黑料吃瓜网

New generation of educationalist vice-chancellors urges change

As more vice-chancellors across the UK emerge from educational backgrounds, rather than academic ones, they argue that academic bias and hierarchies need to be dismantled

十一月 25, 2024
Students in a big lecture hall at Maastricht University
Source: iStock/Kim Willems

Earlier this year Sh?n Wareing had a social media post go viral among academics and researchers, receiving unexpected support and praise alike.

The post? “Two years ago, there were no vice-chancellors with a career route via educational development in England, as far as I know,” Professor Wareing?. “Now there’s three of us.”

Professor Wareing, vice-chancellor of Middlesex University, is joined by Julie Hall at London Metropolitan University and Claire Taylor at Plymouth Marjon University – plus a fourth in Northern Ireland, Ulster University’s Paul Bartholomew. What they have in common is a background in academic learning and student experience.?

The support came flooding in. One social media user wrote: “Universities would be so much stronger if this was much more commonplace. Impact and prestige [are] all too often only referred to in relation to research and the numbers of citations an individual or institution gets.” Another commented: “[This is] a testament to the importance of educational development.”

However, views towards educational backgrounds haven’t always been so positive. Professor Wareing began her career as a lecturer in English language and linguistics at the University of Roehampton, but quickly became fascinated by both the lack of support for new lecturers and lack of focus on pedagogical issues.

She described the act of teaching as “the invisible thing” taken for granted at universities when she first began her career. “I became really interested in how teaching could be more effective, and I realised I found that more intellectually engaging than the discipline in which I was researching. I became very curious about why we didn’t see teaching as a discipline in its own right,” Professor Wareing told Times 黑料吃瓜网.

Professor Hall, who worked as an academic training coordinator, agreed, adding that when she entered the higher education sector, “The lecture was king; you stood up at the front and you just talked and students listened.”

But, she continued, “We can’t take for granted that just because we tell students things, that they are learning.”

This lack of recognition of the importance of academic development was a barrier to career progression and limited opportunities for practitioners to be promoted into senior management positions, she added.

“Ten years ago, there was definitely a sense that you needed to be a four-star research professor to lead an academic institution,” Professor Hall said.?

“I possibly wouldn’t have had the chance [to become a vice-chancellor] in the past, because I have never been submitted to the Research Excellence Framework, for example.”

While this attitude might still make sense at a research-intensive university, at a teaching-focused institution, “it makes absolute sense that you would go for somebody with a deep interest and expertise in learning and teaching”.

The pandemic, hybrid working and the rise of artificial intelligence in academia may have changed minds about the importance of conversations around pedagogy, reviving the need for universities to take seriously how they think about teaching, and students’ relationships with their university and lecturers, according to Professor Hall.

“We’re in a liminal space between what you might call the kind of traditional university education of lectures and seminars, and hybrid learning online,” she reflected. “We’re entering a new era of higher education, but I’m not sure we know what that is.”

Professor Bartholomew, whose previous roles include three years as head of curriculum design and academic staff development at Birmingham City University, said he believed that educational backgrounds set vice-chancellors up for approaching the current challenges in a unique, people-focused way.

“Because I spent a lot of time as an academic staff developer, I think about conceptions of the university both as a business entity, because it has to be sustainable in that sense, but also as a collection of people, and as such you have to continue to invest in and develop people,” he explained.

Professor Bartholomew said there “probably was a little bit of scepticism about my appetite for research” when he began as vice-chancellor due to his background, but he said that he did not view the relationship between research and teaching as a “dichotomy”. “I don’t see it as an ‘either or’; universities are places that do both.”

To break down these dichotomies between research and teaching, Professor Hall argued that universities needed to take a more holistic approach to promotions and career progression, and think more creatively about how they can provide opportunities to develop courses in ways that aren’t research focused.?

“I’m looking in the coming years to have sabbaticals on offer [for learning and teaching]. In the past, you would only have a sabbatical to do research. We want sabbaticals for ideas generation and to give people time away from the classroom to consider new approaches and courses, so it’s about generating ideas from the bottom up.”

juliette.rowsell@timeshighereducation.com

请先注册再继续

为何要注册?

  • 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
注册
Please 登录 or 注册 to read this article.

Reader's comments (12)

Universities have become a joke handing out professorships to these teaching only staff who then take on PVC roles. We need research led teaching by proper professors who have become professors through producing a very large body of 3* and 4* research outputs.
Misguided in my view. If you separate research from teaching, then you might as well just use AI. Teaching institutions don't generally generate new knowledge, and UK universities need to be at the forefront of knowledge generation or the country will decline even more.
I think this makes perfect sense. Have a VC who is an expert in whatever the institution aims to do best. You can still have PVCs for the secondary goals.
I am afraid is more than "education" I think it's commercaility that's missing in the mix. As universities try to play to the rankings and recruit more lecturers from a pure acdecemic / educational background the missing element, being staff from a commercial background is totally ignored.
I agree with many of the points made in this article. Professor Bartholomew sums it up when he says that universities are places that do both research and teaching; there should be no conflict between these two activities. It should also be remembered that income from student fees is paying for salaries, therefore teaching should be considered to be an important activity regardless as to whether the university is research intensive or teaching focussed.
Seems to me to be a load of second rate academics leading second rate academic institutions. Many education Professors cannot even write 1* research articles and are often not that great a teaching either. Just the usual buff we would expect I mean just read the following statement again it hardly has any value: Professor Bartholomew said there “probably was a little bit of scepticism about my appetite for research” when he began as vice-chancellor due to his background, but he said that he did not view the relationship between research and teaching as a “dichotomy”. “I don’t see it as an ‘either or’; universities are places that do both.”
Why do those labelled 'educationalists' disparage the lecture? I loved the lecture as a medium for learning and thinking as a student and believe my students love lectures too; especially when delivered with passion and a robust research background!
I’m finding things to like in this article, albeit not every aspect. I’m amazed at the sweeping generalisations and downright elitist invectives masquerading as input in the comments though. I work at a post 92. I’ve published 4* articles, advanced the boundaries of my area of study, had significant national impact and, finally, get great feedback on my lecturing (which I love). Although I’m sure it would all be dismissed as ‘second rate’ by some of the commentariat here. Do better people, be better!
I’m finding things to like in this article, albeit not every aspect. I’m amazed at the sweeping generalisations and downright elitist invectives masquerading as input in the comments though. I work at a post 92. I’ve published 4* articles, advanced the boundaries of my area of study, had significant national impact and, finally, get great feedback on my lecturing (which I love). Although I’m sure it would all be dismissed as ‘second rate’ by some of the commentariat here. Do better people, be better!
Can help but wonder what the reaction would be to someone with a completely non academic background getting the role of Vice Chancellor. The job they are being paid to do is lead the institution enabling, research, education and learning. Arguably someone with decent leadership and listening skills (as well as understanding of the sector) would be able to do this. An ability to write research papers is not a key skill for this role - balancing a budget, managing and leading people etc.... all way more important.
And as always missed are those working in the third space - Technologists, learning designers, educational designers and developers and others who hold multiple qualifications in education, discipline areas etc. i.e. those supporting teachers across the university so they can actually teach well. After 35 years in higher education, I have only seen it move sideways in the area of high-quality hybrid delivery. Very few academics have studied adult learning and online education. There is no wonder we find ourselves where we are.
Serious academics are increasingly peripheral to everything UK universities do. It is sad to watch the decline.
ADVERTISEMENT