educational dev 7.3 · from peer observation of teaching to review of professional practice (rpp):...

EDUCATIONALDEVELOPMENTSThe Magazine of the Staff and Educational Development Association Ltd (SEDA)

Issue 7.3July 2006 ISSN 1469-3267

£7 Cover price (UK only)

Contents

SEDA LtdWoburn House,20 - 24 Tavistock SquareLondon WC1H 9HFTel 020 7380 6767Fax 020 7387 2655E-mail [email protected]

More information aboutSEDA’s activities can be foundon our website:www.seda.ac.ukRegistered in England, No.3709481. Registeredin England and Wales as a charity, No.1089537

1 From Peer Observation ofTeaching to Review of ProfessionalPractice (RPP): a model forContinuing ProfessionalDevelopment (CPD)David Gosling andKristine Mason O’Connor

5 Developing and accrediting thedevelopers: SEDA’s plans fornational provisionPeter Kahn FSEDA

7 Can you recognise a goodfacilitator when you see one?Anne Lee

11 Educational Development - Howdo we know it’s Working? How dowe know how well we are Doing?Gina Wisker FSEDA

18 Exploring the developmentalimpacts of completing apostgraduate certificate in learningand teachingPeter Stevenson and Anthony Brand

19 The Long and Winding Road – aretrospectiveAnthony Brand

21 The International Consortium forEducational Development, 2006James Wisdom

22 Book Review

23 Let me tell you a story...Steve Outram

28 EditorialAnthony Brand

BackgroundUntil recent refurbishment, ‘The Crit Room’ at the University of Gloucestershirewas a hall encircled by rows of steeply raked hard seats. In the late nineteenthcentury teacher training students would herd pupils from the local elementaryschool into the Crit Room. In this amphitheatre they proceeded to teach the classobserved by their peers in the surrounding seats. Afterwards their performancewould be criticised with a view to enlightenment and future improvement.A hundred years later, along with many HEIs, the institution introduced peerobservation of higher education teaching. It began with paired observations and,subsequent to evaluation a few years later, was revised to take place in the contextof small ‘teaching development groups’ -- the institution-wide TeachingDevelopment Group Scheme. In 2000 the Academic Board commissioned ascholarship of learning and teaching (SoLT) research project to evaluate the TDGscheme (McNamee et al., 2002-3). The evaluation included a questionnaire of allacademic staff and a series of focus groups. While the evaluation highlighted anumber of positive features of the TDG scheme it identified key issues that neededto be addressed. For some staff it was clear they could put on a performance ifrequired, others felt they were being ‘policed’, and some considered theobservations to be a ritual without clearly beneficial outcomes. In response to theSoLT evaluation the Academic Board set up a working party to make proposals fora new scheme. The working party established a set of principles and an outlineprocess which moved away from peer ‘observation’ to peer ‘review’ in recognitionof the range of teaching activities that promote and support student learning.

These proposals, approved by the Academic Board, were subsequently takenforward by a cross-university implementation group chaired by one of the authors(Kristine Mason O’Connor). The group consisted of the seven School Teaching andLearning Coordinators who included National Teaching Fellows, UniversityTeaching Fellows, the PGCHE Course Leader, the Chair of the Scholarship of

From Peer Observation ofTeaching to Review ofProfessional Practice (RPP): amodel for ContinuingProfessional Development(CPD)David Gosling, Independent Consultant, andKristine Mason O’Connor, University of Gloucestershire

2 www.seda.ac.uk

EDUCATIONALDEVELOPMENTSThe Magazine of SEDA

Issue 7.32006Editorial CommitteeGraham AlsopKingston UniversityFran BeatonUniversity of KentDr Stephen Bostock FSEDAKeele UniversityProfessor Anthony BrandUniversity of HertfordshireHelen GaleUniversity of WolverhamptonDr Michelle HaynesMiddlesex UniversityDr Lesly HuxleyUniversity of BristolSteve OutramThe Higher Education AcademyProfessor David RossUniversity of Abertay DundeeRachel SegalThe Higher Education AcademyProfessor Lorraine StefaniFSEDAAuckland University, NZProfessor Bob ThackwrayLeadership Foundation forHigher EducationProfessor James WisdomHigher Education Consultant

2006 (Vol.7)Annual Subscription RatesIndividual subscriptions are £28sterling per year (4 issues) withinthe UK. Overseas subscribersshould add £5 sterling postage andpacking for delivery within the EUor £8 sterling for the rest of theworld.

Bulk copies can also be purchasedin packs of 10 @ £200 sterling perpack.

All orders should be sent to theSEDA Office, either with paymentor official order.

NB SEDA members automaticallyreceive copies of EducationalDevelopments.

Learning and Teaching Group and Centre for Learning and Teaching staff. Externalconsultancy was provided by the other author (David Gosling) who joined thegroup.

Key ideasOur thinking about RPP developed in response to the input from theimplementation group, with its emphasis on the process being democratic andinclusive. We began to focus on the three key changes of emphasis whichdifferentiate RPP from the previous TDG Scheme.

The first related to the nature of the review process and the need to move awayfrom a perceived ‘policing’ element in the previously existing peer observation ofteaching scheme to a scheme that was inclusive and democratic.

Secondly, we considered that the new scheme needed to bring into the review therange of professional activity relating to the support of student learning and notmerely the teaching that could be observed.

Thirdly, we wanted to move away from the implicit deficit model of identifyingprofessional development ‘needs’ and move towards a more proactive conceptionof professional development activity based on the model of the scholarship ofteaching. We will now discuss each of these key areas of our thinking.

Collaborative peer reviewWe drew on some earlier work by one the authors (Gosling, 2005) to distinguishbetween different types of peer review deployed in higher education. Academicsare familiar with the idea of peer review within both the context of research,where publications and applications for research funding are typically peer-reviewed, and in quality assurance processes where peer panels undertake subjectreview, institutional audits and validations. In these examples, the role of the peersis to make a judgement about whether a paper is published, whether a grant isawarded, or whether a course is validated. ‘Peers’ in these cases have authorityvested in them to make these judgements. It is clearly a relationship in whichpower is unequally distributed.

The development model focuses on how staff can be ‘developed’ through the peerreview process, using an ‘expert’, such as an educational developer, or mentor,whose role is to enhance the quality of teaching by providing appropriate feedbackand training. It is mostly a one-way process of the more experienced member ofstaff providing feedback to the less experienced teacher.

The collaborative model, by contrast, is based on equality between the peers andreciprocity of benefit. The collaborative model requires that both those doing thereviewing and those being reviewed are equally committed to learning from theprocess. It is a mutual process because both expect to gain from it. Thecollaborative model is non-judgmental, where the purpose is to promote dialogueabout teaching in order to raise the status of teaching and improve teachingquality.

The Gloucestershire scheme is clearly aiming to be a collaborative peer reviewmodel based on equality between reviewers and reviewed. RPP emphasises thatthe reviewer is not giving feedback, since feedback implicitly involves makingjudgements about the quality of the teaching observed or the learning materialsexamined. Nor is the reviewer claiming specialist expertise that places him or herin position to ‘develop’ the teacher being observed. Rather they meet ascolleagues, both with experience of teaching, in a context aimed at assisting allstaff to reflect on and develop their teaching through a structured context.

RPP is not about ‘observing teaching’In common with many institutions, Gloucestershire’s policy on teaching, learningand assessment emphasizes student-centred learning. Within a student-centredmodel of teaching and learning the role of the teacher is as a facilitator andsupporter of learning. The range of activities that the teacher must be concernedwith include determining the learning outcomes, designing the learning activities,writing learning materials and designing assessment tasks. It is a severe limitation

3www.seda.ac.uk

From Peer Observation of Teaching to Review of Professional Practice (RPP): a model for Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

on the value of peer observation of teaching that it focuseson teaching activities that are observable.

We decided early on that RPP would not be limited in thisway. The review process, in RPP, can focus on any aspect ofdesigning, delivering and assessing learning. The reviewprocesses can consider any of the following, for example:

• documents relating to course design, or assessment ofstudent learning

• curriculum issues - for example embedding skills in thecurriculum

• learning materials designed by the staff member andbeing used, or intended to be used, with students eitheron-line or as hard copy

• teaching skills - for example teaching, demonstrating,tutoring, lecturing, supervising - within the context ofthe relevant course documentation (may includeobservation of teaching)

• interactions between staff members - for example a teammeeting discussing teaching, or design of, a new course,or revisions to an existing course.

Professional development activityRPP is designed to encourage staff to undertake furtherprofessional activity relating to the focus of the review, butwe believe it is vital that we move away from the language ofdevelopment ‘needs’ since this implies a deficiency in theteacher. Rather, teaching staff are encouraged to think ofthemselves as professional agents exploring professionalissues and problems with their peers. The outcome of RPPwill, therefore, include a wide range of scholarly activitiesrelating to teaching and learning, including furtherinvestigation of teaching, and not just traditionally conceivedstaff development.

Locus of controlRPP attempts to vest control in the staff member beingreviewed over key aspects of the process. This is because werecognise that:

‘Any successful change management process aimed atimproving teaching and learning depends ultimately on thewillingness of the people involved to change.’(D’Andrea and Gosling, 2005, p.57)

Firstly, they decide the focus for the review. Secondly, thestaff member will largely determine the way in which thereview is conducted, and, thirdly, the nature of theoutcomes. We believe that staff will engage with the processmuch more wholeheartedly if they are convinced that theyhave the opportunity to identify what will be of most use tothem in their professional practice.

ProcessRPP normally involves three meetings between the staffmember and the peer reviewer. The first meeting is wherethe focus of the review is decided. The second is the mainreview meeting and the third is an opportunity to discusswhat happens next and to draft the Reflective Statement.The way in which staff pairs are brought together willdepend on local decisions within Faculties, but normally we

anticipate that the staff member will be free to choose theirreviewer, subject to that person being available (all reviewersmust have undertaken the reviewer training). It isrecommended that the reviewer should not be the staffmember’s line manager (directly or indirectly) and thatreviewers should not be someone who is within theimmediate teaching team of the staff member. Thisencourages cross-team discussion which introduces newideas into the teaching team in any particular subject area.The reviewer’s role is to help the staff member to identify auseful focus for the review, by asking appropriate questions,such as:

• What aspects of student learning would be mostinteresting for you to explore?

• Is there an aspect of your teaching or assessmentpractice you would like to change?

• Are there aspects of your teaching or assessment practicethat you would like to investigate, or reflect on, further?(Note: this might be to understand better why somethingworks well as much as something that is not workingsuccessfully.)

• What are your goals in teaching your subject? Are theybeing achieved?

Issues arising from student evaluations, external examinerreports, or from the staff member’s ProfessionalDevelopment Group may also produce useful ideas for thereview.

A good review will be one which stimulates the staff memberto think about aspects of their teaching, or of studentlearning, to which they had not previously given seriousconsideration. It will help the staff member to think aboutways in which further enquiry into his/her teaching would bebeneficial to both him/her and the students.

Although the reviewer has undergone RPP training s/he isnot presumed to be an expert who will necessarily know theanswers to questions raised in the review. As a collaborativepeer process, the presumption is that whilst colleagues willshare their experience and knowledge, new questions willbe identified that will require further investigation.

OutcomesIf RPP is to contribute successfully to continuing professionaldevelopment, it is important to avoid the perception thatthere are simplistic certainties and easy solutions to teachingproblems any more than there are to research problems.Academics need to be able to construct their ownframeworks for exploring professional knowledge: ‘1) knowledge always undergoes construction and

transformation2) learning is an integral aspect of activity in and with the

world at all times3) ‘‘What is learned’’ is always complexly problematic4) acquisition of knowledge is not a simple matter of

taking in knowledge but requires reconceptualisation.’(Brown 2001: 9)

The principal outcome of RPP is therefore intended to beon-going professional activity which will explore the

4 www.seda.ac.uk

EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS 7.3

complex issues relating to teaching discussed in the review.The formal requirement of the scheme is the production ofthe ‘Reflective Statement’ which is in three parts: Part Awhich is confidential between the pair engaged in thereview, Part B which links RPP to the University staffdevelopment and review process (appraisal), and Part Cwhich is optional and goes into the public domain.

Part A is the ‘Personal Statement’ to be written solely by thestaff member and to be used in a way that is determined byhim/her to explore their own constructions of the knowledgeacquired through RPP. This will require critical reflection onthe context of the review, the factors which were relevantand contributory to the chosen focus of the review, and areflection on what happened in the review – what has beenlearned and the anticipated professional developmentoutcomes. The Personal Statement could become part of aTeaching Portfolio, to inform an application for registeredpractitioner status with the Higher Education Academy, orsolely for personal clarification.

Part B will provide details of how the review was conductedand what professional activities are proposed to beundertaken as a result of the review process. Part B will bemade available to the person conducting the staff member’sStaff Development Review (appraisal) and is intended tocontribute to discussion about his or her CPD.

Part C is optional and is where the outcomes of the RPP areshared publicly to advance debate about teaching. Wherepossible the reviewer and staff member are encouraged tohighlight examples of good practice identified in the reviewfor wider dissemination to the Department, Faculty orUniversity. There is also the opportunity to identify issuesthat need to be considered by the Department, Faculty orUniversity.

By placing discussions of teaching in the public domain, it isanticipated that there will be shared knowledge and anexchange of ideas about developments in teaching. Part Cwill offer the opportunity for staff members to post ideas,suggestions, interesting thoughts, innovations, what worksand what doesn’t, onto their Faculty or University Learningand Teaching website.

Concluding commentRPP was introduced in the second semester of 2005-2006.Briefing letters were sent to all academic staff and managers,the reviewer training programme continues and theguidelines have been published. Initial feedback suggeststhat the scheme is being welcomed as a focus for ‘excellentcollaborative/stimulating discussion’ and a ‘non-threateningchance to put students‘ learning environment first’.

We do not perceive RPP as a ‘catch-all’ process foradvancing teaching and learning in the institution; as Becher(1996) pointed out, professional learning occurs in a range offorms. However, we do regard RPP as being innovative andhaving the capacity for promoting deep and reflectivethinking and learning among colleagues. Over a centuryaway from the Victorian enthusiasm for scientific positivismwhich produced ‘The Crit Room’ it is surely time to move onfrom peer observation of teaching.

ReferencesBecher, T. (1996) ‘The Learning Professions’, Studies inHigher Education, Vol. 21:1, pp.43-55. (Cited by Helen King(2004) ‘Continuing Professional Development: what doacademics do?’ Educational Developments, Issue 5.4).Brown, H. (2001) Reflections on the development of acollaborative learning community for continuing professionaldevelopment (CDP): the creative network, Higher EducationClose-up Conference 2, Lancaster University, 16 -18 July2001.D’Andrea, V. and Gosling, D. (2005) Improving Teaching andLearning in Higher Education: a whole institution approach,SRHE, Buckingham: Open University Press, McGraw-Hill.Gosling, D. (2005) Peer Observation of Teaching: SEDAPaper 118, Birmingham, SEDA.McNamee, M., Fleming, S., Jones, D., Pill, A. and Shire, J.(2002) ‘Evaluating the Teaching Development GroupScheme’, Electronic Journal of Learning and Teaching (e-JoLT),Issue 1, Feb. 2003, University of Gloucestershire.McNamee, M., Fleming, S., Jones, D., Pill, A. and Shire, J.(2003) ‘Evaluating the Teaching Development GroupScheme (2): probing the key themes and issues’, ElectronicJournal of Learning and Teaching (e-JoLT), Issue 1, Feb. 2003,University of Gloucestershire.

David Gosling is an independent consultant, and KristineMason O’Connor is Dean of Teaching and LearningDevelopment at the Unversity of Gloucestershire.

Information forContributorsThe Editorial Committee of EducationalDevelopments welcomes contributions on anyaspect of staff and educational development likelyto be of interest to readers.Submission of an article to EducationalDevelopments implies that it has not beenpublished elsewhere and that it is not currentlybeing considered by any other publisher or editor.For more information please contact the SEDAoffice via email: [email protected]

Notice to PublishersBooks for review should be sent to:

Rachel SegalBook Review Editor,c/o The Higher Education Academy,Genesis 3, Innovation Way, York Science Park,York YO10 5DQ

Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

5www.seda.ac.uk

Developing and accrediting the developers: SEDA’s plans for national provision

IntroductionWe have seen a vast expansion inrecent years for the field of staff andeducational development within theUK and elsewhere. At the same time itis increasingly becoming apparent thatthe extent of the provision ofprofessional development for staffinvolved in this field, for those whofacilitate and lead educational change,remains relatively limited. The sheernumber of development posts now inplace means, for instance, that staff areoften appointed without professionalqualifications in leading change.Furthermore, a recent survey (Outram,2006), conducted by the HigherEducation Academy with SEDA’ssupport, indicated that there wouldseem to be a prima facie case for someforms of provision to support thedevelopment of such staff. Some 64%of the 83 respondents indicated thatthey or their staff would be interestedin gaining a professional qualificationin staff and educational developmentin higher education.

SEDA has, of course, long been at theforefront of professional developmentfor those who facilitate educationalchange, with its Fellowship andAssociate Fellowship Schemes, andwith its texts (such as Kahn andBaume, 2003), annual Summer Schooland other events for developers (e.g.SEDA’s annual November conference).The schemes provide a nationalsystem of professional recognition forstaff and educational developers, witharound 50 highly experienceddevelopers now accredited.

More recently SEDA has introducedtwo new awards within its ProfessionalDevelopment Framework (PDF),entitled Staff and EducationalDevelopment and Leading Staff andEducational Development, as Baumeand Pilkington (2005) earlier reportedin this magazine (see also the PDFsection of the SEDA website).

Developing and accrediting the developers:SEDA’s plans for national provisionPeter Kahn FSEDA, University of Manchester

Institutions are thus encouraged bySEDA to run programmes fordevelopers and to seek recognition forthese programmes under SEDA-PDF.Two such programmes are alreadyunder way, at the University of CentralLancashire and at the University ofManchester.

SEDA, however, recognises that notevery institution will be in a position torun such a programme. It hastherefore decided itself to offer twonational programmes, one leading toeach of these awards. The pilot workin support of this national provision isto be supported by the HigherEducation Academy, which has agreedto fund £20,000 towards thecollaborative project. This project isalso to involve links with the StaffDevelopment Forum. This articleoutlines the plans for this nationalprovision, and the associated changesin the Fellowships Schemes.

Staff and EducationalDevelopmentThe first of these two nationalprogrammes, Staff and EducationalDevelopment, will first be offered tothe sector on a pilot basis beginningAutumn 20061. The starting date(s)and costs for the programme will havebeen announced by the time you arereading this. (To book a place oneither the First or Second stages of theprogramme see the details at the endof this article.)

The programme will be suitable forpeople working in a range of contexts,including institutional educationaldevelopment units, Faculties/Schools/Departments, Higher EducationAcademy Subject Centres, CETLs, andso on. It concentrates on supportingdevelopers to carry out cycles ofdevelopment activity (goal setting,planning, facilitating, monitoring,evaluating and following up) within

their particular organisational andstrategic contexts. As with allprogrammes recognised under SEDA-PDF awards, attention is also paid toprofessional values and to personaldevelopment. The programme as awhole is supported by reference to thecourse text: A Guide to Staff andEducational Development (Kahn andBaume 2003). The structure of thetwo-stage programme is outlined inTable 1.

Stage 1Summer School for NewEducational Developers(3 day residential course)

Introduction to Staff andEducational Development(6 week online course)

Stage 2Portfolio and assessment module(3 months supported learning)

Table 1 Overall structure of theprogramme Staff and EducationalDevelopment

The programme normally begins witha participant taking either the SEDASummer School for New Developers orthe new online course Introduction toStaff and Educational Development.We may outline each of the elementsof the programme as follows:

First Stage

• SEDA Summer School for NewEducational Developers

This annual three-day residentialcourse is designed to provide anintroduction to staff andeducational development. Thecourse is highly participative andpractical. Participants develop anddeepen skills and conceptualframeworks necessary to plan, runand evaluate successfuleducational development

6 www.seda.ac.uk


activities and projects. Participantsregularly value the opportunity tolink up with other developers.

• Introduction to Staff andEducational Development

This six-week online course hasbeen designed as a counterpart tothe Summer School. It is highlyparticipative and is designedaround frequent opportunities foryou to practise and receivefeedback on your developingskills. You will be supportedthrough a series of scheduledactivities by selected key readingsfrom the course text, speciallydeveloped course resources, andexperienced course tutors. Youwill need to set aside six hours perweek in order to participateeffectively in the course. Thecourse has been developed forSEDA by the Oxford Centre forStaff and Learning Development atOxford Brookes University.

Second Stage

• Portfolio and assessment module

The second stage of theprogramme comprises worktowards an assessed portfolio,which provides evidence ofachievement against the learningoutcomes of the award. Theportfolio is based around a casestudy that incorporates the cycleof staff and educationaldevelopment, along with a roleanalysis, reflective review ofprofessional practice and a seriesof formative tasks. Tutors and agroup of peers support each otheronline through a carefullydesigned process over a period ofthree months.

Participants are welcome to take theSummer School or the online coursewithout registering for the fullprogramme; or to register for the fullprogramme after completing Stage 1.Participants who have attended theSEDA Summer School on a previousoccasion are welcome to progressstraight to Stage 2. It will also bepossible for suitably preparedindividuals to progress directly to Stage2, such as those who have already

completed a similar course or whohave sufficient experience within thefield (usually at least two years),subject to the appropriate approval.

Leading Staff and EducationalDevelopmentThe second of the two nationalprogrammes is planned for early2007, and addresses thedevelopment of institutional strategy,setting the direction of developmentactivity, and leading and assistingcolleagues in carrying outdevelopment activity -- all withintheir particular organisational andstrategic contexts. Attention willagain be paid to professional valuesand to personal development.Colleagues who are interested incontributing to the development ofthis programme are welcome toapproach the author.

Changes to the AssociateFellowship schemeThe SEDA Fellowship schemes wereoriginally intended as a means torecognise staff and educationaldevelopers, rather than as fulldevelopmental routes; although asBaume and Pilkington (2005)indicated, the process of analysingand reviewing one’s own experienceis profoundly developmental. Given,however, the changing nationalpicture, it is evident that a moredirectly developmental route wouldbe more appropriate for newdevelopers in particular.

The SEDA Fellowships Committeehas thus decided to close the existingroute to the Associate Fellowship(AFSEDA) to new entrants from 1November 20062. Staff who secureeither the SEDA-PDF award Staff andEducational Development or LeadingStaff and Educational Development,through one of the two nationalprogrammes will be eligible tobecome Associate Fellowshipsholders, which will involve becomingan associate or full member of SEDA,and joining the annual continuingprofessional development process forthe Fellowships scheme. The fullFellowship scheme (FSEDA) remainsunchanged.

ConclusionsSEDA is committed to the professionaldevelopment of staff in developmentroles within higher education. Webelieve that these new programmesand courses, and the changes to theAssociate Fellowship scheme will openup further avenues for professionaldevelopment, helping to bridge thecurrent skills gap that is evident withinthe sector.

Notes1 Subject to this programme goingthrough SEDA’s own recognitionprocess under PDF, this programmewill lead to participants receiving thenamed award ‘Staff and EducationalDevelopment’ within PDF.

2 Subject to the proposed programme‘Staff and Educational Development’going ahead during the autumn of2006 as planned.

ReferencesBaume, D. and Pilkington, R. (2005)‘Developing and accrediting thedevelopers’, EducationalDevelopments, 6.3, pp. 1-4.

Kahn, P. E. and Baume, D. (eds.)(2003) A Guide to Staff andEducational Development, The Staffand Educational Development Series,London, Kogan Page.

Outram, S. (2006) Developing theDeveloper: A Higher EducationAcademy/SEDA Pilot Project, ProjectBrief, Higher Education Academy,York.

Further information about SEDA-PDFand the Fellowship Schemes can befound on the SEDA website, http://www.seda.ac.uk.

Booking details: to book a place onthe programme Staff and EducationalDevelopment as a whole, or on eitherthe six-week online course or thethree-day Summer School, pleasecontact the SEDA office.

Peter Kahn is Senior ProfessionalDevelopment Adviser at the Universityof Manchester. He is Co-Chair of theSEDA Fellowships Committee.

7www.seda.ac.uk

Can you recognise a good facilitator when you see one?

IntroductionFacilitation skills are important both for educationaldevelopers and for the academic staff they work with. Thegrowth of active learning methods, the demands for studentsto be critically reflective and the increasing number of adultlearners all mean that many lecturers are now working withgroups in a way that enables students to discover what theywant to learn for themselves.

This article outlines four different ways of exploringfacilitation skills: behaviourism, critical thinking, socio-psychological models and transformative approaches.Different academics and different disciplines may beattracted by different approaches. Those who are interestedin numbers and incline more towards looking for ‘hardevidence’ may prefer the behavioural approach. Those wholook towards logic and philosophical inquiry may prefer thecritical thinking approach. Humanistic psychologists havenurtured the socio-psychological approaches and thoseinterested in the emancipatory nature of knowledge mayfind the transformative approaches helpful.

What is facilitation?The facilitator is the midwife in the learning process, and justas midwives have to be skilled at ‘masterly inactivity’ so theskilled facilitator needs to know when and how to interveneand when to remain silent.

The root of the word facilitator comes from the Latin faciliswhich means ‘capable of being done’. Therefore thefacilitator’s role is to create the conditions under which atask may be effectively carried out. It is the opposite of ‘todefine’, ‘to limit’ or ‘to close down’.

The importance of who creates the knowledge is indicatedin the diagram below. If the lecturer is coming from the lefthand side of the diagram, they will be using a transmissionskill base (demonstration, exposition, repetition, examinationof knowledge retained and applied); if the lecturer is comingfrom the right hand side of the diagram they will be using afacilitative skill base (questioning, challenging, supporting,research supervision, co-operative inquiry).

Can you recognise a good facilitator whenyou see one?Anne Lee, University of Surrey

Student creates the knowledge

Facilitated constructionof understanding

Diagram 1: the sliding scale in the transmission of knowledge

Lecturer creates the knowledge

Transmissionbased teaching

Four approaches to facilitationThe four approaches described below are not completelyseparate. There are aspects that ‘leak’ from one to anotherbut I hope looking through different lenses enables furtherunderstanding.

1) Using behavioural analysis to identify facilitative skillsBehavioural analysis has permeated social psychology inmany ways, and its approach is currently behind the use of‘cognitive behavioural therapy’.

Bales (1950) produced a powerful method for the study ofinterpersonal engagement in small groups. He used tworesearchers to analyse group interaction, and compared theirresults to increase rater accuracy. For our purpose the workhe did in examining group leaders’ interactions is the mostrelevant. He would measure two aspects: firstly, the portionof the total time that the leader spoke and secondly, thetypes of interaction that the leader made.

The table used to create interactive profiles is show below,and the columns on the right hand side are used to mark thenumber of interventions in each category by each memberof the group.

1 Shows solidarity raises other’s status, gives help,reward

2 Shows tension release, jokes, laughs, showssatisfaction

3 Agrees, shows passive acceptance, understands,concurs, complies

4 Gives suggestion, direction, implying autonomyfor other

5 Gives opinion, evaluation, analysis, expressesfeeling, wish

6 Gives orientation, information, repeats, clarifies,confirms

7 Asks for orientation, information, repetition,confirmation

8 Asks for opinion, evaluation,analysis, expressionof feeling

9 Asks for suggestion, direction, possible ways ofaction

10 Disagrees, shows passive rejection, formality,withholds help

11 Shows tension, asks for help, withdraws out of field12 Shows antagonism, deflates other’s status, defends

or asserts self

Facil

itator

Stude

nt A

Stude

nt B

Stude

nt C

etc.

Diagram 2: Interaction Process Analysis (Bales 1950 p.19)

8 www.seda.ac.uk


This table could be adapted for academic use. The work ofBales provides a useful sample of a diagnostic tool, but weshould not expect it to say anything about the quality of theinteraction.

2) The critical thinking model of facilitationThe critical thinking model of facilitation looks to an externallogical framework to solve a problem. It is a systemsapproach. Critical thinking can, if it chooses, avoid theaffective completely. Three examples are described briefly:Coverdale, Halpern and Egan.

Coverdale’s (Taylor, 1979) process relies on students learningby working together through a pre-set framework to solve anactual problem (real or contrived). It suggests that conflictcan usually be resolved by going back to the agreed aimsrather than involving any interpersonal analysis. The systemand the process are the primary problem-solving tool.

The diagram below is the figure that small groups work towhen they are being trained to apply Coverdale’s sheme.

AIMS

INFORMATION

WHTBD(1)

PLAN

ACTION

REVIEW

(1) WHTBD is the mnemonic for ‘what has to be done’and refers to the decision-making part of the process

(Adapted from Taylor, 1979, p. 66)

Coverdale acknowledges the need for a continuing cycle of‘plan, action and review’.

Mosely et al. (2004) argued that Halpern was also the onlytheorist to deal adequately with what teachers and learnerscan do to improve the acquisition and retention ofknowledge and skills for the post-16 years’ student. Herframework included creating frameworks for developing:

• verbal reasoning skills• argument analysis skills• skills in thinking as hypothesis testing• using likelihood and uncertainty• decision-making and problem-solving skills.

Egan (2001) recognised this process but both extended itand added more about the affective domain. Although heintended his model to be used in one-to-one counsellingscenarios, it is a broad model and suited to enquiry-basedlearning. His skilled-helper model works in three stages:

Stage IWhat is going on?

STORYBLIND SPOTS

LEVERAGE

Stage IIWhat solutions

make sense for me?

POSSIBILITIESCHANGE AGENDA

COMMITMENT

Stage IIIHow do I get what

I need or want?

POSSIBLESTRATEGIES

BEST FITPLAN

HOW DO I MAKE IT HAPPEN

As befits a counselling model, Egan highlights the importanceof empathic relationships, and he suggests that thecounsellor should tune in to the client and be tentative insharing their understanding (Egan, p.114).

3) The psychosocial model of facilitationThis model assumes that where students come togethervoluntarily, learning will happen automatically if therelationships within the group are positive. The father ofnon-directive therapy, Rogers (1983), suggested thatfacilitators needed six role sets: they set the initial mood ofthe group, elicit and clarify individual and group purposes,regard themselves as a flexible resource, respond to bothintellectual and emotional expressions from the group, sharetheir personal feelings, and work to recognise and accepttheir own limitations.

There are many other models of group functioning andgroup relationships which focus on the interpersonaldynamics of an interactive group. One such model is calledthe FIRO-B (an abbreviation for Fundamental InterpersonalRelations Orientation – Behaviour). This model was devisedby Will Schultz (1984 and 2004).

The model identifies the key motivators that drive behaviourand help transform a disparate group of individuals into acohesive productive group. The model helps individuals todiscover how their needs for participation, influence andcloseness can be contributing to or detracting from theirsuccess as a learning group.

Schultz argues that if the key concepts of inclusion, controland openness are not attended to, group members will stoplearning because they will feel ignored, humiliated orrejected or fight for more recognition (inclusion), influenceand attention to their (emotional) needs.

Another psycho-social model concentrates on looking at theintent behind the intervention. Heron (2001) has written atlength about facilitation and the six categories ofinterventions that he has identified. Like Egan, he intendedhis six category intervention analysis to be used in one-to-one situations, but it is a rich analysis and much istransferable to identifying skills for group facilitation.

The core of his argument is that the skilled facilitator makesan intervention competently, free from any hidden agendas,and knows exactly what the intent is behind theirintervention. Unskilled facilitators are at risk of makingmanipulative, perverted or degenerate interventions.

9www.seda.ac.uk

Can you recognise a good facilitator when you see one?

Making interventions purely, and constantly being aware ofour intentions, is a lifelong quest. Heron tries to help us bydividing interventions into those that he calls ‘facilitative’ and‘authoritative’.

Facilitative interventions are those where the practitioner isseeking to enable the student to become more autonomous.Authoritative interventions are where the practitioner(facilitator) takes responsibility for and on behalf of thestudent. It is a positivist stance and is about raisingconsciousness, guiding behaviour and giving instructions.

It is easy to see from the above list that the skilled facilitator/academic teacher will need to be psychologically self awareto understand their intentions when making any intervention.According to Heron, all categories are neutral in that if theyare operated competently one is no better than another. Hisrider is that the facilitator must always be working from anunderlying supportive attitude with the students.

Along with other writers, Heron (1999) has also looked atgroup processes. He identifies three models of facilitating:hierarchical, co-operative and autonomous. Within eachmodel there are six different dimensions: planning, meaning-making, confronting, feeling, structuring and valuing.

For Heron some of the goals of facilitation are that the studentwill be able to direct and develop themselves, make informedjudgements, be emotionally competent and self aware.

He identifies a hierarchy of facilitator ‘states’. This is a way ofidentifying the level of ‘presence’ that the facilitator canportray. Levels 6 to 8 will be most meaningful for the learnerand probably exhausting but rewarding for the facilitator:

1. Facilitator shows no interest or empathy in participant orsubject matter – submerged in his/her own internalanxiety and concerns

2. Facilitator is fascinated by the subject, their own distress,or the participant, to the exclusion of all else

3. Facilitator’s attention is distracted, goes off in directionsirrelevant to work in hand

4. Facilitator displaces their own distress, confusion orconflict on to student by attacking, withdrawing, blaming,denial, complaining etc.

5. Control of attention energy: some attention for task inhand while remainder is buried, displaced, distracted etc.

6. Full attention directed to task in hand encompassing bothown and participant’s needs

7. Attention for work in context, encompassing past andfuture, but immersed fully in task in hand

8. Attention for work in context at the engaged participantlevel and also at the disidentified witness/monitoring level.

4) Facilitation to support a transformative agendaThere are various theories about how we evolve our valuesor ambitions. Maslow (1954) was one of the early writers toidentify a goal of ‘self actualisation’. Perry (1970) produced achart of development which suggested that students movefrom a position of basic duality, through multiplicity tocommitment. Hall (1994) has suggested that adults shift their

values as they grow from surviving, belonging, self-initiativeto interdepending, and as they do that they move theirleadership style through the following range: authoritarian,paternalist, managerial, facilitator, collaborator, and finallyfrom servant to visionary.

Gregory takes our definition so far of facilitation (capable ofbeing done) one stage further and argues that‘facilitation...means easing. “Easing”...helping learners get intouch with their internal capacities to learn and to makesense of their experiences’ (Gregory, 2002, p. 81). Thisdefinition becomes particularly interesting when we examinethe role of the facilitator in transformation.

Gregory (2002 and 2006) writes that facilitation is an ancientart: it had a place in spiritual and monastic tradition in theform of guides, spiritual masters and spiritual directors,where it still flourishes. She adds:

‘Facilitation is the educational skill of accessing thephenomenological world of the individual, textured insocial and cultural variables and helping the learner get intouch with their internal capacities to learn and to makesense of their experiences.’ (Gregory, 2006)

A transformative experience is one that enables the studentto make a paradigm shift. It has similarities with the notion ofthreshold concepts (Meyer and Land 2002, Land et al. 2004,Meyer and Land 2005) in that once you have seen the worldin this new way there is no way of going back. It isimpossible then to perceive or believe that the worldoperates in the ‘old way’.

The fact that Meyer and Land call this ‘troublesomeknowledge’ gives some clue to the skills that the academictutor/facilitator needs to support some students whilst theytravel through this threshold. Some of the language thatMeyer and Land use in their work is also redolent ofspirituality; they refer to transfiguration and transformationas well as highlighting the metacognitive requirement for thelearner to become self-regulated.

Senge (1990) takes these boundaries one stage further whendescribing this transformative learning process as ‘metanoia’,and links it to ‘dia-logos’:

‘To grasp the meaning of metanoia is to grasp the deepermeaning of learning, for learning also involves afundamental shift of mind.’ (p.10)

He links this ability to learn individually through groups todia-logos:

‘…to the Greeks dia-logos meant a free flowing ofmeaning through a group allowing the group to discoverinsights not attainable individually.’ (p.10)

He also links this on to the concept of the learningorganisation (and thereby makes explicit the premise thatenabling staff to pursue the transformative agenda willenhance the employing organisation).

Enabling students to reframe their knowledge is a major taskof the educator. Mezirow (1991) refers to this as ‘a meaningperspective’ (p. 46) and reminds us that the sociologist Erving

10 www.seda.ac.uk


Goffman used the term ‘frame’ to refer to a shared definitionof a situation that organises and governs social interaction.

Mezirow takes the question of how to understandknowledge firmly back to the philosopher. This would leadthe facilitator to ask ‘in how many ways can we disprovethis’ (after Popper), and ‘can we make explicit what we aretaking for granted’ (looking for tacit knowledge, afterPolyani):

‘Popper and the transformation theorists agree that ourefforts to understand the world generate the continuoustesting of our most fundamental assumptions.’ (p. 41)

Brooks studied 29 managers who were identified as criticallyreflective by their peers. She identified what she called firstand second order thinking. First order thinking involvedempathically taking another person’s or group’s perspectiveand listening to intuition. Second order thinking includedperspective taking, monitoring thought processes, gatheringinformation and using analytical processes (Brooks 1989, inMezirow 1991, p. 181). Here we begin to see the skillsrequired of the transformative facilitator: they are a mix ofthe psycho-social and critical thinking skills combined at ahigh level.

What skills are important for each type offacilitation?The table below begins to identify the skills needed tobecome a practised facilitator in one of the four dimensions.

Skills required

creating an appropriate code andclassifying interventions, givingappropriate feedback and applyingthe implications of that coding totheir own performance as afacilitator

identifying appropriate criticalthinking or problem solvingprocesses and enabling the groupor student to move along them

self awareness, ability to identifythe psychological processes thatmitigate both for and againsthealthy group working

an ability to encourage students toconstantly reframe and questiontheir understanding in order tobroaden and deepen it, and tosupport students and learn fromand with them

1 Behavioural:

2 Critical thinking:

3 Psycho-social:

4 Transformational:

The combination of models is intended to help the academicto question the governing variables of facilitation. It aims tosupport what Argyris and Schon (1974) would call double-loop learning rather than single-loop learning (where thechosen values, plans and rules are operationalised ratherthan questioned). Or, as Elton (2000) put it more pithily, itaims to avoid the danger of ‘doing the wrong things righter’.

ReferencesArgyris, C. and Schon, D. (1974) Theory in practice:increasing professional effectiveness, San Francisco: JosseyBass.Bales, R. F. (1950) International Process Analysis, University ofChicago Press.Egan, G. (2001) The Skilled Helper, Pacific Grove CA Brooks/Cole Thomson Learning.Elton, L. (2000) ‘Danger of doing the wrong thing righter’,Evaluate and Improve, Open University ConferenceProceedings.Gregory, J. (2002) and (2006) ‘Facilitation and FacilitatorStyle’, in Jarvis, P. and Associates, Theory and Practice ofTeaching, London: Kogan Page pp.79-93.Hall, B. (1994) Values Shift, Rockport MA Twin LightsPublishers Inc.Heron, J. (1999) The complete facilitator’s handbook,London: Kogan Page.Heron, J. (2001) Helping the client, London Sage.Land, R., Cousin, G., Meyer, J. and Davies, P. (2004)Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (3):implications for course design and evaluation, Proceedings ofthe 2004 12th International Symposium, ‘Improving StudentLearning’, Oxford Centre for Staff and LearningDevelopment.Maslow, A. H. (1954) Motivation and Personality, New York:Harper.Meyer, J. and Land, R. (2002) Threshold concepts andtroublesome knowledge: linkages to ways of thinking andpractising within the disciplines, Proceedings of the 2002 10th

International Symposium on Improving Student Learning,Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.Meyer, J. and Land, R. (2005) ‘Threshold concepts andtroublesome knowledge (2): epistemological considerationsand a conceptual framework for teaching and learning,’Higher Education, 49: 373-388.Mezirow, J. (1991) Transformative Dimensions of AdultLearning, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Mosely, D., Baumfield, V., Higgins, S., Lin, M., Miller, J.,Newton, D., Robson, S., Elliott, J., Gregson, M. (2004)Critical Thinking Skills for post 16 learners, LSRC.Perry, W. G. (1990) Forms of Ethical and IntellectualDevelopment in the College Years, New York: Holt,Rheinhart Wilson.Rogers, C. (1983) Freedom to Learn in the 80’s, Charles EMerrill.Schutz, W., (1984) The Truth Option, California: Ten SpeedPress.Schutz, W. (2004) The Human Element: productivity, self-esteem and the bottom line, California: Jossey Bass.Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline, New York, Doubleday.Taylor, M. (1979) Coverdale on Management, London,Heinemann.

Anne Lee is the Academic Development Adviser in theCentre for Learning Development at the University of Surrey.

11www.seda.ac.uk

Educational Development - How do we know it’s Working? How do we know how well we are Doing?

Educational Development - How do weknow it’s Working? How do we know howwell we are Doing?Gina Wisker FSEDA, University of Brighton

‘The primary purpose of evaluation isto contribute to the collective learningof all those involved in the programmeor having a stake in it. … evaluationhas thus to engage with the innovationprocess and to help shape its directionor trajectory.’(Kelleher et al., 1996, p. 5)

‘There are reasons to think that thefield of practice and research that isbroadly referred to as educationaldevelopment has achieved a new levelof maturity and confidence. It is fastbecoming both an established field ofstudy and a recognised professionalrole in most institutions of highereducation in the UK.’(Gosling and D’Andrea, 2000(b))

The stature and status and, indeed, insome institutions, the very existence ofeducational development isoccasionally somewhat buffeted bylooming funding crises, influencedlocally by managerial changes ofdirection, and affected sometimesquite oddly by the more distantnational landscape of steers fromHEFCE, the HEA, and currently theRAE. David Gosling and VaneetaD’Andrea’s certainty that professionalrecognition for educationaldevelopment centres/units/institutes/etc. and identifiable educationaldevelopment practice had nowreached maturity might seem a littleshakier in the light of variousupheavals and closures during 2004-06; but the fact that the HEA nowintends to set up a network of ournetworks is further recognition of ourlocal, national and internationalimpact. Senior management threats toeducational development centresmight well arise from a short-sightedmisperception that the work ofeducational developers in some wayor other could really appear and

disappear with the vagaries of nationalfunding agendas, as if one mightsuddenly do without a (even largelyinternet-based or virtual?) library. Wewill always morph, but I think we arenow here to stay in some form orother. My own and others’ varioustravels over the last few years(Australia, South Africa, Far Eastmostly, in my case) have yielded some,as yet under-researched, perceptionsthat, internationally, educationaldevelopment centres rise and fall,grow and shrink, readjust to thechanging needs of their client groupperhaps or to the changing plans ofthe directorate.

They also change their focus. Currentconcerns with the scholarship ofteaching, research evidence-enhancedlearning and teaching, large-scaleevaluative research into for exampleteaching quality or student retention,communities of practice,professionalisation and theprofessional standards framework,indicate something of the range of ourwork. It has moved from only themaverick marginality of nurturingindividuals and their innovations ofthe early 1980s, right along thecontinuum to align itself with auditand quality assurance, seniormanagement roles in the office of thepro-vice-chancellery, front lineinvolvement or leadership, strategicpolicy decision-making andimplementation. All this without losingthe involvement with individuals. Thispaper seeks to review our remits andmissions, dissimilar and various thoughthey might be, and to look morespecifically at ways in which we findout if and how we might have had animpact. This, of course, feeds intothought about why we might beworthy of committed funding whenuniversities now have so many calls on

their money and are so auditconscious.

How do we evaluate our workand effectiveness?Evaluation is increasingly important toour work, our status and oureffectiveness. Barry Jackson commentson the growth in popularity ofevidence-based, informed orsupported policy and practice ineducation (Jackson, 2004) and fromthis we can see that building such anevidence base is necessary, andevaluation is one crucial elementamong several means to indicate oureffectiveness. But it is also importantbecause it provides us with evidencewe may use in professionaldecision-making and change agency.

How do we evaluate and gatherinformation and evidence upon whichto base judgements? Perhaps we usedto do this largely through theimmediate responses of thoseattending workshops:

‘It was a shame there was nodecaffeinated coffee.’‘It was really good to talk with mycolleagues – we don’t get much timefor this because of work pressures.’

It’s wonderful to have such positiveand discriminatory, carefully thought-through responses on the ‘happysheet’ after an educationaldevelopment event (I am being ironic,people need time to mingle and share)– but actually this tells us very littleabout the impact of our work. Suchresponses on the average evaluation‘happy sheet’ just indicate that peoplehave specific personal tastes (whichwe try to cater for but which might beout of our control) and that they doneed the carved-out space to sharetheir expertise and reflections with

12 www.seda.ac.uk


each other and move forward. Onsecond thoughts, then, these are notsuch frivolous comments, but they arenot enough to evaluate the impact ofour work.

What educational development doesin one of its many manifestations is toprovide such a space for professionalsto share their experiences andexpertise whether they are new toteaching and learning and so maybefinding their way, trying things out,moving beyond the ways in whichthey were taught (all of the above), orwhether they are well-established,frequent attendees (early adopters,‘the usual suspects’) and with a wealthof experience to share, or whetherthey are seeking something specificand otherwise rarely attend sessions.

Why might we want to evaluate whatwe do? And what is evaluation for?

Chelimsky (1997) identifies ‘threeconceptual frameworks of evaluation’:

• Evaluation for accountability (e.g.measuring results or efficiency)

• Evaluation for development (e.g.providing evaluative help tostrengthen institutions)

• Evaluation for knowledge (e.g.obtaining a deeper understandingin some specific area or policyfield). (p. 100)

Colleagues at the Heads ofEducational Development awayday in2005 considered evaluation in allthree of these areas or related to thesethree conceptual frameworks. Lookingat the range of our work theyidentified individualised developmentachievements as being still veryimportant goals for us in our work:

‘Promotion of academics we’ve been“building up”.’ (Head of Ed.Development 1)

‘Ask participants in development eventswhat goals they want to achieve (andask them if they succeeded!).’ (Head 2)

In the light of the positioning, newcentrality and constant change ofEducational Development Units/Centres, we can identify on the onehand the certainty that we are

essentially here to stay, but also that ourposition is volatile, based on an edgyrealisation that the evidence of closureand realignment, funding insecuritiesand politics is an everyday reality.Anyone who has worked in any contextwith postmodernism will recognise thisstate of relativity, fragmentation, anduncertainty which produces in differentmeasures, at different times, uneasynihilism, a celebratory sense of strength,of having arrived (as one HEDGcolleague put it, measures ofeffectiveness might well be ‘Be thePVC!’ (Head 3)), and an awareness ofthe constructedness of the wholesituation. In the midst of all of this andthe concomitant awarenessthat manipulation of paperwork,league tables, and the massaging ofrealities are a staple in higher educationin the twenty-first century, how can anyerstwhile radical, creative, imaginative,nurturing, politically adept agent forchange (read educational developer)know that we are doing a good job?The scepticism which partners a radicalphilosophical stance is healthy –perhaps we won’t be taken in by falserealities and false securities, alwaysedgy and always finding ways to provewhat we intuitively know.

And what do we know? And how dowe know it? I would argue we know tosome extent intuitively when the rangeof our work is effective:

• It is well planned, well researched,well timed, well conducted,colleague and institution-centred,inspirational and solidly completed

• It enacts well-rounded educationaldevelopment strategies in action

• There is ongoing evidence ofnetworks and community of practicebuilding/introduction and sharing ofresearch evidence-led practicethroughout the year and at events/conferences, in publications

• There is informed support and advicegiven to the full range of colleagues,experienced productively, and sharedwith senior management

• There is advocacy and support forindividual staff initiatives/internal andexternal consultancy

• Internal and external audits andreviews indicate the success of thework of educational developers andthe unit or centre in terms of robust,leading edge, ethically informed,active, forward-looking, engagedpractices.

How do we do know when the fullestrange of our work in action hasenabled all of the above? By the factthat it contributes to constructivechange, involves reflective practice,sensitive, appropriate, strategic,people-centred innovation andembedding of good practice?

Beyond intuitionSome of the answers to thosequestions might be based only onintuition, and though essential,intuition or gut feeling is not enough.If we are expecting our colleagues touse a research evidence base in theirlearning and teaching developmentsand practice, and if we are living in anaudit culture of league tables anduniversity branding, we do need allthe appropriate and useful evaluationvehicles we can gather, not merely toindicate to others internally andexternally that we are having an effect,we are doing a good job, but also toprove it to ourselves (as far as anythingis really provable – just to continuewith the postmodernism).

So how do we evaluate effectively?Several Heads of EducationalDevelopment colleagues suggestedusing external and internal qualitymechanisms:

‘QAA Institutional Audit report/findings.’ (Head 4)‘Quality Review’ of the unit.’ (Head 5)

Ensuring the centre is central to theeffectiveness of external audit andsubject to both external and internalaudit and review is a way ofestablishing credibility, andmaintaining status and also, it ishoped, centrality and the continuingpower to be effective. Of course, auditand measurable outcomes are limited,but they are an essential part of theevaluation continuum. I am notsuggesting that everyone mistrusts theconstructions of league tables,monitoring, assessment, appraisal and

13www.seda.ac.uk


attempts to capture the often fragilebubble of experience. Indeed, even ifwe do mistrust these as relative andpartial constructs, they can helpprovide evidence of how well we areidentifying and working with thevarying needs of the institution,colleagues and students, in educationand learning, locally, nationally,internationally, generally andspecifically. We need them and weneed more subtle, varied andreflective versions, alongside theperhaps simplistic and mechanistic, tocapture the nuances and build onwhat this can tell us about oureffectiveness, and show it to others.Ranald Macdonald, consideringevaluation as part of our role ineducational development, identifiesseveral approaches to it, reasons for it,and methods and uses of it, much ofwhich can be seen in the responses ofHEDG colleagues:

‘One possible approach to examiningthe main aspects of evaluation is tofocus on a set of questions:

• Why evaluate?• What to evaluate?• By whom is the evaluation carried

out?• Who determines the evaluation

questions?• What assumptions underlie the

evaluation questions?• With whom is the evaluation

undertaken?• How to evaluate?• When to evaluate?• How much evaluation will be

carried out?• What types of evidence will be

used in the evaluation?• How will the evidence be used?• For whom is the evaluation being

carried out?• What effect will the evaluation

have?• How will feedback be provided to

all stakeholders?’

(Macdonald, 2002)

Identifying elements in theevaluation continuumFollowing a very lively and successfulsession at the Heads of Education

Development awayday meeting in inthe summer of 2005 I was asked towrite up what I’d prepared aboutevaluating the effectiveness ofeducational development centres andtheir work, and to collate and reflecton the different responses made bycolleagues and friends at the meeting– against a background, as one wouldexpect, of research evidence-ledlearning and teaching, and of the workof others in the field.

If in these changing times we want togenuinely find out about oureffectiveness and our impact onlearning and teaching in ouruniversities, then first we probablyneed to review exactly what the rangeof our work is in educationaldevelopment in the twenty-firstcentury. In many ways, it might appearpublicly in those kinds of sessionsindicated above, but in many otherways it has moved enormously fromthat kind of activity and context.

The range of our work could include:

Nurturing the development ofindividuals

Networking and embedding through:• secondments• promoted posts• fellowships• small groups• change work

Programme delivery - needs, analysis,etc.

• workshops• symposia• conferences

Research and publications• learning, teaching, assessment• management, leadership, roles,

processes• evaluating impact

Strategic – work in terms of policiesand strategies

• internally (and externally)• committees

The developing of strategies – networksand influences, and systems

Informing and linking local, national,international demands and trends

Managing EducationalDevelopment Centres --assessing/evaluating theirimpactHow and why do we assess orevaluate the impact of our work inmanaging and leading EducationalDevelopments/EDCs?• Leadership – vision, direction,

mission• Management – the more everyday

practicalitiesIn 2000, the initial survey of work inEDCs noted that we had become morestrategic and more centrally funded.We are carrying out a large range ofactivities, from strategic advice andinternal advocacy, international andnational development, to acting asvisionaries as well as completer-finishers, working with individuals aswell as whole institutions, and inleague with audit mechanisms toensure the university can be seen to beworking well, and also listening to theneeds of the newly overburdenedteaching members of staff, andnurturing them forwards to build ontheir strengths, and supportingestablished colleagues in CPD activities.

A number of writers (Moses 1987,Hounsell 1994, Candy 1996) havesuggested that ‘educationaldevelopment’ includes all, or somecombination of, the following:(1) Improvement of teaching and

assessment practices, curriculumdesign, and learning support –including the place of informationtechnology in learning andteaching

(2) Professional development ofacademic staff, or staffdevelopment

(3) Organisational and policydevelopment within the context ofhigher education

(4) Learning development of students –supporting and improving effectivestudent learning.

As Gosling and D’Andrea have pointedout, such a summary misses much ofthe aims and activities of EDCs. ‘Firstlyit provides no account of whatconstitutes “improvement” or“development” and secondly it focusesentirely on the implementation ofsome previously identified practice orpolicy’ (Gosling and D’Andrea, 2000).

14 www.seda.ac.uk


Graham Badley (1998) argues thateducational development is alsoconcerned with:

‘Supporting the scholarship of teachingthrough classroom inquiry and actionresearch; providing opportunities forcritical dialogue and conversationabout teaching and learning indepartmental and institutional settings,and promoting learning as the criticallink between teaching, research,scholarship, inquiry and dialogue.’(Badley, 1998: 71)

Educational development is a keyfunction in higher education. It aims tocreate a teaching environment inwhich debate flourishes about whatconstitutes good practice in learningand teaching in different contexts andfor diverse students. Perhaps some ofthe measures of this have becomeincreasingly simplistic but:

‘Learning is not simply more or less“effective” and teaching is not simplymore or less “efficient”, nor can goodpractice simply be “disseminated”.Educational development is also aboutinterrogating the goals of learning andof higher education more generally. Itlooks at questions about the value oflearning to students, and promotesconversations not only about how toteach and promote learning, but alsoabout the nature of the curriculum andthe political and social context oflearning. The notion of “development”itself must be continually contestedand interrogated.’ (Webb, 1996,Gosling, 2000).

Pedagogic research and thescholarship of teaching and learning(‘SoTL’) (Boyer 1990, Hutchings andSchulman 1999), are not muchrepresented in common definitions ofeducational development. A keyrecent feature of our work in HE is theincreasing recognition of theimportance of research into learningand teaching as an integral part ofeducational development (Jenkins2000, Healey 2000, Yorke 2000,Gosling and D’Andrea, 2000(b)).Latterly, this had led to the inclusion ofa funding study relating research andlearning/teaching in the new HEFCETQEF (2006-9) funding. As Badleynotes:

‘Educational development is thereforenot only about “improving”,“promoting”, “supporting”,“developing” learning and teaching,assessment and the curriculum, it isalso about enquiring into, investigating,and researching higher education.’(Badley, 1998)

Gosling and D’Andrea go on toindicate educational development isalso defined by being:

(5) Informed debate about learning,teaching, assessment, curriculumdesign, and the goals of highereducation

(6) Promotion of the scholarship ofteaching and learning andresearch into higher educationgoals and practices.

Gosling’s 1995 survey indicated thatnot all EDCs were expected, orfunded, to carry out all of these sixgoals or work areas. The surveyrevealed that improvement of learningand teaching and professionaldevelopment staff was at the ‘core’ ofwhat educational development unitsdo (Gosling, 1996: 79).

As part of our activities in the awaydayI asked colleagues to consider thechart below which tried to indicatesome of the range of our work, inorder to begin to consider how weknow we are effective in thesedifferent areas.

Having decided the range of our workit is then important to consider howwe really can measure any impact wehave on each of these areas - whatmeasure do we use to evaluate? Theold adage that the successful staffdeveloper knows how successful theyare because those they haveinfluenced now believe all the goodideas are their own, is fine enough fordays when being a marginal maverickwas the preferred option, but it is nogood for an audit culture, or onewhich actually wants to makeeffectiveness visible -- two halves ofthe same coin. Our work is explicablein terms of Boyer (1990) and others atthe Carnegie Foundation whosuggested four areas of scholarship:discovery, integration, application andteaching. Glassick et al. (1997)subsequently identified six aspectscommon to these: clear goals,adequate preparation, appropriatemethods, significant results, effectivepresentation and reflective critique.Glassick goes on to ask:

‘Does the scholar critically evaluate hisor her own work? Does the scholarbring an appropriate breadth ofevidence to his or her critique? Doesthe scholar use evaluation to improvethe quality of future work?’ (Glassick etal., p. 36)

Although Boyer, Glassick and othersare focusing here on the role of theacademic, we can ask ourselves the

Considering the range of work of EducationalDevelopment Centres -

Workshops

Courses

Research

Individuals

Conferences,symposia

CPD

International

Local, National -Strategies &

Policies

Local, Regional

SeniorManagement

InstitutionalStrategies

Development

Faculties

Programmes

•New Staff

••

•••••

•

•

•

•

••

15www.seda.ac.uk


same questions and apply the sameevaluative stringencies to our work ineducational development centres.Evaluation is part of that scholarlycontinuum which leads to continuousimprovement based on reflection.

What follows are some of thequestions I asked HEDG colleagues,and some responses, managed intothemes.

• Please identify the range and kindof impact, measures, outputs andoutcomes of your EDC.

(Some of my own include: nos. ofindividuals publishing, deliveringat conferences on Learning andTeaching or engaging withLearning and Teaching; successfulembedding of e.g. peerobservation, curriculum changes)

What else?

Please also consider

Research• Do you use research evidence-

based information to evaluateimpact, enable and embedchange?

• Share examples and models ofusing research evidence-basedinformation – how do youidentify a change, problem, orinnovation and then

• Plan/action/collect/analyse/usedata? Embed change?

• And, when you see something isnot going so well, what do youdo?

• Who do you work with?

• How do you turn the problemaround?

• Do you use research strategies inthis also?

• What plans can you now share toassess and evaluate the impact ofyour EDC?

• What can we do to ensure we arenot only effective but seen to beeffective, and embed success atevery level?

In the 2000 report by Gosling, acomment was made about evaluation

being a crucial part of raising the statusof learning and teaching moregenerally. Gosling found that someeducational development units werenot yet au fait with the need for orpractices of evaluation:

‘Evaluation of ImpactThe intention behind the increasedfunding is to raise the status of learningand teaching. An interesting questionto ask, therefore, is the extent to whichthe increased activity is having thateffect. In response to a question aboutthe ways in which the unit evaluatedtheir impact some said “not yetdecided”, “none yet” or “underconsideration”, “currently working onthis”. It was clear that some new unitshad been established without any clearstrategy for evaluation. It would appearthat relatively few units are required tosystematically evaluate their impact onthe institution although many reportedthat they used questionnaires orfeedback tools to evaluate particularevents or initiatives. Some were usingexternal evaluators and some sawevaluation as part of their “actionresearch”. However, without moresystematic forms of evaluation, itwould appear that it will be difficult toknow whether or not the increase involume of activity in educationaldevelopment is producing the effectsthat the funding councils areexpecting.’ (Gosling, 2000)

However, evaluation is a key elementin our work and in its future :

‘I see evaluation as a process whichleads to the making of a judgement inrelation to a set of values or criteria;and one in which the judgementpossibly leads to a decision.’ (Cowan,1998, p. 79)

And it is essential in innovation andjudgement:

‘Evaluation is any activity thatthroughout the planning and deliveryof innovative programmes enablesthose involved to learn and makejudgements about the startingassumptions, implementationprocesses and outcomes of theinnovation concerned.’ (Stern, 1988,quoted in Sommerlad, 1992, p. 1)

When asked about how we evaluateour effects and effectiveness,colleagues responded to the topic‘Managing EDCs – discussing andevaluating their impact’. Looking atthe responses we need to bear inmind the reasons for evaluation, andways of approaching it, since thefollowing responses can be seen tocohere with the characteristics ofcarrying out, reasons for, and uses of,evaluation as explored and defined byRanald Macdonald (2002).

A selection of suggestionsabout evaluation and its uses --the HEDG resultsResponses fell into a variety ofcategories from the strategic to thepersonal and local, the visionary to thepragmatic, the short term to the longterm. I am not going to produce acomplex matrix and there are anumber of overlaps, but we can seehow educational developers andrelated colleagues might collect avariety of data to indicate impact, dealpersonally and professionally withtheir changing role, further their ownfuture and mark the achievement ofthe learning and teaching strategy.Some of the strategies for evaluationand assessment and some of theindicators are a trifle ironic, othersutterly pragmatic:

1) Play a political game.2) Publish research papers/project

outcomes of teaching fellows’work.

3) Leave (then they know what youused to do).

4) Encourage production of A1position for projects – projectworkers to include evaluation andimpact.

5) Invite someone in to meetings of[team] and share perceptions ofwhat you think they do and viceversa.

6) Number of people/groups offering‘interesting’ sessions at our annualLearning and TeachingConference.

7) Sometimes bringing in someone tochallenge everything.

8) Follow up on workshop feedbackto discover actual change.

9) Levels of activity in faculties inrelation to enhancement oflearning and teaching quality.

16 www.seda.ac.uk


10) Ask participants at developmentevents what goals they want toachieve (and ask them if theysucceeded!).

11) Direct impact of close involvement– e.g. with NTFS candidates, CETLBid team.

12) How to evaluate ‘down the line’evaluation and ask participants sixmonths later about what they aredoing.

13) Publish summary of programme/seminar evaluations.

14) Trailing committee papers andminutes to check against effectachieved two/three years on.

15) Do you have an official parkingplace?

16) ‘Repeat’ business.17) Increasing requests to do things by

‘senior management team’.18) Capture everything you do in the

centre and make others aware ofit.

19) ‘Serendipitous’ evaluations –lecturers citing your centre as asource of funding/support.

20) Number of staff presenting atLearning and TeachingConferences.

21) Invite the head of HR to lunch.22) Number of learning and teaching

co-ordinators who have movedinto senior management.

23) Number of bids achieved/income.24) Number of staff who ring/email

me for advice on leading sessions.25) Plan measurable/desirable goals

for development activities.26) Take time for discussion with your

team and listen to their views onsuccesses.

27) Conference.28) Proportion of people invited to

work with us on a project orinitiative who accept with alacrity.

29) Create promotion route forteachers in teaching so themanagement can show they valuelearning and teaching.

30) Write and publish summary ofannual report.

31) Lie about the national context.32) Get successes into corporate

newsletter.33) More people knocking on the

door.34) VC asks to meet you.35) Promotion of academics we’ve

been ‘building up’.36) Number and rate of new staff who

get PG Cert and move on toanother university.

37) Intervention: consultancy withcourse teams facing validation.

38) Measure: how many conditions atvalidation (compare with coursesthat haven’t used service).

39) Number of times seniormanagement asks me to providebackground research re… (e.g.student attendance).

40) Size of budget!41) Keep and use favourable comment

from others.42) QAA Institutional Audit report/

findings.43) Internal and external membership.44) ‘Quality Review’ of the unit.45) Student attests (unsolicited).46) Annual funding tells us a lot about

our perceived impact.47) Dialogue ----> ideas ----> description

----> collecting data ----> evaluating48) Present internationally at

conferences where people link uswith the name of the university.

49) Publish.50) Internal review by team leaders

within unit once every two years.51) Mixture of numbers and

comments used for evaluations.52) Telling a convincing story.53) Be the PVC.54) Comments/commendations/

mentions in reports and audits e.g.QAA, OFSTED, NMC, IIP (externalevidence).

55) Number of staff.56) Understanding why staff change

their practice: ask them why theychanged what they do!

57) Evaluating training anddevelopment: how haveparticipants changed what they doas a result of the training anddevelopment.

There are a number of ways of lookingat these responses. I first gatheredthem into a kind of chart whichconsidered those continua mentionedabove – in other words connectionsand impact related to the strategic andthe personal professional developmentof individuals; the pragmatic andmeasurable indicators of success oreffect, and those which were morevisionary; indicators which suggestedan immediate effect – signs of someresponse or change – and those whichneeded a longer study, and could

indicate embedded development andchange as a result of working withourselves in Educational Developmentcentres.

Strategic1, 2, 4, 9, 17, 25, 32, 34, 37, 42, 44,48, 50

Personal / Professional3, 15, 26, 43, 48, 49, 52

Pragmatic and Measurable5, 6, 7, 11, 13, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24,27, 28, 29, 30, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 42,44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 52, 54, 55

Visionary19, 31, 34, 53

Short Term10, 51

Long Term3, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 25, 29, 33, 41,47, 56, 57

Some responses considered data. Anumber of responses focused oncollecting appropriate data, evaluatingand sharing it. Others recognised theimportance of inclusion in keyuniversity activities, such as QAA, orcurriculum development, and of beingable to produce evidence of the waylearning and teaching are supported,invested in. Some look at how we canidentify and share the quality of ouractual activities, as centres, and morecrucially, of course, the activities ofothers which have been supportedand enhanced by our work – bothinternally via public recognition andinvolvement in developments, andexternally via publications andconferences, which herald abroad theuniversity’s image as committed tolearning and teaching and the studentexperience.

The fascination with evaluation of theeffectiveness of educationaldevelopment centres needs to be seenin the context of a widespreadevaluation culture of which we are apart. As Ranald Macdonald notes:

‘We need to ensure that we are clearabout the purposes of any evaluationand how we are going to use theoutcomes that come from it (Patton,1997). In particular, we need to createthe right culture, climate or

17www.seda.ac.uk


environment for evaluation to beeffective where the emphasis is onlearning from mistakes and success,rather than merely apportioning blameor praise. It is worth remembering thatthere is no single right way of achievingour educational aims nor of evaluatingthem.’ (Macdonald, 2002)

So that we can develop and enhanceour abilities to recognise, evaluate,share and build on our successes (andovercome our weaknesses), it would bevery helpful to hear of examples of datacollection, and stories of successfulimpact.

ConclusionOur roles in educational developmentcentres have changed enormously overthe last few years and, if they arevolatile they are also much morestrategically embedded in the variety ofcore work of the university, thecurriculum development, CETLs,research grant bids, and the initial andcontinuing professional development ofthose who teach and facilitate learning.We are also not alone. Deputy vice-chancellors, deputy deans and learningand teaching committees now workwith us and share titles and roles. Oneof the things we still do as educationaldevelopers is provide a safe andenabling space for the learning andteaching oriented learningconversations which have no suchspace elsewhere (though of course theyshould, but we are all too busy gettingon with it, it being teaching, research,management activities and internalpolitics). Colleagues locally – externallyand internally – work with us onfellowships, a host of learning andteaching developments and we areexpected and even enabled more thanever to focus on the scholarship ofteaching, the development andembedding of research-enhancedlearning and teaching. We are alsoexpected to be universityrepresentatives and beacons abroad –through publications, conferencepresentations and consultancies. Bothhard and reflective evidence areneeded to capture and share the waysin which our work, operating within awider community of practice, cansupport the embedding of good practiceand positive change as well as retaininga building on our knack for networking,

questioning absurdities, creativity andsupporting individuals.

ReferencesBadley, G. (1998) ‘Making a case foreducational development in times ofdrift and shift’, Quality Assurance inEducation, Vol. 6, No. 2.Boyer, Ernest L. (1990) ScholarshipReconsidered: Priorities of theProfessoriate, Princetown, N.J.: CarnegieFoundation for the Advancement ofTeaching.Candy, P. (1996) ‘Promoting lifelonglearning: academic developers and theuniversity as a learning organisation’,The International Journal for AcademicDevelopment, Vol. 1, No. 1, May, 7-18.Chelimsky, E. (1997) ‘Thoughts for anew evaluation society’, Evaluation,3(1), 97-118.Cowan, J. (1998) On becoming aninnovative university teacher,Buckingham: SRHE/Open UniversityPress.Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T. andMaeroff, G. I. (1997) Scholarshipassessed: evaluation of the professoriate,San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Gosling, D. (2000) ‘Conceptual issues inhigher education’, in Improving StudentLearning Through the Disciplines, (ed.)C. Rust, Oxford Centre for Staff andLearning Development.Gosling, D. and D’Andrea, V. (2000)Promoting Research in Teaching andLearning in Higher Education: two casestudies of multi-disciplinary pedagogicresearch, ESRC-TLRP Conference,Leicester, UK.Gosling, D. and D’Andrea, V. (2000(b))Research and Teaching: RevaluingPedagogic Research in Higher Education,SRHE Conference: Leicester.Gosling, D. W. (1996) ‘What do UKEducational Development Units Do?’,The International Journal for AcademicDevelopment, Vol. 1, No. 1, May, 75-83.Healey, M. (2000) Developing theScholarship of Teaching in HigherEducation: a discipline-based approach.Higher Education Research andDevelopment, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp.169-189.Hounsell, D. (1994) ‘Educationaldevelopment’, in Bocock, J. andWatson, D. (eds.) Managing the

University Curriculum: MakingCommon Cause, SRHE and OpenUniversity Press, Ch. 6, pp. 89-102.Hutchings, P. and Schulman, L. (1999)‘The scholarship of teaching, newelaborations, new developments’,Change, September/October.Jackson, N. (2004) ‘The meanings ofevidence based practice in highereducation: themes, concepts andconcerns emerging through publicdiscussion’, The Higher EducationAcademy, http://www.ltsn.ac.uk/genericcentre/index.asp?docid=20034, accessedMarch 2006.Jenkins, A. (2000) ‘Summary/review ofthe research and scholarly evidenceon teaching/research relationships inhigher education’, The Relationshipbetween Research and Teaching inHigher Education: Present Realities,Future Possibilities, SouthamptonInstitute and the Higher EducationFunding Council for England, pp. 23-33.Kelleher, J., Sommerlad, E. and Stern,E. (1996) Guidelines for eLib ProjectEvaluation, The Tavistock Institute,http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/services/elib/papers/tavistock/evaluation, accessedMarch 2006.Macdonald, R. (2002) ‘Educationaldevelopment: research, evaluationand changing practice in highereducation’, in R. Macdonald and J.Wisdom (eds.) Academic andEducational Development: Research,Evaluation and Changing Practice inHigher Education, London: KoganPage.Moses, I. (1987) ‘Educationaldevelopment units: a cross-culturalperspective’, Higher Education, 16,449-79.Sommerlad, E. (1992) A Guide to LocalEvaluation, Employment Department.Webb, G. (1996) Understanding StaffDevelopment, Buckingham: SRHE andOpen University Press.Yorke, M. (2000) ‘A cloistered virtue?Pedagogical research and policy in UKhigher education’, Higher EducationQuarterly, Vol. 54, No. 2, April, pp.106-26.

Gina Wisker is Head of the Centre forLearning and Teaching at theUniversity of Brighton.

18 www.seda.ac.uk


Peter, tell us something about your background; where youwork and your job profile…

Since 1995 I have been working at Spurgeon’s College inLondon, a theological college in south London which is anAffiliated Institution of the University of Wales. My currentrole as Director of Training means that it is my responsibilityto plan packages of training and information for students. Italso means that I have a role in delivering staff training.Alongside that I am the Director for a postgraduate course inpractical theology (MTh in Applied Theology) which attractspeople from across the UK and some from overseas. Theyare involved in various forms of Christian service, and thecourse encourages them to reflect upon their experiences inministry. At any time there are about 100 people workingtowards that degree, which means that various bits of workare coming in throughout the year. Prior to coming here Iworked for 17 years as a local church minister, squeezingsome postgraduate study in along the way.

A short while back you completed a postgraduate certificatein L&T – what are your reflections about the experienceswhile on the course?

When I started the Open University course in 2002 I hadbeen teaching for seven years, and I found it very helpful tobe able to reflect upon my experience and to makeconnections with broader currents of educational thinking.I appreciated the way the assignments were all geared to thework I was doing throughout the year, and amongst otherthings it enabled me to review one of our undergraduatecourses in some depth. That review helped lay thefoundation for a lengthy process of designing a new Bachelorof Theology course which we hope will commence inSeptember 2006. Lots of the ideas stirred up by the coursehave flowed into our staff development sessions too.

The Open University course appears to have made asignificant impact, and as a result you now want to extendyour studies on learning and teaching. Tell us about what youhope to do:

Since 2002 I have been involved, twice a year, in teachingMTh students in West Africa, through a partnership with theGhana Baptist Theological Seminary. Reflection on my workwith students there identifies helping students engage incritical thinking as one of the key challenges. For, in keepingwith the standard expectations of a Master’s course at anyBritish university, we expect our students to demonstratetheir ability to engage in critical thinking.

Exploring the developmental impacts ofcompleting a postgraduate certificate inlearning and teachingA conversation between Peter Stevenson and Anthony Brand

So I want to do some primary research, which will help toidentify some of the specific obstacles to critical thinkingfacing African students. The hope is that such research willhelp the process of developing strategies and materials thatwill help students, from an African context, engage in thecritical thinking expected by Western based courses.

Another reason for my interest in this topic is its directrelevance for teaching in the stimulating, multi-culturalcontext of London.

As you tell it to us the concept of critical thinking as part ofthe research project produces a number of dilemmas andchallenges. Can we explore these a little more?

Although there is no agreed definition of critical thinking,Neil Browne and Kari Freeman (2000) helpfully argue that‘critical thinking comes in many forms, but all possess asingle core feature. They presume that human argumentsrequire evaluation if they are to be worthy of widespreadrespect. Hence, critical thinking focuses on a set of skills andattitudes that enable a listener or reader to apply rationalcriteria to the reasoning of speakers and writers.’However, they claim that ‘our proclivity to seek onlyinformation that supports our views (called “confirmationbias” by psychologists) in addition to the human tendency tohold firmly to our beliefs, provide a sizeable obstacle todeveloping the critical thinking of students’ (Browne andFreeman, 2000). This seems to be an accurate description ofmany theological students in West Africa, who come fromreligious traditions which do not encourage a criticalapproach to questions of faith and theology. In suchsocieties, which place a high premium on respect fortradition, it is likely to be the case that there are furthercultural and educational obstacles which make it moredifficult for students to engage in critical thinking.

It does strike me that if we regard the concept anddevelopment of critical thinking as a core aspect of (western)higher education, and indeed the certificate in L&T, then weare on the brink of a clash of cultural values here. If you wereto succeed as a teacher you would be enabling andencouraging your student participants to challenge orthodoxyand, dare I go as far as to suggest, dogma.

In doing this kind of research I am strongly aware of thecultural assumptions undergirding Western notions of criticalthinking, which presumably are themselves open toquestion. Indeed one study about critical thinking and

19www.seda.ac.uk

Exploring the developmental impacts of completing a postgraduate certificate in learning and teaching

international students in the UK asks provocatively ‘if UKmodels of critical thinking are grounded in assumptionsabout the universal characteristics of “our society”, is it fittingto ask international learners to adopt them? If criticalthinking concepts are drawn from a largely secularistintellectual tradition, do they offer the most appropriatemodes of thinking for students engaged in theologicalreflection?’ (Moore, Faltin and Wright, 2003).

Within Ghana, for example, I am sure that the Akan culturehas its own resources for contextually valid forms of criticalthinking. So I want to listen to both students and teachers inAfrica to see how their insights might contribute to thedevelopment of a more international perspective on thistopic.

Critical thinking versus orthodoxy?

It is undoubtedly true that some forms of faith discourageany kind of questioning, but it would be wrong to assumethat all Christians are unthinking fundamentalists. It might beargued that Christianity actually encourages certain forms ofcritical thinking because the stress within the biblicaltradition on seeking for ‘wisdom’ implies a process ofdiscerning between the good and the not-so-good. Perhaps‘seeking for wisdom’ might be a rough and ready definitionof what critical thinking involves?

The challenges facing Africa have been very much in thespotlight over the last couple of years, and some agencies,such as the World Bank, have acknowledged the strategicrole of faith communities in the work of communitydevelopment (Belshaw, Caderisi and Sugden, 2001). Withinsuch a context the place of critical thinking withintheological education is not a private matter for thechurches, but is potentially of much broader significance.

Peter Stevenson is Director of Training at Spurgeon’sCollege, London, and Anthony Brand is Head of LearningDevelopment at the University of Hertfordshire.

ReferencesBelshaw, D., Caderisi, R., and Sugden, C., (eds.) (2001) Faithin Development: Partnership between the World Bank andthe Churches of Africa, World Bank Publications andRegnum Press.

Browne, M. N. and Freeman, K. (2000) ‘Distinguishingfeatures of critical thinking classrooms’, Teaching in HigherEducation 5:3, 301-309.

Moore, Z. B., Faltin, L. and Wright, M. (2003) ‘Criticalthinking and international postgraduate students’, Discourse:Learning and Teaching in Philosophical and Religious Studies3.1, 63-94.

This article is a reflection upon thetransition from SEDA’s TeacherAccreditation Scheme to theProfessional Development Framework(PDF)¹.

The history of PDF is to be found in aspecial edition of EducationalDevelopments and may bedownloaded from the SEDA website².Briefly, while the outcomes of theDearing Committee report were inmany ways recognition of SEDA’s earlywork, the establishing of the Institutefor Learning and Teaching (ILT)presented a direct challenge to thecontinuing viability of much of SEDA’sprofile of activities. Appropriatemeasures were taken to reach anaccord with the ILT which enabledSEDA-recognised programmes tomove across and the TeacherAccreditation Committee continued towork with those institutions who

The Long and Winding Road – aretrospectiveAnthony Brand, University of Hertfordshire

wished to maintain a link. Inevitablyhaving two bodies accrediting thegrowing number of postgraduatecertificates in learning and teachingwas inherently unstable and so SEDAengaged in a radical re-examination ofits place and role in the sector. Theresult was the formation of theProfessional Development Frameworkand from the start it was emblematicof what SEDA does well – workingwith and listening to colleagues acrossthe sector. A core feature andprinciple of PDF is its being supportiveand developmental within the contextof an individual institution’s mission.The former Teacher Accreditationawards were transformed into whatcan now be seen as an embryoniccontinuing professional development(CPD) framework for an institution touse in a local context. In fact the rapidand rich growth of named awardswithin PDF can now be truly seen as

being close to a fully matured CPDframework.

At the start the Teacher AccreditationCommittee, which was reconstitutedas the PDF Committee, thought thatthe list of named awards was fairlycomplete. How naïve! Listening to theemerging needs of the sector provedthat more were needed and thesewere added; see the list below.Additionally, SEDA has always been aproactive organisation and so, with theestablishment of the Centres forExcellence in Teaching and Learning,there was recognition that furtherawards were needed to support agrowing but diverse body ofdevelopers.

As Chair of PDF I frequentlyencountered the embarrassment ofhardly being able to keep up to datewith the growing list of named awards.

20 www.seda.ac.uk


I would like to say with someconfidence that the correct andcurrent list is:

• Action Research into ProfessionalPractice

• Developing Leaders• Developing People and Processes• Developing Professional Practice• Embedding Learning Technologies• Enhancing Academic Practice in

Disciplines• Enhancing Research Practice• Exploring Learning Technologies• External Examining• Leading and Developing Academic

Practice• Leading Staff and Educational

Development• Learning, Teaching and Assessing• Staff and Educational

Development• Student Support and Guidance• Supervising Postgraduate Research• Supporting Learning.

However, there will be an inevitablelag between the writing of this articleand its publication and more mightwell have been added! What follows isan exploration of some of the namedaward areas showing how they meetthe diverse needs of the highereducation community. In doing so,PDF recognises and embraces thegrowing and highly diverse set of staffwho now support student learning inpost compulsory and highereducation.

An inevitable question is in seeinghow the PDF named awards relate tothe new National Standards. WhilePDF obviously predates the release ofthe Standards in February 2006,Supporting Learning clearly satisfiesand exceeds the requirements for level1, and Learning, Teaching andAssessing maps to the level 2standard³. Inevitably there is evengreater interest in seeing how theremaining named awards can be usedto establish unique institutionallycontext-related CPD frameworks forstaff.

Most of the named awards aredesigned to be of interest to a singleinstitution establishing a CPD profilefor members of staff who supportstudent learning in the broadest ofsenses. Others are highly specific in

regard to context/role. These include,for example, Student Support andGuidance; Supervising PostgraduateResearch and Enhancing ResearchPractice. Some, such as ActionResearch into Professional Practice,Developing Leaders, and DevelopingPeople and Processes are open to awide range of contexts and might bedescribed as generic.

Enhancing Academic Practice inDisciplines is currently published as adiscussion document. This is anexample of a named award areawhich will support sector-widedevelopment and most probably willeventually be offered through agenciessuch as the Subject Centres.

Since its inception, External Examiningwas seen as most probably beingprovided through regional consortia ofinstitutions. At the time of writing theExternal Examining named award isbeing run in a pilot format from KeeleUniversity through on-lineparticipation. The core group ofparticipants, who are representative ofa wide cross section of institutions, willevaluate the viability of this form ofdistance engagement and the validityof the Specialist Outcomes.

The establishment of Centres forExcellence in Teaching and Learninghas significantly grown the communityof staff and educational developers.Aware of the professionaldevelopment needs of thesecolleagues, SEDA has devised twoadditional named awards – Staff andEducational Development and LeadingStaff and Educational Development.They are currently administeredthrough the SEDA Fellowship Schemeand successful completion will enableparticipants to move to SEDAAssociate Fellowship status. A typicalpathway through the Staff andEducational Development award willbe attendance at the SEDA SummerSchool and subsequent completion ofSEDA’s Portfolio and Assessmentmodule. Mindful that alternativemodes of study are desirable, SEDA isproviding an on-line version of theSummer School. The first group ofparticipants will commence thePortfolio and Assessment module thisOctober and complete in January2007. The module will be provided by

SEDA in association with the HigherEducation Academy. During 2007 aparallel roll out will happen forLeading Staff and EducationalDevelopment.

Discussion of the named awardswould be incomplete withoutreference to Embedding LearningTechnologies and Exploring LearningTechnologies. These are examples ofhow a nationally funded TLTP project– EFFECTS4 – became incorporatedinto the PDF.

Spotting potential national and localneeds are ongoing tasks which engagethe minds of those who are membersof the PDF Committee. Looking to thefuture there is an awareness thatdevelopment needs exist forcolleagues in FE institutions who teachon HE awards and around the area ofinternationalisation in all of itsdimensions. So please keep onaccessing the SEDA web site forupdates on the named award areas.

References¹ Earlier this year I completed a three-year term of office as Chair of SEDA-PDF, having previously been Chair ofthe Teacher Accreditation Committeefor two years. It is therefore anappropriate time to reflect upon theplace of SEDA-PDF in the sector andhow it is meeting current and futureneeds.² See http://www.seda.ac.uk/ed_devs/index.htm³ The National Standards framework isowned by the sector and a number ofthe named awards clearly map acrossand meet the requirements of Levels 1and 2. SEDA is currently seeking anaccord with the Higher EducationAcademy which will enable holders ofthese named award areas to gaindirect entry to the register ofpractitioners.4 EFFECTS - Effective Framework ForEmbedding C&IT using TargetedSupport; fuller information can befound at http://www.elt.ac.uk

Anthony Brand is Head of LearningDevelopment at the University ofHertfordshire and was Chair ofTeacher Accreditation andsubsequently SEDA-PDF from 1999 to2006.

21www.seda.ac.uk

The International Consortium for Educational Development, 2006

The International Consortium forEducational Development (ICED) wasfounded in 1993 by Graham Gibbsand representatives from six nationalnetworks. It has grown to embrace 23national members and is working witha further three emerging networks.

It was set up to:• help partner organisations

develop their capacity foreducational development inhigher education throughthe sharing of good practice, problems and solutions

• increase the number of partner organisations of ICED• help educational developers in countries where no

national network exists to form such a network• support educational development in higher education in

developing countries• link with other national and international organisations.

This year ICED held its Annual Council meeting in Sheffield(on the two days before the biennial Conference) and Irepresented SEDA at the meeting. The chairs orrepresentatives of 13 of the 23 networks attended, alongwith two representatives from emerging networks, threeobservers, three editors of the International Journal forEducational Development, Kristine Mason O’Connor asTreasurer and Ranald Macdonald as Conference Organiser.

Educational Developments has carried reports of earlierCouncil meetings and activities in Bielefeld, Madrid, Ottawa,Perth and Croatia. From those accounts, and from thedebates around the table, it was clear to me that the taskfacing ICED is how to grow from the ‘very light and flexibleorganisational structure’ which Carole Baume described in2000 (Educational Developments 1.3) to one which cansupport further expansion without losing the values inherentin its aims. As Liz Beaty reported from Madrid in 2001:‘Keeping things simple has to be weighed against the needfor the organisation to be active.’

ICED derives income from its Journal (IJAD) and itsconferences. As everyone involved in academic publicationknows, royalties from many journals barely cover the costs ofproduction. Similarly, the profits from conferences canfluctuate. The aims of ICED are so consistent with the valueswhich SEDA espouses that SEDA must be able to supportICED in whatever way is required. In recent years this hasbeen primarily through the work of Kristine MasonO’Connor in sorting out the funds and the procedures, andof Ranald Macdonald in supporting the conferences.

The International Consortium forEducational Development, 2006James Wisdom, Co-Chair, SEDA

The plan had been to hold the 2006 Conference in SriLanka, where Suki Ekaratne is chair of the Sri LankaAssociation for Improving Higher Education Effectiveness.The 2004 tsunami destroyed the plans and hopes for thisconference, and Ranald – as co-convenor and using SEDA asback-up – offered Sheffield Hallam as the venue. Theoutcome of a great deal of hard work was that Suki andRanald were able to welcome over 280 delegates from 28countries to an excellent three-day conference. Theabstracts can be read on the website (http://iced2006.shu.ac.uk/) and from them it is possible to getsome picture of the issues and activities which concern andengage educational developers around the world.

The Council meeting in 2007 will be held in Estonia to helpsupport the network which is emerging there. The nextConference (2008) will be in Salt Lake City, and the Councilintends to hold the 2010 Conference in Sri Lanka.

The ICED web site is hosted at the University of WesternAustralia (http://www.osds.uwa.edu.au/iced) and the sitesfor the International Journal for Academic Development arehosted by Taylor and Francis at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/routledge/1360144X.html and for authors by theUniversity of Sydney at http://www.itl.usyd.edu.au/ijad/instructions.cfm.

ICED has members in Australasia, Belgium (for threefrancophone states), Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Finland,Germany, India, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Russia,Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden,Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States and emergingnetworks in Ethiopia, Estonia and Israel.

James Wisdom is an independent consultant and Co-Chairof SEDA.

ICED Council 2006 meeting in Sheffield, withCarla Nelisson, the President, in the centre.

www.seda.ac.uk22


The topic of dyslexia is contestedterrain. Fact, fiction, mythology andideology compete to dominateestablished perceptions of whatdyslexia should or could beunderstood to be. It has to be a braveauthor who considers perceptions ofdyslexia through the equally contestedlens of the ‘self’.

David Pollak does not shy away fromthe complexities or conflicts, indeedhe lays them bare in a very systematicoverview of the different trends andinfluences on understanding of bothdyslexia and notions of the self. Theearly chapters provide excellentsignposting to detailed sources andintroduce a range of issues relevant toa great diversity of learners, not justthose labelled ‘dyslexic’.

The research presented by Pollak inthis book has adopted analysis of‘educational life histories’. Throughoutthe book this proves a powerful toolfor gaining insights into the actualexperiences of learners, in contrast tothe heavily theorised assumptions thatare often made about the learningexperience. Again, there are valuablelessons here for accessing the reality ofthe student experience for all, not justthose with a ‘diagnosed condition’,and thereby making progress towardsa student-centred approach tolearning and teaching, whichcelebrates a diversity of talents andaptitudes.

The title of this book leads to highexpectations of ground-breakinginsight about the interrelationshipbetween the dyslexic label andnotions of the self, as a learner andmore generally. Some readers may feelthat the book presents establishedtruisms and restates anecdotalcertainties. For those that have beenactive in the area of dyslexia supportthis may be true, but the particular

Dyslexia, the Self andHigher EducationDavid Pollak

ISBN-13: 978-85856-360-2ISBN-10: 1-85856-360-7Trentham Books Limited,Stoke-on-Trent, 2005

Book Reviewstrength of this book and the researchwhich informs it is the pertinent andcompelling evidence of how a label,and the experience of all that isassociated with a label, influencesthose who are labelled.

One fascinating element of the bookfor me was the presentation andconsideration given to the discoursesadopted by those accepting theirdyslexia diagnosis/label. The range ofpositions and responses presented isinteresting, and again offers potentinsight to the motivations andchallenges for these learners, andthereby also indicates effectivemechanisms for supporting theirlearning. For those already interestedin learning styles the chapter ondiscourses of dyslexia will beparticularly interesting, offering as itdoes a digest of the evidence aboutattitudes to HE, the universityexperience and the coping strategies ofdyslexic students adopting thediscourses of: ‘patient’, who see theirdyslexia as a defect; ‘student’, forwhom dyslexia is an irritation andinconvenience; ‘hemispherist’, whorecognises and exploits different naturaltalents; and ‘campaigner’, who tendsto articulate their frustration with theenvironment that appears to maketheir dyslexia a barrier to their success.Although specific to dyslexia, thesediscourses seem to have resonance withother groups with concerns or issueslinked to equality of educationalopportunity and so will be of interest topractitioners with wider interests than

dyslexia.Pollak’s conclusions arisingfrom the research are a helpful andthoughtful contribution to the long-running debate about medical andsocial models of disability, which tendto inform medicalised andproblematised support interventions,or ‘academic socialisation’. A third wayis posited, linked to ‘academicliteracies’ and an acceptance that thelearning attributes associated with‘dyslexia’ are part of a perfectly normalvariation in the population, concludingthat ‘learning support approachesbased on an academic literaciesstandpoint centre on supportingstudents’ self-awareness and sense ofidentity. All students need some meta-cognition – thinking about how theythink, learning about how they learn –in order to succeed’.

Don’t be put off if you are a self-confessed sceptic about dyslexia, orthink you’re not interested in learningdisabilities. Any reader interested inhis/her own meta-cognition and inenhancing his/her understanding ofthe vast array of factors operating onall learners should find this a valuablebook. This volume combines helpfuland informative overview andsignposting, with excellent andextensive references, and thoughtfuland balanced discussion of howdifferent factors combine to influencestudents’ sense of self and learning.

Alison Robinson is AcademicResources and Quality Manager at theUniversity of Hull at Scarborough.

CopyrightCopyright for all published material is held by SEDA unless stated otherwise.

Contributors may use their material elsewhere after publication withoutpermission, but the following note should be added: “First published inEducational Developments, issue number and date”. Permission is required foruse by a third party.

The publishers have endeavoured to find the copyright holders of all materialin this magazine. If we have infringed copyright, we shall be pleased, on beingsatisfied as to the owner’s title, to pay an appropriate fee as if prior permissionhad been obtained.

Every effort has been made to ensure accuracy in all published material.However, the Editorial Committee and the publishers cannot accept anyliability for any inaccuracy accepted in good faith from reputable sources.

Any opinions expressed are those of the authors.

23www.seda.ac.uk

Let me tell you a story...

Let me tell you a story told to me by a most respectedstaff and educational developer. It concerns one of hischildren studying at a quite prestigious university whohad telephoned to complain that the lecturer for anoption course she was taking did nothing for his lecturesother than read a chapter out of the text book that hehad authored. What could she do? ‘Let’s see,’ replied herfather. ‘How many are taking this option?’ ‘Twelve,’ shereplied. ‘This is what you do,’ he said. ‘Contribute £5each and go into the town and buy the text book.’ Hisdaughter was studying a subject where text books areusually quite expensive – in this case it cost £50. ‘Is theremainder of the money for the bus fare?’ she enquired.‘Not at all,’ said her father with a smile on his face, ‘it isfor a stanley knife.’ He gave her the followinginstructions: that she should use the knife to chop thebook into three equal parts. The twelve students shoulddivide themselves into three study groups and it wouldbe the job of each group to teach the other two from thethird of the book they had been allocated. This they didand, since they had the book, attended no more lectures.At the end of year examination they all did extremelywell; so well, in fact, that the tutor received a teachingaward from the university to congratulate him on theimprovements he must have made in his teaching!

This is a story told to a group of tutors in an educationaldevelopment workshop over ten years ago, yet itendures. As educational developers we rely on storiessuch as this to bring life to the ideas we wish to share andit is worth looking at the relationship betweeneducational development and storytelling in more detail.

Learning through StorytellingA most useful text that offers a theoretical and conceptualunderpinning is Learning through Storytelling in HigherEducation by Janice McDrury and Maxine Alterio.¹ Inexploring the role of storytelling in supporting learningthe authors suggest that stories are one of the ways inwhich the learner is able to make meanings, andstorytelling is transhistorical and transnational. Further,they suggest that storytelling is one of the ways in whichwe explore theories and make links between the self andother. It is a ‘way to knowing’ that is also inclusive:

‘As a learning strategy, storytelling accommodatesdiverse realities and enables students to shareexperiences from their own cultural frame of reference.’(p. 35)

Storytelling is clearly related to reflective practice.Consider the following stages to learning and howstorytelling relates to them as described by the authors.²

Let me tell you a story...Steve Outram, Higher Education Academy

Map of Learning Learning through Storytelling ( Moon, 1999)³ • Noticing • Story finding • Making sense • Story telling • Making meaning • Story expanding • Working with meaning • Story processing • Transformative learning • Story reconstructing

As the authors remind us, reflective accounts are narrativeswhere the account is told from the teller’s perspective;notwithstanding that these accounts may have corroboratingevidence to support them:

‘Tellers choose which elements will be included andexcluded and how they present their stories. Tellers alsodetermine what level of affective involvement they willreveal.’ (op. cit.)

Given the importance of reflective practice to educationaldevelopment activities, being able to appreciate the natureand craft of telling stories might enable us to advance ourknowledge and practice of being reflective practitioners. AsRuggles states:

‘Stories are great vehicles for wrapping together the manyelements of knowledge. A good story combines the explicitwith the tacit, the information with the emotion. Storiesare not effective, or even appropriate, for every attempt toexpress knowledge, but I believe that they areunderutilised in knowledge management approaches.Now, I am not proposing “story management”, per se, butI do believe that stories enable people to express andcomprehend the sticky, context-rich aspects of deepknowledge much more effectively.’ (Rudy Ruggles, TheRole of Storytelling in Knowledge Management4)

Telling a good storySo what are the characteristics of a good educationaldevelopment story? In The Story Factor Annette Simmonsexamines the relationship between storytelling and beinginfluential and persuasive in leading and managingorganisations.5 In this very compelling text she suggests sixfundamental types of story that are influential inorganisational settings:

• ‘Who I am’ stories• ‘Why I am here’ stories• ‘The Vision’ story• ‘Teaching’ stories• ‘Values in action’ stories• ‘I know what you are thinking’ stories.

She suggests that ‘before anyone allows you to influencethem they want to know who you are and why are you

24 www.seda.ac.uk


there’ (p. 5). In short, we have stories we tell that establishour legitimacy and credibility. These help in building anecessary rapport without which engagement is unlikely.Further, the ‘who am I’ stories we tell also say somethingabout our values as well as establishing authenticity.Authenticity is further achieved using ‘why I am here’ storiesas is one’s integrity. To establish and build rapport we share‘why I am here’ stories to gain trust and, at the very least, awillingness to listen, however tentatively.

‘Vision’ stories are where we describe a possible future – afuture that includes benefits to the audience, theorganisation and to ourselves. It is the vision that providesthe motivation; the lever of influence and change. Often, the‘vision story’ is told badly or insincerely with obviousconsequences. As Simmons also suggests, it is also all tooeasy to allow one’s ‘vision story’ to sound corny. An effective‘vision story’ needs time to create so that your listeners cansee what you are talking about. An example she gives in thetext, told to her by a friend, is of a man who comes across abuilding site where three bricklayers are working.

‘What are you doing?’ he asks the first bricklayer.‘Laying bricks,’ the bricklayer replies.He asks the second bricklayer who replies, ‘I am building awall.’On asking the third bricklayer, the reply he received was, ‘Iam building a cathedral!’

It is the ‘vision story’ that connects all the pieces and givesmeaning to the world.

‘Teaching stories’ do what they say on the tin. Whetherthrough fables, modern-day parables or morality stories, weuse stories to teach. Often the stories we use are multi-layered and complex. The story at the start of this articleincludes a view of active-learning; a view in relation to peer-supported learning; a possible view in relation to lecturing; apossible view in relation to the research/teaching nexus aswell as a possible comment on the operation of distinctiveteaching awards, i.e. there is a simultaneous demonstrationof values.

This leads us into ‘values-in-action’ stories. Simmons suggeststhat ‘Without a doubt, the best way to teach a value is “byexample”. The second best way is to tell a story that providesan example’ (p. 20). One of the ways in which one mightdescribe case studies, for example, is as a collection ofexemplary stories.

We use ‘I know what you are thinking stories’ to disarm.‘Living a life of influence’, argues Simmons – and let’s faceit, most of us live a life of influence – ‘means that we aremore often evangelising to the heathens and less oftenpreaching to the choir.....Telling an “I know what you arethinking” story can neutralise concerns without directconfrontation’ (p. 25).

I know what you are thinking – that the values she isrepresenting emanate from a divisive, deficit understandingof organisational change. In fact, she goes on to describe

how the use of stories transcends organisational division. Shealso goes on to warn, however, that it is also possible togenerate ‘blame stories’ as well as ‘fear stories’ – stories thatare used to frighten and scare in order to gain a quick(but seldom enduring) compliance. Indeed, she identifies a‘shadow’ side to organisational storytelling . Adolf Hitler, shetells us, was primarily a storyteller:

‘His story and his ability to convince others of his story wasa primary tool of Hitler’s influence. Even when he blatantlydistorted facts, the emotional content of his messagemesmerized his listeners. It is a frightening example of howstory can trump facts.’ (p. 227)

As we become adept at writing and telling stories so theresponsibility to tell stories with integrity is enhanced. AsDavid Snowden concludes:

‘Properly understood Story is both a science and an art, toneglect one at the expense of the other is not only foolish itis also dangerous, in playing with people’s stories you areplaying with their souls and that requires a high level ofresponsibility.’ (Snowden, 20016)

The characteristics of a good storyAccording to Simmons there are a number of ‘dos’ and‘don’ts’ of story writing.

The Don’ts comprise:

• Don’t act superior – this is disrespectful and may lead toresentment or dependence

• Don’t bore your listeners – it is the greatest crime of thestoryteller who is more interested in the ‘telling’ than the‘listening’

• Don’t scare people or make them feel guilty.

The Dos include:

• Do intrigue and captivate – through authenticity andpassion

• Do connect at the level of humanity – ‘Your best storiesconnect your listeners to you and each other at the pointsof common experience’ (p. 214)

• Do listen – the people who you seek to influence alsohave their stories and you can gain a huge amount bylistening to their stories as much as you would like themto listen to yours

• Do leave them feeling hopeful.

Vignettes and storytellingThere are some quite specific ways in which storytelling canfacilitate our educational development practice. One ofthese is through the use of vignettes. Within the context ofresearch, Christine Barter and Emma Renold have prepareda most useful summary of the use of vignettes in research.7

Citing the work of Janet Finch (1987) vignettes are definedhere as:

‘short stories about hypothetical characters in specifiedcircumstances, to whose situation the interviewee is

25www.seda.ac.uk

Let me tell you a story...

invited to respond.’ (Finch, J. (1987) cited in Barter andRenold, 1999)

A vignette is a fictional account of a ‘realistic’ situation that issufficiently ambiguous that the listener has to interpret thesituation for themselves. This is especially useful to elicitlisteners’ responses within the context of sensitive subjectareas. Educational developers might use such stories in anumber of ways. Obviously, they might use vignettes as aresearch technique like other researchers. However, theymight also be used to stimulate discussion around sensitivetopics as a tool in workshops. For example, we might createhypothetical scenarios to facilitate the discussion ofprinciples without having to identify real institutions orpeople. They are also useful within the context of qualitativeresearch in other ways. For example, as an ice-breaker at thestart of a focus group.

A second way in which vignettes are particularly useful toeducational developers is in the context of preparingproblem-based learning scenarios. Within the context ofenabling IT students to learn about project managementthrough PBL methods, for example, Urban Nuldén andHelana Scheepers8 have researched the characteristics of aneffective PBL vignette and conclude that it must have ‘soul’ –that the author has ‘put their heart into it, not just madeanother vignette’. Secondly, the vignette must engage withreal cases and thirdly, students were keen that there shouldbe a ‘wow factor’ in the layout and delivery of vignettes. Theauthors conclude by arguing that the vignette in PBL can beenhanced using computer-based technology and multimediadelivery through web pages, including multimedia files to setthe scene and simulated emails to enable the vignettes tobecome more dynamic. Similarly, Lin Norton has outlinedthe way in which vignettes facilitate PBL in psychology as anoutcome of an FDTL4 Project.9 She summarises Barter andRenold’s suggestions for constructing a good vignette as:

‘Vignettes should appear plausible and real to engageparticipants.

Vignettes should focus on mundane rather than bizarreevents or characters.

Vignettes should contain a balance of sufficient content forparticipants to understand the situation but be ambiguousenough to ‘force’ them to provide additional factors whichinfluence their approach.

Too many changes in a story line are confusing and make itdifficult for participants to deal with.

Participants may engage more with the story if they havesome related personal experience of the describedsituation.’ (p. 9)

Also, as Deborah Bowman and Patricia Hughes note,problem-based learning can arouse strong emotionalresponses from students and care must also be taken inpreparing appropriate vignettes as well as preparing for theemotional responses that may be stimulated – a important

point in relation to all the uses of Story in learning, teachingand educational development.10

Innovation, storytelling and knowledge transferAn important element of the educational developer’s role isto be effective in organisational development including theability to support pedagogic innovation and thedissemination and embedding of new ways of doing things –often known in management-speak as ‘knowledge transfer’.Storytelling has a vital role to play in these activities andthere is a growing literature on storytelling and knowledgetransfer. As Tom Kelly argues:

‘Stories persuade in a way that facts, reports, and markettrends seldom do, because stories make an emotionalconnection. The Storyteller brings a team together. Theirwork becomes part of the lore of the organisation overmany years. Storytellers weave myths, distilling events toheighten reality and draw out lessons.’ 11 (p. 242)

Kelly goes on to suggest seven reasons to tell stories withinthe context of innovation and knowledge transfer:

• Storytelling builds credibility – who am I and why I amhere stories

• Storytelling ‘unleashes powerful emotions and helpsteams to bond’

• Stories give permission to explore controversial anduncomfortable topics as in research and PBL vignettes

• Storytelling, Kelly suggests, ‘sways a group’s point ofview’. Effective leaders tell compelling stories!

• Storytelling creates ‘heroes’ – someone, oftenfictionalised, to motivate us to do things differently. Forexample, we might create a composite ‘lecturer new toteaching’ who has a PhD to complete, a series ofpublications to complete for the next RAE as well as newsubject areas to teach. What are the techniques andactivities we can introduce to enable this person tocomplete the programme for new tutors as well as meettheir other obligations?

• Storytelling also gives us a ‘vocabulary of change’according to Kelly. For example, many colleaguesengaged in change management use Malcolm Gladwell’snotion of a ‘tipping point’ describing how small changescan bring about transformations in organisations andcommunities.12 We collect our ‘tipping point’ stories to

influence and persuade, for example, how changingfrom using surveys to focus groups brought about amassive shift in students’ engagements with givingfeedback about the quality of their learning experiences

• Finally, Kelly suggests that ‘good stories make order outof chaos’. With an ever-increasing workload and ‘toomany unread emails’ a good story ‘cuts through theclutter’. Not only do we remember good stories whenemails and phone conversations have long sincedisappeared from our memory but stories also help tobuild relationships whatever the context.

As Sole and Wilson point out, storytelling also helps sharethe norms and values of an organisation, including futurenorms and values, develop trust and commitment as well as

26 www.seda.ac.uk


sharing tacit knowledge.13 However, they also describe someof the ways in which storytelling might be counterproductiveto supporting organisational development. For example, astory might be so compelling that the listener loses sight of thestory’s purpose to support listener reflection on ‘real’situations. Also, stories are told from a single perspective, thatof the storyteller, although there are techniques beingdeveloped to enable multiple perspectives to be incorporated.Stories, once they are written down, also become static andpossibly disconnected from the reader; something that mayhappen when we use the same ‘case studies’ in our workwithout updating them. David Snowden also suggests some‘perils’ in using stories in organisational development.14 Forexample, informing an audience of academic colleagueswithin the context of change that you are going to tell them astory might be considered patronising and lead to resistance.Snowden also suggests telling ‘factual stories’ can behazardous.

‘In order to achieve a story there is a need to select the mostcompelling of the facts and provide appropriate emphasis:create tension, introduce clear protagonists, build a propercontext, spell out the message; in other words all the toolsand techniques of a script writer or journalist.’ (p. 2)

It only takes one person who was there at the time to say ‘Itwasn’t like that’ for the story to be undermined. In short,stories may be used as ‘anecdote enhancement’ as Snowdenterms it, which may be useful in training and development butlack sustainability.

Analysing storiesIn analysing stories, McDrury and Alterio focus on thereflective practice processes that occur, pointing out that asthe storyteller becomes adept at storytelling the reflectionsbecome less focussed on themselves and more orientedtowards the contexts and the events that occurred. They willalso become more aware of the impact they are having. Thereis more to analysing stories than the contribution suchanalyses might make to reflective practice. Searching for themeanings in stories is the work of narrative inquiry, a researchmethod that has been deployed to analyse a range ofnarrative approaches, including stories. There is not the spaceto do justice to the myriad ways in which narrative inquiry canbe useful in analysing educational development stories, andnarrative inquiry itself has its critics.15

Afterword – tell me your storyNotwithstanding the critique of storytelling, many subjectareas and professional practices continue to find storytelling tobe a useful tool in learning and teaching. Educationaldevelopment is no exception and I would be delighted todiscuss these ideas further and develop an analysis ofeducational development stories.

Tell me your story.

References¹ McDrury, J. and Alterio, M. (2003) Learning ThroughStorytelling in Higher Education: using reflection and

experience to improve learning, Kogan Page, London.

² ibid. p. 47.

³ Moon, J. (1999) Reflection in Learning and ProfessionalDevelopment, London, Kogan Page Ltd.4 http://www.recordingachievement.org/downloads/PDPUKJUNE06.pdf5 Simmons, A. (2001) The Story Factor: inspiration, influence,and persuasion through the art of storytelling, Perseus BooksGroup, Cambridge MA.6 http://www.kwork.org/Resources/narrative.pdf7 Barter, C. and Renold, E. (1999) ‘The use of vignettes inqualitative research’, Social Research Update, Issue 25.8 http://www.viktoria.se/nulden/Publ/PDF/ECISdoc.pdf9 http://ltsnpsy.york.ac.uk/docs/pdf/p20040422_pals.pdf(There is also an FDTL5 Project at the University ofGloucestershire exploring the use of stories with students tosupport their reflective writing. See http://www.recordingachievement.org/downloads/PDPUKJUNE06.pdf).10 Bowman, D. and Hughes, P. (2005) ‘Emotional responsesof tutors and students in problem-based learning: lessons forstaff development’, Medical Education, Volume 39, Issue 2.11 Kelly, T. with Littman, J. (2005) The Ten Faces of Innovation,Currency Doubleday, New York. (I am grateful to Paul Helmat Sheffield Hallam University for introducing me to thistext.)12 Gladwell, M. (2000) The Tipping Point: how little thingscan make a big difference, Abacus, London.13 http://lila.pz.harvard.edu/_upload/lib/ACF14F3.pdf14 http://www.kwork.org/Resources/narrative.pdf15 See Plummer, K. (2001) Documents of Life 2, Sage,London.

Steve Outram is Senior Adviser at the Higher EducationAcademy (email: [email protected]).

11th Annual SEDA Conference 2006

Mapping EducationalDevelopment: locations,boundaries and bridges

Novotel, Birmingham21 - 22 November 2006

Further information can be found on theSEDA website - www.seda.ac.ukOr contact the SEDA office Tel: 020 7380 6767Fax: 020 7387 2655 Email: [email protected]

27www.seda.ac.uk

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��

��

��

�� !��"� ! �#�� # �

�� #��

�� $�� #�� #��!"� �$��

��#��!�� #�� %��"� ��&

�� "� ��!"� ��

'�� #�� #��!� � � ��

�� #�� ()�� "�

��

�� #�� *�� #��

��

� ��

��

��

�

�

��

�� %�� #�� #�� + � ��

�� "� �� ,�� !��

��

��#�� #��

�� #� ��

�� #�� ! �#�� -.��

�� + ��'�� /�� #�� "� ��

��

�� #�� # � �$��

�� $�� #��

��

��

��

� ��

� � � � � ��

� �

��#��0��!!!"��"��"��

HERDSA presents ...... two brand new Guides

Interested in good teaching practice in higher education?

28 www.seda.ac.uk


This EditionIt is usually unwise to miss, as I didrecently, an editorial meeting. You findthat you are given a range of tasks inyour absence which is likely to includecommissioning and chasing authorsand editing the next edition. However,I’m pleased to report that editing thisedition has been a joy. There has beena rich harvest of articles enabling us topublish a full edition and we arealready in the fortunate position ofholding a number of articles in reservefor later in the year.

A conscious decision was taken in theselection of a wide variety of articles tosuit many tastes. They range from thechatty to the scholarly; from aparticipant on one of the sector’spostgraduate certificates reporting onthe impact of the award to a report onleading and protecting an educationaldevelopment unit. We have decidedto publish two articles on peer review/support systems. While providingdifferent perspectives they areinformative and complementary andwe anticipate them generating a fullerdiscussion in the form of feedbackletters.

SEDA is known as an organisationwhich anticipates, develops, fostersand nurtures important initiatives forthe sector. Typical is the new SEDA-PDF award Staff and EducationalDevelopment which has beendesigned to support and recogniseindividuals who form the growingcommunity of developers. Elsewherein this edition you will find details of apilot version which is being providedthrough SEDA’s Fellowship Scheme inassociation with and supported by theHigher Education Academy (HEA).

Current themesThe acceptance and ownership of a

EditorialAnthony Brand, University of Hertfordshire

that such awards are subject to themost intense scrutiny as indicated bythe recently published HEA evaluationreport of accredited programmes(http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/research/formativeevaluationreport.rtf).Overall the key findings contained inthe report provided positive indicatorsfor such programmes, whichdevelopers will find helpful at aninstitutional level. A parallel butmethodologically different study runthrough the OU’s Institute ofEducational Technology, in associationwith seven other institutions, indicateshighly positive feedback fromparticipants. The OU study enabled aset of meta-themes to be establishedfrom the feedback. These include:

• the importance and impact ofnon-formal learning aboutteaching (learning by doing)

• work and practice based learningabout teaching

• academic communities andidentities

• professional standing – dostandards indicate a thresholdlevel of attainment or are they partof a trajectory?

A full paper will be presented later inthe year and it is anticipated that theinitial findings will be reported at theSEDA Conference in November.

My heartfelt thanks to all who havecontributed articles and to colleaguesat the ACU for their support indelivering an outstanding edition.

Anthony Brand is Head of LearningDevelopment at the University ofHertfordshire.

sector-wide National StandardsFramework places institutions in apivotal position in regard to the initialand continuing development of allstaff who contribute to students’experience of learning. It appears thatthere will be greater institutionalautonomy in the application of thelevels contained in the Standards.Many forward-looking institutions areprogressing their own individualframeworks for CPD. A number havefound the SEDA-PDF valuable insupporting and enabling suchinitiatives. Perhaps an unintendedcasualty of the introduction of theStandards is the failure by the HEA toenact a CPD framework based uponthe outcomes of the recent pilotphase. The Academy has ‘decided toundertake a wider review of thesector’s expectations in relation toprofessional development and the newstandards. We will undertake thisreview alongside the on-going workwith the HEIs involved in the CPDProject. This is likely to lead to a moreformal review in the next academicyear.’

Perhaps of greater significance is theHEA decision to establish a workinggroup which will look into theimplementation of a ‘process foroptional certification of ContinuingProfessional Development’. As aconsequence SEDA-PDF currentlycontinues to be the only viablenational framework to recogniseinstitutional approaches to CPD.In June the ICED conference washosted in the UK and provided manyopportunities for educationaldevelopers to share internationalperspectives and approaches. Onefeature which surfaced was in relationto the perceived value of postgraduatecertificates in learning and teaching fornew lecturers. A shared realisation was