View
139
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Qualified to teach: The impact on professional development of national standards and KPIs within a marketised HE sector, by Stephen Bostock, Helen King and Pam Parker. Paper at ICED 2014 Stockholm
Citation preview
Qualified to teach: The impact on professional development of
national standards and KPIs within a marketised HE sector
Stephen Bostock1, Helen King2 and Pam Parker3
1 Glyndŵr University Wrexham, Wales, UK
stephen@keele.org.uk
2 University of Bath, England, UK
3 City University London, England, UK
ICED 2014
Stockholm
What are the drivers of accreditation of teachers in our
institution/country?
How do they help or hinder the real development work that we
want to do?
2
Professionalisation + market forces
The historical trend is from academics being amateur teachers towards professionalisation (Gibbs 2013)
In the UK marketisation is driving this faster and deeper.
Marketisation accelerated since 2003 as explicit government policy to improve quality (DES 2003), where ‘student experience’ (customer satisfaction) is the measure of quality (Bell 2013 , Brown 2013)
“the latest proposals in the UK to inform customers (we used to call them students) about what they are getting for their money, [include] publicly collated data stating the percentage of a University’s teachers who possess professional teaching qualifications” (Gibbs 2013 p10)
3
How marketised is UK undergraduate education?
Public service, funded from taxation, with many stakeholders. Block grant funding, controlled student numbers
Public/private sector market, funded by customers, for benefit of owners. Competitive research funding, tuition fees fund teaching, student numbers uncapped. Students Consumers, customers
England
Rest of UK: Wales, Scotland, N.Ireland UK in 1970s
4
USA
Academics as
amateur teachers
Professionalisation by
market forces
Australia
SEDA develops
teacher accreditation
Professionalisation
urged by state
now
Public market information & ‘Key Performance Indicators’
Course level information – Key Information Set KIS • Supposedly to provide market information for potential students or
parents to select a university course; web site supports comparisons
• 50 items published; some placed automatically on course web sites
The National Student Survey - final year students’ “satisfaction”
Institution level information • HE Statistics Agency (HESA) collects and publishes data on staff, students,
finance
• From 2012-13 includes staff teaching qualifications; expected to publish this in near future
League tables use this data to rank universities and courses
Universities select Key Performance Indicators as strategy goals
5
Our national standard: the UK PSF
The UK professional standards framework for teaching and supporting learning in HE (2005) www.heacademy.ac.uk/ukpsf
• 5 Activities, 7 Knowledge topics, 4 Values
• Four levels (D1, D2, D3, D4) from part-time teacher to strategic leadership
• Accredited as a fellowship of the HE Academy, or a SEDA award; through an accredited course or by individual accreditation of past professional development (CPD)
• Recorded annually for each faculty member as five of the 10 types of teaching qualifications recorded
6
Measuring the impact of UKPSF (SEDA research 2013)
Key findings from the institutional representatives’ survey:
Influential across UK HE in changing institutional practice. In 84% of sample UKPSF had led to changes to academic development, learning, teaching or the student experience. Particularly
• shaping accredited courses for faculty
• influencing institutional CPD frameworks
• supporting reward and recognition
• influencing institutional strategy and policy
Different impacts in different ‘mission’ groups
7
Our three universities: staff (faculty), students, income
2012-13 HESA data (159 institutions)
Staff (faculty)
FTE
Student FTE
SSR Gross income
/student £
The University of Bath 992 12830 12.9 16,223
The City University 804 13053 16.2 14,155
Glyndŵr University 263 5282 20.1 8,308
UK median 673 11642 17.3 10,941
8
Example 1. University of Bath
9
Granted University status in 1966; roots trace back to a technical school established in 1856.
Considered a ‘research-intensive’, selecting institution.
1st for overall satisfaction in 2013 NSS
2nd in Times Higher Education Student Experience Survey 2014
4th in the 2015 Guardian University Guide
34th in the Times Higher Education’s international ‘100 Under 50’ 2014 league table
Bath Mandatory programme for Lecturers & Teaching Fellows on
probation: accredited against UKPSF, leads to FHEA (not PGCert)
Mandatory, one-day training for graduate students who teach and for new doctoral supervisors
‘Bath Scheme’: optional, HEA-accredited recognition scheme for experienced academics and professional services (D1, D2, D3)
Established teaching-focused promotion route up to Professor; UKPSF accreditation may be used as evidence for promotion
No KPI targets for teacher accreditation are set institutionally
Policy on peer review of teaching is focused on development
6 teaching-related awards plus student-led awards; Faculty / School-based and University-wide Teaching
Development Fund. 10
Example 2. City University, London
11
City University London gained its degree awarding powers in 1966. There are five Schools: School of Arts and Social Sciences Cass Business School School of Mathematics, Computer
Science and Engineering School of Health Sciences City Law School
City The PG Certificate has around 100 staff participants annually
All new PhD students and academic staff must do the first module (accredited for HEA Associate Fellowship UKPSF-D1) and most do the PG Cert. (HEA Fellowship UKPSF-D2).
Around 20 go beyond this through the MA Programme.
‘CPD scheme’ accredited by HEA for all four level of fellowship from September 2014 (UKPSF D1-D4)
No institutional KPI targets for teacher accreditation are set
Promotion route for teaching as well as research; all academic role descriptions refer to UKPSF
Well established award scheme which includes student voice award, school scheme and University Education Excellence award
12
Example 3. Glyndŵr University
• Small, poor
• 125 years as a college; University title in 2008
• One of 8 in Wales (less marketized than England)
• Serves the local region
• Near the bottom of league tables (108th), until 2013-14 when NSS results improved (64th in Guardian tables)
13
Wrexham,
Wales
Glyndŵr Postgraduate Certificate suspended in 2013-14
• Accredited against UKPSF D2 but fewer staff have time to do it, only half complete it; not cost-effective; may be replaced with a shorter modular course linked to UKPSF, meanwhile new staff do …
Supporting student learning, a new blended course • For adjunct faculty and learning support staff, accredited against UKPSF D1
• New full time faculty also start with this
CPD Scheme to accredit experienced staff (UKPSF D1, D2) • Aimed at experienced staff without a teaching qualification
• Three submission dates annually
• Supported by briefing sessions, workshops, and individuals mentoring
A policy on teaching qualifications: all staff need a qualification to teach or be working towards one. KPI is 80% with teaching qualification
Policy on peer review of teaching focused on development
14
Conclusion
Drivers of accreditation: government, institutions, students, educational developers (SEDA), employers, professional bodies… • E.g. in EU: “All staff teaching in higher education institutions in 2020
should have received certified pedagogical training.” (Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions, McAleese 2013 p64)
In the UK, market forces are increasingly important: public information (including staff teaching qualifications) supports choice and competition; institutional policies require or reward accreditation and ‘Key Performance Indicators’ may be targets
Accreditation now reaching beyond new faculty, to sessional (adjunct) faculty and senior faculty, through a wider range of programmes and accreditation of past professional development
15
EDUs: Pros and Cons
We have more influence with senior management
More leverage for EDUs, accreditation built into strategies
More resources or more secure resources
Opportunities to engage with a wider range of staff
Academics may see us as tools of management
Risk that our activity concentrates on KPIs
One KPI target takes resources from others
Staff motivation may be instrumental and they may have less time
16
The end
What are the drivers of
accreditation of teachers in your institution/country?
How do they help or hinder the real development work that you
want to do? 17
References
Brown, R. (2013) Everything for sale? The marketisation of UK Higher Education. SRHE/Routledge
Bell, D. (2013) Removal of the student number cap is a ‘Tory electoral manoeuvre’, Times Higher Education 19-16 Dec., p13
Department for Education and Skills (2003) The future of higher education (UK)
Gibbs, G. (2013) Reflections on the changing nature of educational development, IJAD 18 (1) 4-14
McAleese, M. (2013) Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions
SEDA (2013) Measuring the impact of the UK Professional Standards Framework for Teaching and Supporting Learning
18
Recommended