Teachers as brokers: adding a university-society perspective to higher education teacher competence profiles

Abstract

Higher education institutions are increasingly engaged with society but contemporary higher education teacher competence profiles do not include university-society oriented responsibilities of teachers. Consequently, comprehensive insights in university-society collaborative performance of higher education teachers are not available. This study empirically develops a teacher profile for an exemplary university-society oriented, multi-stakeholder learning environment and builds an argument for university-society collaborative additions to existing higher education teacher profiles. A showcase example of a new university-society collaborative, multi-stakeholder learning environment, the Regional Learning Environment (RLE), provides the context of analysis. Thirteen RLE establishments were included in the study. The study uses a descriptive qualitative design, triangulating data from RLE documents, teacher interviews and focus groups with teachers and managers on RLE teacher roles, tasks and competencies. The resulting RLE teacher profile comprises nine roles, nineteen tasks and 21 competencies. The new profile echoes scattered indications for teacher responsibilities as identified in previous studies on teaching and learning in university-society collaborative learning settings. The study argues that the role of broker, including boundary crossing competence, and the competency 'stimulating a collaborative learning attitude', might be added to existing higher education teacher competence profiles. Adding this university-society engaged perspective to existing teacher competence profiles will support higher education institutions in developing their university-society collaborative responsibilities and subsequent teacher professionalisation trajectories.

The role of brokers in cultivating an inter-institutional community around open educational resources in higher education

“…At the same time, brokers’ role stressors could be lessened if teachers recognized and valued the act of boundary crossing across institutes. We therefore suggest that institutes advocate for collaboration across institutes to follow up on the recommendation of Oonk et al ( 2020 ) that boundary crossing competence be incorporated into teacher competence profiles.…”

“…Although these studies provide valuable insights into the role of boundary spanners, it is important to note that our understanding of boundary spanning mainly derives from organizational theory. Within the context of higher education, previous studies have mainly explored boundary spanning roles in university-industry collaboration (Corsi et al, 2021 ; Martin & Ibbotson, 2021 ; Oonk et al, 2020 ), within transnational partnerships (Bordogna, 2019 ) and university-school partnerships (Akkerman & Bruining, 2016 ; Nguyen, 2020 ), as well as the role of leaders as boundary spanners (Prysor & Henley, 2018 ), but little is known about boundary spanners within inter-institutional collaborations. Hill ( 2020 ) examined boundary spanning behaviour of brokers intended to connect their campus with the wider network of institutes, but the focus of these brokers was on exploring and transferring the value of the network to their own campus.…”

Reflections of a student engagement program designed and delivered by academics

“…Beyond the interactions experienced as part of teaching and learning, there is restricted scope for academic staff to provide what might be considered personalised support and pastoral care to university students (Groccia, 2018). Historically, the role of academic staff was to provide quality teaching, learning and assessment opportunities for students (Akareem & Hossain, 2016;Oonk et al, 2020), however, in contemporary higher education contexts, it is becoming increasingly common for academic staff to support students with both their academic and non-academic challenges (Crawford & Johns, 2018). While existing research has investigated student and institutional perspectives and experiences of student support and engagement initiatives (Balwant, 2017;Bowden, Tickle, & Naumann, 2019;Nepal & Rogerson, 2020;Tai et al, 2019), there is an absence of research on the experiences of academic staff in the design and delivery of student support programs (Chipchase et al, 2017;Coleman et al, 2021;Crawford & Johns, 2018).…”

Work self-efficacy and job performance of business educators in public universities

“…To achieve these obligations, competent business educators are required. The need for competent business educators in tertiary institutions is of great concern to major stakeholders of business education programme because of their salient role in preparing students for career progressions in various professions and occupations upon graduation (Oonk et al, 2020). The need for competent business educators in the university system may be due to their salient role in performing high job-related activities.…”