Search results

The internationalisation of teaching and learning in higher education necessarily invokes the concept of culture with its emphasis on improving cultural awareness and developing intercultural competency. However, how students and academics respond to manifestations of culture in teaching and learning and how their perceptions have changed over the years have seldom been explored. Drawing on data from four studies on internationalisation, three paradigms of cultural responses in teaching and learning are identified: (1) a multicultural paradigm; (2) an intercultural paradigm; and (3) a post-cultural paradigm. Within institutions, all three paradigms co-occur, in different degrees. However, there are intimations here of a shift in the balance of the three paradigms over time. Further, this chapter poses questions about the pedagogical implications for internationalisation and interculturality in higher education so suggesting the opening of a future research programme on the relationship between pedagogy and culture.

Teaching excellence remains a contested term in English higher education (HE). This paper begins by reflecting on its complex and sometimes blurred meaning, charting the divergence between academic interests in the complexity and contextual questions relating to practice development and organisational and sectoral shifts which have been driven by managerialism, accountability and “top-down” ideas of change. The authors argue that this divergence, epitomised in the development of the teaching excellence framework, has led to a confused, if ubiquitous, use of excellence to identify organisational and sector-led ideas of what it means to deliver quality teaching. However, these frameworks have become progressively detached from the complexity of practice investigated by those interested in pedagogy. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This is a conceptual paper which brings together literature from teaching excellence, organisational science, time and HE to develop an alternative approach to pedagogic development.

Based on a critique of the current, confused conceptualisation of teaching excellence, the authors offer a different narrative which demonstrates how a reconsideration of the factors is important in developing critical and challenging teaching opportunities. Based on a “bottom-up” system focusing on dialogue, sustainability and “unhasty” time, the authors argue for a re-establishing of a holistic approach in HE providers based on emergent pedagogies as opposed to teaching excellence.

This paper demonstrates why teaching excellence has become conceptually fractured in an English context, and why a new approach to pedagogic development needs to be considered to establish a more positive and critical approach at both the institutional and sectoral levels. This paper outlines a possible approach to developing such renewal.

Building on the proposition that Bernstein's ideas are due for a revival in higher education research, the call for studies in which theory is put to use and for policy studies to engage in textual analysis, this chapter argues for the affordances of the theoretical underpinnings of Bernstein's pedagogic device and critical discourse studies in investigating connections between policy and practice. Drawing on the sociology of pedagogy and applied linguistics, this chapter aims to explore the theoretical complementarities of the chosen approaches for exploring how policy ideas move through time and space. A focus on the notion of recontextualisation enables an understanding of how influences beyond the discipline itself, including policy discourses, can shape learning, teaching and assessment practices. The illustrating case examines policy on learning and teaching and how these ideas are recontextualised from national policy through to institutional policy and individual practices. The critical or questioning angle of both approaches in seeing ideas, including policy, as never value-free but as situated within their sociopolitical context can shed light on how policy ideas make their way into universities and in whose interests.

This chapter will consider the spatial implications in disrupting hierarchies and shifting identities in the undergraduate environment and explore the extent to which space can act as an agent of change in this process. Drawing on research and empirical evidence, the chapter explores the link between the re-design of learning and the design of the physical space. As this chapter will illustrate, when the active learner is centrally positioned in the learning spaces of the future, space can support relational and dialogic learning experiences and promote learner agency and reflexive learner engagement in a way that has the potential to become a platform for transformative educational change. As educational spaces are re-conceptualised, recognising a fundamental shift has taken place in how, when and where we learn, it can be argued that space is acting as an ‘agent of change’ facilitating change in pedagogic practice, relationships and methods.

Basil Bernstein’s theoretical ideas have been called upon by far fewer higher education researchers than would be expected. We argue that the international higher education field of research is ripe for further application of Bernstein’s theoretical ideas. Through reference to our own and that of others, we illustrate five key affordances of Bernstein’s theoretical framework. First, it provides a unique approach that leads researchers to pose formerly unthinkable questions and encourages the development of new knowledge to address them. Second, Bernstein’s valuable concepts raise questions about the specific but inter-related macro- (societal), meso- (organisational) and micro- (individual) level processes involved in producing (in)equalities. Bernsteinian analysis can help to identify how inequalities emerge from and can be addressed at these levels. Third, we contend that the approach encourages empirical exploration of the ways in which education may be disruptive of the social order. Fourth, we suggest Bernstein’s concepts can be adapted to capture the complexity of intersecting inequalities in a way that allows the object of analysis to determine what inequalities are foregrounded. Finally, we argue that concepts help to orientate questions around inequality and social justice in a way that does not over-determine answers.

The European Forum for Enhanced Collaboration in Teaching (EFFECT, 2015–2019) (EFFECT, 2019), a project co-financed by the European Commission, through its Erasmus+ programme, has been exploring effective methods for university teachers’ development at the European level, including pedagogical staff development “modules” to support inclusivity and citizenship in teaching and learning practice. Throughout the project and in this chapter, the authors have taken “inclusivity” to convey an attitude and appreciation for principles which inform “inclusion” as a practice – in the context of reflective and reflexive practice the words become largely interchangeable.

The way academic staff teach is of critical importance in any reform designed to enhance inclusion and citizenship in higher education. Conveying these values-related topics in an academic context hardly lends itself to a traditional pedagogical training model. Promoting inclusion means stimulating discussion, challenging stereotypes and unconscious biases, as well as improving educational and social frameworks. The Change Laboratory methodology (Engeström, 2001) was chosen for the pedagogical staff development workshops under EFFECT, with a view to engaging teaching staff in a deeper reflection about the topics and about their teaching practice. Change Laboratory is an intervention-research methodology that aims at reconceptualizing activity: it intends to provoke authentic reactions, responses and disagreements among the participants and provides opportunity for them to work together to reimagine their activities and to identify “concrete” solutions that address persisting issues in their practice. The theory takes a broad conceptualization of “activity” and “practice,” which is not specific to the education sector or the “classroom.” The Change Laboratory is a methodology designed to support the “expansive learning cycle” described by Engeström and as such can be understood as a theory of change which the EFFECT project team applied to a pan-European higher education learning and teaching context.

In 2017, the project team designed and implemented four physical, face-to-face pedagogical staff development workshops on inclusivity and citizenship skills based on this methodology, attended by over 100 participants from across Europe. In 2018, the workshop model was adapted to a virtual learning environment and three online sessions on inclusivity and citizenship skills for higher education teaching staff were offered.

The pedagogical staff development workshops enabled participants to use open reflective questions to provoke discussion about the challenges faced in their own learning and teaching contexts, think about their pedagogical practices and identify their unconscious biases. Most of the participants rated the workshops as very good and innovative, and considered the methodology an effective vehicle for promoting meaningful open discussion.

In this chapter, the authors reflect on the design, implementation and lessons learnt from the pedagogical staff development workshops on inclusivity and citizenship skills. The authors propose a set of recommendations for individual teaching staff and institutional leadership to consider when addressing continuous professional development for inclusivity and citizenship.

Disciplinary differences in approaches and methodologies to research present an important challenge to humanities practitioners wishing to engage in pedagogic research. This article outlines the development of a social sciences research methods workshop as an example of an intervention to provide a bridge for modern languages practitioners to engage with pedagogic research. The workshops have also raised questions about the capacity of UK higher educational institutions to provide research training for their staff at introductory levels, as well as identifying barriers to languages practitioners contributing to “generic” pedagogic research. Overcoming these barriers is a long term process, but in the shorter term the workshops are good way of raising awareness of social science research methods and offering a possible route into publishing pedagogic research which has an audience beyond the languages community.

With the introduction of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF), the status of teaching has been moved towards the centre of concerns in the UK higher education (HE) sector. This interest develops further the notion of teaching excellence created through various institutional and sectoral schemes such as the Higher Education Academy (HEA) fellowship. Whilst excellence schemes and the TEF all highlight the importance of teaching, they also run the danger of reducing it to lists and simplified proxies.

This chapter argues that reductive characterisations of teaching, through metrics supporting the TEF, such as the national student survey, or ‘idealised’ descriptions of the foundational aspects of ‘excellent practice’, all lead to partial accounts of the teaching process. Such characterisations might lead to creeping performativity and increasing organisational attempts to control. An alternative account of teaching is proposed based on complexity theory. This sees teaching as emergent, multifaceted and contextually based. It refutes notions of ‘best practice’ and argues that any attempt to capture ‘excellent practice’ is to reduce the holistic nature of the processes that bring teaching, learning, curriculum and assessment together.

The aim of this paper is to present a vision for university educator professional development, based on self-analysis of pedagogical styles and production of knowledge about the practices that promote education for sustainable development (ESD).

The “STSE” course is part of the department’s Professional Development Program. The course aims to articulate the relationship between ESD processes and university educator training through reflection on their practices. To accomplish this objective, the course promotes interdisciplinary groups of educators from different backgrounds. These groups are encouraged to introspect regarding their pedagogical styles. A survey is applied to encourage self-analysis of the four pedagogical style dimensions.

University educators adopt their own pedagogical styles based on the evolution of their practices. This information is useful in generating education, formation and transformation of new professionals in their respective fields. This knowledge also raises questions about ESD, and the construction of processes, values and attitudes to aid this education.

This paper only describes the characterization stage of the university educator pedagogical styles through practice-related self-analysis

This study builds pedagogical knowledge, promotes higher education transformation for sustainable development and strengthens the quality of university education.

Experiential approaches have become increasingly common in entrepreneurship education in response to calls for different approaches to the traditional didactic process-driven approach. Experiential approaches offer the potential to develop the skills and mindset that are required in entrepreneurship. Research has highlighted the critical importance of educator pedagogical competence in the delivery and quality of teaching and learning in further and higher education. Nevertheless, educator narratives and practices are often based on foundations that suggest a lack in the depth of knowledge and understanding of the underlying pedagogic learning theories and practice. This paper brings educational theory and pedagogic practice together in a three-stage framework of the experiential entrepreneurship learning process to support entrepreneurship educators within further and higher education.

This paper reviews and brings together the seminal educational theories and philosophies of constructivism, objectivism, Kolb's (1984) theory of experiential learning, Schön's (1983) reflection-in-action and Mezirow's (1997) theory of transformative learning, to develop a framework which underpins the experiential entrepreneurship learning process.

This paper develops a three-stage framework which informs the roles of an educator and a learner in experiential entrepreneurship education within further and higher education, based on educational theories and philosophies that inform the learning process.

The developed framework supports the pedagogic competence of educators in the delivery of experiential entrepreneurship education through a deeper understanding of the supporting theory that informs the pedagogic practice. This will provide consolidation to enable educators to maximise the effectiveness of their educational practice (Kaynardağ, 2019) and can increase the legitimacy of entrepreneurship education (Foliard et al., 2018).

This paper meets calls in the literature to provide a closer engagement between educational theory and pedagogic practice to afford guidance as to how educators can navigate some of the different educational theories and philosophies to consolidate the effective delivery of quality experiential entrepreneurship education. Applying seminal educational theories and philosophies to ensure the quality of experiential education can support the legitimacy of experiential entrepreneurship education.