Betwixt and between: academic developers in the margins

Little, Deandra; Green, David A.

doi:10.1080/1360144x.2012.700895

Cited by 80 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their own interest in teaching and learning as an item of authentic interest in its own right tends not to be approved of in many higher education settings. This interchange highlights the sense of frustration that many academic developers have, in struggling to assert a clear identity and role for themselves in the academy, as is reflected in many past IJAD pieces, including that by Little and Green (2012), and should strike a chord with many of the readers of IJAD. There are many challenging statements expressed in this interchange between Gibbs and Grant which IJAD readers are encouraged to respond to, in the form of opinion pieces, or full scholarly articles.…”

Section: Managing Change Across Time and Spacementioning

confidence: 88%

Managing change across time and space

Leibowitz

2013

International Journal for Academic Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Managing Change Across Time and Spacementioning

confidence: 88%

Managing change across time and space

Leibowitz

2013

International Journal for Academic Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Through this process, the academic development team strives to address the specific professional development needs of teacher educators. However, the breadth of the work of the academic developers at CDU means they are often spread very thinly and find it challenging to do this successfully, which creates a degree of tension commonly experienced by staff engaged in these types of roles (Little & Green, 2012;Napoli, et al, 2010). This tension is heightened if the needs and priorities of the teacher educators are not congruent with those of the university's professional development agenda.…”

Section: Challenges For Academic Development Units In Meeting the Promentioning

confidence: 97%

Developing teacher educators in the era of the ‘smart worker’

Billany¹,

Barnes²,

Boitshwarelo³

et al. 2016

Learning Communities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a rapidly changing environment where graduate teachers are expected to have 21 st century skills and knowledge, it is critical that teacher educators keep up with their own professional development. One way to do this is through engagement with professional development activities provided centrally by academic development units within universities where the teacher educators work. Traditionally, this has involved attending formal, stand-alone professional development sessions that reflect a learning agenda set by the central academic development unit in response to the university's strategic priorities. However, the pace of change in the 21 st century, coupled with the rise of the 'smart worker' (Hart, 2015) who takes charge of their own professional learning, are challenging this model, requiring academic units to rethink their roles and activities. This paper explores the challenges, tensions and opportunities presented by this situation for one such academic unit at a northern Australia university. It argues for the need to develop a new model of academic development that nurtures opportunities for teacher educators and other academic staff to build on their professional networks and enables them to engage in professional learning in multiple ways that suit their needs at different times.

show abstract

“…Amundsen and Wilson () discovered a predominant focus in the literature on outcomes over process. Others have discussed the transformative possibilities that a CTL might spark for a university and its faculty, complicating a simplistic notion of faculty development, opening possibilities for positioning CTLs to co‐construct the very nature of the university (Green & Little, ; Little & Green, ; Schroeder, ). We posit that a CTL, regardless of the manifest purpose of activities it provides or facilitates, can be a source or facilitator of three modes of faculty mentoring (dyadic, networked, and co‐mentoring) integrated within a community of practice (CoP), the situated context for faculty work and for faculty development.…”

Section: Integrated Mentoring Within a Community Of Practice For Facumentioning

confidence: 99%

Mentoring Within a Community of Practice for Faculty Development: Adding Value to a CTL Role

Calderwood

Klaf

2015

To Improve the Academy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

E. R. Smith, P. E. Calderwood, F. Dohm, and P. Gill Lopez's (2013) model of integrated mentoring within a community of practice framework draws attention to how mentoring as practice, identity, and process gives shape and character to a community of practice for higher education faculty and alerts us to several challenges such a framework makes visible. In this exploratory study, we apply the model, and the consideration of the challenges it highlights, to consider how mentoring might figure in and configure a community of practice for faculty development localized in a university Centers for Teaching and Learning (CTL) for teaching and learning.

show abstract

Betwixt and between: academic developers in the margins

Cited by 80 publications

References 8 publications

Managing change across time and space

Managing change across time and space

Developing teacher educators in the era of the ‘smart worker’

Mentoring Within a Community of Practice for Faculty Development: Adding Value to a CTL Role

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About