Pedagogical mentoring and transformation of teaching practices in university

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify how pedagogical mentoring contributed to the transformation of teachers’ pedagogical practices and to the consolidation of a team of autonomous leaders in a Colombian regional university, within the framework of a curricular reform. Design/methodology/approach The paper is a qualitative research under the methodology of experience systematization. In this methodology, the participants and researchers analyze experiences and generate knowledge about why processes are developed in a particular way. This requires organizing, reconstructing and interpreting facts and experiences. In education, the main actors (teachers) research their own pedagogical practice, developing critical thinking and generating curricular and pedagogical knowledge. Findings Results show that pedagogical mentoring was effective in achieving the proposed objectives by means of learning conversations. The entire process addressed the curriculum in all its complexity, encouraged reflection about the teachers’ pedagogical practice and empowered them as designers, implementers and evaluators of the curriculum. Research limitations/implications Curricular reforms are complex educational phenomena. In this study, the authors limited the analysis to understanding how to generate a new community of practice with teachers to implement curricular changes in all their complexity. Other actors such as principals or students were not included in the process. Originality/value The systematization of this experience shows that pedagogical mentoring is a successful strategy to develop a curricular reform in a participative manner. In addition, it provides elements – from both pedagogical practice and theory – to foster communities of reflexive teachers who are ultimately the actual designers and implementers of curricula that can tackle the challenges of education for the twenty-first century.

Presentation of a school of government model through a comparative study of selected schools

“…It is also suggested that to identify and formulate new ways and means of funding of the schools of governance, independent and extensive studies be conducted. Based on the components “establishment of research centers and institutions,” “conducting applied and operational research,” “production of new governance and public policy knowledge” (Table IX), and to aid the promotion of the governance school's educational system, particularly in the components “workshop,” “case studies,” and “use of advanced technologies,” it is suggested that the schools of governance establish satellite institutions such as governance lab for operationalizing and localizing the existing knowledge about governance (for example, see the Government Performance lab, Kennedy School of Government (Harvard University), Governance Lab of the Tandon School of Engineering). Based on the components “experience and expertise,” “spirit of public service,” “spirit of leadership,” “experience of administrative, managerial and policymaking positions” (Table VI) and the components “workshop,” “case studies,” “attendance by politicians, elites, and government executives” and “visits to policy centers and offices of public officials,” (Table VIII) the mentoring method and presentation of professional training courses at the schools of governance is a principle. Correspondingly, it is suggested that the faculty members of these schools should become the basis of education and act as autonomous mentors (Hernandez and Flores, 2019). Thus, the faculty members of the schools of government/governance, as presented in Table VII, must be selected from among the professionals with a strong background and the education programs should be shaped based on their successful experience in governance.…”

“…Based on the components “experience and expertise,” “spirit of public service,” “spirit of leadership,” “experience of administrative, managerial and policymaking positions” (Table VI) and the components “workshop,” “case studies,” “attendance by politicians, elites, and government executives” and “visits to policy centers and offices of public officials,” (Table VIII) the mentoring method and presentation of professional training courses at the schools of governance is a principle. Correspondingly, it is suggested that the faculty members of these schools should become the basis of education and act as autonomous mentors (Hernandez and Flores, 2019). Thus, the faculty members of the schools of government/governance, as presented in Table VII, must be selected from among the professionals with a strong background and the education programs should be shaped based on their successful experience in governance.…”

Proyecto Multidisciplinario de Diseño en Ingeniería - PMDI: un espacio para la reflexión curricular

“…Sin embargo, las universidades en sí mismas son organizaciones que se estabilizaron en el siglo XIX y en donde priman las pedagogías tradicionales, con currículos centrados en los contenidos [1] y orientados al desarrollo de las disciplinas como campos particulares de saber. Así, afrontan retos importantes para movilizarse a propuestas pedagógicas innovadoras donde los currículos se orienten al desarrollo de competencias y pueda evidenciarse qué y cómo aprenden los estudiantes [2]- [5].…”