Abstract
This chapter focuses upon an initiative in the United Kingdom to enhance learning and teaching in higher education. The government decided that learning and teaching practices should become sites for innovation and change and established 81 Centres of Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETLs) for that purpose. The contemporary policy and economic contexts in which the initiative took place are examined. These include the expectations that universities should broaden their range of applicants and provide curricula that will prepare learners for the needs of a knowledge-based society. A national educational evaluation of the CETL programme was conducted using mixed methods which included survey, interviews, case-study visits and a meta-analysis of CETL self-evaluations. The theories of change implicit in the design of the initiative were critiqued in relation to the experiences of CETLs and their intended and un-intended effects. The extent to which CETLs were agents of change had implications for the relationship between teaching and research, individual and organisational identities and academic practices, and these are thoroughly discussed. A key shift in learning and teaching practice was the widespread encouragement and promotion of pedagogic research and small-scale development projects. However, despite a growing acceptance for the use of pedagogic research, there was an enduring unease with this form of practice. Continuing unease regarding pedagogic research centred around concerns that academics engaged with it might cease to engage with research in their own subject disciplines. Inevitably, attempts to create change involve issues of power, and the dominance of research over teaching in higher education has power implications. However, social forces are beginning to enable a rethink about the current relationship between research and practice. Discussions about academic practice, identity and the relationship between teaching and research are both increasing and likely to continue.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Higher Education Funding Council For England: For employability: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/econsoc/employer/, accessed June 2009
- 2.
Ibid. For Widening participation: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/widen/, accessed June 2009
- 3.
The Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills: The Future of Higher Education: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/hegateway/strategy/hestrategy/teaching.shtml, accessed August 2009
- 4.
The seven CETLs in Northern Ireland did participate in the national evaluation of the CETLs. However, the Northern Ireland office separately managed them and their self-evaluation reports did not form part of the meta-evaluation of these.
- 5.
The National Evaluation report may be found at Higher Education Funding Council: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rdreports/2008/rd08_08/, accessed August 2009
- 6.
HEFCE; Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, Invitation to bid, http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2004/04_05/ , Executive Summary Key Point 2, accessed August 2009.
- 7.
The national evaluation of the CETLs was co-ordinated from the Centre for the Study of Education and Training (CSET) at the University of Lancaster. CSET has a team of educationalists with extensive national and international experience, who specialize in programme and policy evaluation. These included several recent initiatives in higher education funded by HEFCE to enhance learning and teaching in the sector. I joined the team in the later stages of this evaluation. The following discussion draws upon the research design they outlined in the original proposal.
- 8.
Many CETLs included two or more universities who had formed partnerships for the specific purpose of creating a CETL. Usually, one university was the lead university for this period.
- 9.
Subject Centres were established around the year 2001 with a brief to provide subject-specific support to enhance learning and teaching in the UK. There are 24 subject centres, housed within the universities, which successfully bid to establish them. Each has a specific disciplinary or cognate group focus. Details may be found at the Higher Education Academy: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/networks/subjectcentres
- 10.
The Carnegie Web site may be found at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/programs/index.asp?key=21, accessed July 2009
- 11.
Links to CETLs may be found at Higher Education Funding Council: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/tinits/cetl/, accessed July 2009
- 12.
Linking Teaching and Research Web site: http://www.brookes.ac.uk/genericlink/index.htm!, accessed July 2009
- 13.
Institutional strategies to link teaching and research may be found at Linking Teaching and Research in the Disciplines: http://www.health.ltsn.ac.uk/projects/collaborative project/kholland, accessed July 2009
- 14.
Practical examples of research-informed teaching Health Sciences and Practice: http://www.health.ltsn.ac.uk/projects/collaborative projectgdunlop, accessed July 2009 (trouble with access on October 25, 2009)
- 15.
Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences (GEES), The GEES Subject Centre http://www.gees.ac.uk/linktr/linktr.htm#projplan, accessed July 2009
- 16.
The Hospitality Leisure, Sport and Tourism Network: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/hlst/ourwork, accessed July 2009
- 17.
The UK Centre for Bioscience: http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/ltr/ and law, accessed July 2009
- 18.
EvidenceNet may be found at the Higher Education Academy: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/research/evidencenet, accessed July 2009
References
Bannister, D., & Fransella, F. (1993). Inquiring man: The psychology of personal constructs. London: Routledge
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities for a new century. In G. Rigby (Ed.), Universities in the twenty-first century: A lecture series. London: National Commission on Education.
Brew, A. (2003). The future of research and scholarship in academic development. In H. Eggins & R. MacDonald (Eds.), The scholarship of academic development. Buckingham: Buckingham SHRE and The Open University Press.
Connell, J. P., & Kubisch, A. C. (1996). Applying a theories of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives. New York: The Aspen Institute.
Cooperrider, D. L., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry in organisational life. Research in Organisational Change and Development, 1, 129–169
Elliott, A. (2008). Concepts of the self, polity (pp. 45–50). Cambridge.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge: Power of discourse and discipline. London: Tavistock
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. London: Allen Lane
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholas
Garnham, N. (2002). ‘Information Society’s theory or ideology: A critical perspective on technology, education and employment in the Information Age. In W. H. Dutton & B. D. Loader (Eds.), Digital academe. The new media and institutions of higher education and learning. London: Routledge.
Hammond, N. (2007) Preface. In A. Jenkins & M. Healy (Eds.), Linking teaching and research in disciplines and departments (p. 3). Retrieved September 10, 2008, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources
Hughes, M., & Traynor, T. (2000). Reconciling process and outcome in evaluating community initiatives. Evaluation, 6(1), 37–49
Jenkins, A., Healy, M., & Zetter, R. (2007). Linking teaching and research in the disciplines and departments. Higher Education Academy. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/research/teaching
O’Leary, J. (2009). Higher education in England: Achievements, challenges and prospects, higher education funding council. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/hefce/2009/heineng.htm
Quinn-Patton, M. (1996). Utilization-focussed evaluation. London: Sage
Saunders, M., Machell, J., Willaims S., Allaway, D., Spencer, A., Ashwin, P., Trowler, P., et al. (2008). The national formative evaluation of the 2005–2010 CETL programme, Final Report. http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rdreports/2008/rd08_08/
Scott, P. (2004). Knowledge work in a knowledge society: Rethinking the links between university teaching and research. The Higher Education Academy Learning and Teaching Conference, University of Hertfordshire, July, unpublished paper.
The Future of Higher Education. (2003). cm 5735, HMSO, Norwich. Retrieved accessed March 9, 2009 from http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/hegateway/strategy/hestrategy/teaching.shtml
Turner, V. (1977). Variations on a theme of liminality. In S. Moore & B. Meyerhoff (Eds.) Secular ritual. Amsterdam: Van Gorcum
Weiss, C. (1995). Nothing as practical as a good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives. In J. Connell, et al. (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods and contexts. Washington: The Aspen Institute.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mc Kee, A. (2012). Academic Identities and Research-Informed Learning and Teaching: Issues in Higher Education in the United Kingdom. In: Mc Kee, A., Eraut, M. (eds) Learning Trajectories, Innovation and Identity for Professional Development. Innovation and Change in Professional Education, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1724-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1724-4_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1723-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1724-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)