issues of quality assurance, increased participation, the potential of new technologies and improving standards of teaching, learning and leadership. Education development has a central role to play in these areas, and should be a core element in the strategic positioning of all higher education institutions. This book is a packed with research and proven case study material on what education development can offer managers in higher education. It draws from worldwide experiences of leading innovative educational developers, and illustrates the numerous ways in which education development strategies, structures and processes can make a difference to an institution's corporate strategy.

1

From a community of scholars to a company

Peter Ling

THE CONCEPT OF EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT WITHIN UNIVERSITIES

This book is concerned with education development. Development within organizations in general may be viewed as contrived change in the behaviour of people, processes and the organizational environment to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the institution in meeting its purposes. Likewise, within universities development relates to the behaviour of people who constitute the organization, the processes in which they engage, and the conventions and resources that enable and constrain them in carrying out their functions.

This book focuses on one area of development within universities – the development of learning and teaching. This does not mean that education development is confined only to the development of academics as teachers. For one thing, learning is facilitated by an increasingly complex array of personnel and technologies and for another, teaching takes place within organizational systems and structures that have a bearing on the efficacy and efficiency of the university in providing for learning. The book is concerned with development of the environment in which teaching occurs as well as with the development of academics and others who play a role in facilitation of learning. This environment includes organisational missions and goals, plans and strategies, structures and support systems, and quality assurance and improvement measures. Chapters 3, 6 and 7 address quality assurance, leadership and policy issues.

So is there a conventional wisdom about the function of education development and the means of achieving it? There are a number of features of the current era that render a single approach problematic. In this chapter some key changes in the environment in which universities operate and some of the developments in higher education are identified. These can be seen both as responses to change in the environment and as generators of change. A number of forms of education development suited to the dynamic environment and to various forms of provision of higher education have emerged. The chapter concludes with a description of approaches to education development as a preamble to the various contributions to good practice presented in this book.

THE CONTEXT

Education development takes place in the twenty-first century in what Rowley, Lujan and Dolence (Rowley et al. 1998: 3) have described as a ‘paradigm shift from what we have known as the “industrial age” to a new “information age”’. The information age shifts the very locale of universities from the regional to the global. As Giddens (1999: 19) puts it ‘globalization is not incidental to our lives today. It is a shift in our very life circumstances. It is the way we now live.’ It has been argued that the effects of globalization on education are overstated; that education systems are still mediated by the structures of nation states (Reid 1999). Globalization, however, impinges on the sovereign law and administration of the states in which we live (Habermas 2001) and the higher education sector at least is acutely aware of the universality of its environment. Globalization is one element of change in the ‘Western’ world that has altered the way in which work is undertaken. The work of academics is no exception. The work of academics now involves everything from physically teaching on campuses in foreign countries, to collaborative research, and development across national boundaries, to conducting ‘virtual’ classes with students in a variety of locations.

ACCOUNTABILITY OF UNIVERSITIES

The dynamics of the environment in which universities operate generates tensions. There is a growth in the demand for higher education and a change in the clientele accessing universities (Tierney 1999; Katz 1999; Palmer 2001). At the same time, public financial support has been constrained as the political pendulum in the context of global competition swung to the right at the close of the twentieth century and moves now only tentatively to the left, and even then with a focus on flexibility and entrepreneurial culture (Giddens 2000). As public funding becomes a smaller proportion of the resources available to universities, the accountability of academics for their teaching increases through devices that range from performance appraisal systems within universities to quality audits of universities imposed by governments (see, for example, Nelson 2003). This context is further developed in Chapter 2.

That public accountability should increase as public funding decreases could be seen as a paradox. On the other hand it could be seen as the corollary of higher education being recognized as a key component of the economy, both through the production of the intellectual workforce required in the post-industrial era and as a contributor to export earnings through the fees of foreign students (see, for example, Nelson 2003). In addition universities, taking on the corporate characteristics that align with their economic role, assume other marketing trappings such as conspicuous quality assurance systems. The result is a mix of in-house quality systems, accreditation by professional bodies and government-imposed quality assurance mechanisms, some of which specifically target teaching and learning. These various approaches to quality assurance and improvement in relation to university learning and teaching are taken up in Chapters 2 and 3.

THE CHANGING NATURE OF UNIVERSITIES

In this environment it is not only the operation of universities that is undergoing change. The raison d’être for universities, always contentious, becomes further confused. Some universities might be represented as seeking to maintain their traditional image. Some appear to operate as multinational, profit-oriented corporations. Some appear set to take on the role of electronic publishing houses.

The technical developments that have propelled universities into a globalized environment, at the same time open the door to new sources of competition both large and small. Commercial publishing concerns not only produce textbooks with self-help quizzes, as they have in the past, but now provide CD-ROM and website support, including links to other resources, discussion forums and online testing. As universities enter global markets adopting the same format for their course delivery as do these publishers, the distinction between universities and publishers focuses on the accrediting role of universities. It is a role that becomes difficult to protect through regulation both because electronically provided education permeates national boundaries and defies national regulation and because, in a world of change, lengthy set-piece programmes, such as bachelor degrees, are less pertinent to meeting ongoing educational needs. Universities must compete with small-scale providers who have an opportunity to enter the market electronically without requiring much in the way of capital or marketing ability. They must compete also with industrial organizations that have new techniques for provision of training and education, some of which are recognized by universities for accreditation purposes. The role of the university in the current era is ambiguous.

Technological development has not only influenced the space in which universities operate, it has influenced the pace of change. As Giddens observes, we suffer from a chronic revision of practice (Bryant and Jary 2001). As universities seek to respond to new possibilities for their operations that are opened up by technological developments, react to competition, and adjust to changes in available financial resources, they redefine their mission, revise their strategies and restructure their operations, setting in place revisions and reviews before changes cycle through. It generates a ‘manufactured uncertainty’ (Bryant and Jary 2001: 22) in the academic work environment.

The traditional university and the present day university are sometimes styled as fitting within differing paradigms (for example, by Kathy Tiano in AVCC 1996).

The concept of a change in paradigm draws attention to some of the features emerging in universities but is problematic in that it suggests a new orthodoxy where there are many possibilities and contesting views of the nature of organizations that provide higher education. Consistent with contemporary views of learning – which recognize that understandings and meanings will vary between individuals – there are many understandings of what now constitutes a university. One is to envisage the university as an organization, a device which can be seen as a means by which humans attempt to ‘write’ order into a world that is in a constant state of flux and movement (Hancock and Tyler 2001). In Giddens’ terms, the university as an organization is ‘constituted’ by those who notionally interact with it (Giddens 1984). The people who constitute universities – using the term constitute to mean not only to populate but to frame the phenomenon through their understandings of the institution – are many. They include the leadership of universities, managers and administrative staff, academics, maintenance workers, students, and all sorts of individuals and bodies that have dealings with the university. Each actor will have his or her own perception of the organization. That of the chief executive officer, and those of individual academics, administrative officers, and so on will vary. What the organization is then depends on individual perceptions that may overlap but are bound to vary and may be contradictory in some respects (see Figure 1.1).

One consequence of this understanding is that one should expect to find tensions and contradictions in the expectations of education development in university settings. As Parker puts it, the world in which we operate is ‘multiple, contradictory’ (Parker 1997: 116). While some academics may still view universities as autonomous – if not anarchic – communities of scholars, their managers may well view the organization as a business enterprise (Margison and Considine 2000) with a defined mission, a strategic plan, and key performance indicators. Views of the nature of academic work may vary from the orthodoxy of Boyer’s scholarships of discovery, integration, application and teaching (Boyer 1990). Certainly the balance struck between these activities is likely to be influenced by factors other than purely academic concerns. Academics can also find themselves engaged in management, in public relations and marketing, fund raising, publishing for commercial purposes and a range of political activities.

Figure 1.1 Universities are constituted by numerous interested parties who perceive them in a variety of ways

OUTCOMES OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE CURRENT ERA

In this environment what should be the outcome of the learning and teaching aspect of higher education is contested. Is it about being knowledgeable in a select discipline area? Is it about mastering the methods of a discipline? Can it be about becoming competent in some profession? Is it about a learned, rounded individual? Is it about the acquisition of learning and problem solving skills? Is it about acquiring a range of generic skills for economic and social life such as communicating effectively, and working collaboratively?

The outcomes of higher education are influenced in part by perceptions of the nature of a university. John Henry Newman’s vision of the university of the 1850s as a centre for teaching rather than research – a community of scholars sharing their understandings with students – still has some currency. In fact the idea of some universities specializing in teaching is raised from time to time. Abraham Flexner’s (Flexner 1930) review of American, English and German universities in the 1930s saw the functions of the institutions as including research, the advancement of knowledge – and teaching – the preservation of knowledge. Flexner, however, did not see universities as being concerned with the application of knowledge (except that they may engage in ‘training’ at the highest level in the learned professions of medicine and law as distinct from ‘the make believe professions’ such as business) (Kerr 1991: 76). Clark Kerr saw the university as a pluralistic organisation: ‘Flexner did not realise how many functions can be combined into a single university – even apparently inconsistent functions’, Kerr stated (Kerr 1991: 75). Flexner did not appreciate the populist drive for education nor ‘the desire of a technological society for knowledge’ (Kerr 1991: 77). Kerr saw the rise in the popularity of university education as being associated with a recognition of the importance of knowledge in economic and social growth. Reflecting on the twentieth century Kerr saw universal access to higher education, a move to a market-driven orientation and the global role of research as outstanding features in the development of American higher education (Kerr 2001; Palmer 2001). As the embrace of universities continues to grow and the definition of higher education becomes ever more challenging, Kerr cautions against a ‘free for all’ approach where external influences drive internal decisions (Palmer 2001). This may be difficult to eschew. Universities are at least sensitive to the external environment if not driven by it.

The global context of higher education and the competitive environment has some universities attempting to define – and market – their product or outcomes with statements of graduate attributes or capabilities. These include generic capabilities such as being able to work collaboratively as well as individually, being able to communicate effectively, and being able to engage in problem solving (e.g. University of Leicester, University of South Australia). They may include having subject knowledge and understanding, or being informed and skilled in a discipline or professional area (e.g. Swinburne University and the University of Hertfordshire).

The declaration of graduate outcomes, together with demands for attainment of minimum standards, such as the UK Higher Education Quality Council’s Graduate Standards Programme, has implications for programme design, learning and teaching activities and the assessment of student attainment. These developments in higher education provide challenges, opportunities, and some would say distractions, for education developers.

LEARNING IN A POST-MODERN WORLD

The majority of students at most universities may remain young people exiting secondary school and undertaking a basic undergraduate programme but, unlike many of their forerunners, this will not be their only contact with university. In a changing environment, curriculum based on knowledge requirements of the world of today is unlikely to suit the world of tomorrow. Changing social and work environments not only generate a need for new knowledge and s...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Illustrations
• Contributors
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1 From a community of scholars to a company
• 2 The role of national UK organisations in enhancing the quality of teaching and learning
• 3 Assuring and improving teaching quality
• 4 Education development units and the enhancement of university teaching
• 5 Decentralised approaches to education development: supporting quality teaching and learning from within a faculty
• 6 Alignment and synergy: leadership and education development
• 7 Integrating teaching and learning principles with IT infrastructure and policy
• 8 Educating university teachers: participation and access issues for students who have a disability
• 9 Education development: the role of graduate university teaching programmes
• 10 Education development through funded projects
• 11 Towards a profession of tertiary teaching: academic attitudes in Australia
• References