91ÇÑ×Ó

Education development centres (EDCs) are often seen as merely a nice-to-have in UK universities, potentially enhancing teaching and learning but far from vital to it.

But while such a case may have been arguable a decade ago, it is no longer. In an era in which questions are being asked about the value of higher education in an AI-enabled world, universities are beginning to grapple with the complicated question of what institutions and learning will look like in a world where much of what people have been doing for decades will be done by AI. In that endeavour, a bridge between the academic community and the universities¡¯ strategic priorities is vital. And that is what EDCs provide.

Nor is AI the only challenge facing teaching and learning in higher education. Another is rocketing levels of mental ill health; in the UK, the number of students reporting is more than seven times higher than a decade ago. Partly as a result, staff have reported a decline in on-campus engagement. Moreover, student populations are more diverse than ever, and while universities widely acknowledge this as a positive, students and staff are being presented with challenges that they are not fully equipped to meet.

Student expectations are also rising in the high-fees systems adopted across most of the UK. Students who will be paying off those fees for many years rightly expect a certain level of quality, not just of teaching but of facilities, support and experiential opportunities.

These issues have raised the profile and status of education within universities but, particularly in research-intensives, the current funding constraints are putting its delicate relationship with research under strain. The pressure to ¡°do more with less¡± is being felt across the sector. A clearly defined EDC can play a vital role in enabling that.

EDCs have evolved and expanded significantly since their emergence in the 1960s, with most UK universities now housing dedicated units. And despite operational differences, successful EDCs share a common foundation: expertise grounded in research or engagement in the scholarship of teaching and learning, along with strong collaborative partnerships with both academic and professional staff across the university community.

But universities haven¡¯t always thought enough about the career trajectories of educational development staff and how to effectively capitalise on the expertise and focus they bring. And that remains true ¨C despite EDCs¡¯ crucial role in ensuring the continuity of teaching throughout Covid-19, as well as their current leadership in guiding universities¡¯ responses to the rapid development of generative AI. This leaves EDCs¡¯ existence and resources dependent on the of individual champions in the university¡¯s senior management.

Educational development staff are able to train early-career academic staff to be effective teachers and to lead or support educational change at the institutional level. They often work at the front lines of pedagogical innovation and programme/curriculum development while institutions slowly acculturate to new educational paradigms, collaborating with senior leadership on strategic initiatives such as assessment reform, inclusive education and digital transformation.

Yet in many EDCs, there is a prevailing identity crisis. This arises out of the historical tension between two related but distinct missions: deploying academic expertise and educational insight to improve education within the institution and the more traditional academic function of research and scholarship into how learning, teaching and assessment can be improved more widely. If EDCs become too scholarly, the institution begins to ask: ¡°What is it doing to improve practice?¡± But if the EDC focuses solely on supporting practice, it will typically be asked to be more engaged with best practice and to advance thinking and practice through investigating the issues of the day, thereby ensuring that EDC guidance is informed by up-to-date research.?

Moreover, many academics remain sceptical that educational development is a distinct academic domain. Instead, they often view it as administrative, or a mere provider of classroom tips. These dynamics are exacerbated by entrenched hierarchies that privilege traditional academic roles over those of professional staff regardless of qualifications or impact. Hence, some academic developers may react defensively when their academic credentials or expertise are questioned, creating further barriers to productive collaboration with academics.

Indeed, academic developers may outright reject the characterisation of their work as service and be resistant to engaging in certain kinds of service work. Some are also concerned about being viewed as agents of managerialism rather than educational partners, and notions of service to the university may also come into conflict with perceived rights to academic freedom.

Academic developers¡¯ institutional status is further undermined by the of the work of EDCs. When an educational development initiative succeeds, the visible outcomes may be improved student experience, enhanced teaching quality or curricular innovation. But these achievements are often credited to academic departments, without recognising the partnership work that might have contributed.

Perceptions that EDCs fail to deliver benefit may also in part stem from misaligned expectations. Universities may be looking for rapid, quantifiable improvements while underestimating the time required to make meaningful pedagogical change. Fundamentally, the work of EDCs is about facilitating cultural change, which by its very nature is slow, often imperceptible and non-linear.

So how can EDCs put themselves in a better institutional position to support the educational offer of universities in this period of huge uncertainty and precarity?

The answer begins with rethinking the notion of EDCs as ¡°service¡± units. We must lose some of the negative connotations associated with customer assistance, with a reframing that recognises the expertise needed for educational development work and the value of working in partnership.

EDCs need to cross traditional boundaries, using their whole-institution perspective and evidence-based expertise to bring different parts of the university together as partners for improvement. They also need to support the design and implementation of education strategy, enabling the institution to make progress against its strategic priorities and regulatory obligations.

This requires trusting communication between the EDC and the senior leadership, as well as with all the stakeholders in the academic community. The senior leadership needs to be able to set the agenda and know that the EDC has the expertise, or can convene the expertise, to deliver against that agenda in a way that is appropriate to different academic cultures.

Specifically, we propose a for EDC activities. Engagement within and across levels would depend on the support, resourcing and level of maturity of individual institutions. Larger and wealthier universities may have an academic citizenship role in working with smaller, less well-resourced institutions.

Level 1 is faculty development. EDCs lead on the pursuit of individual teaching qualifications, such as the Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education, and they run a development programme for graduate teaching assistants and an accredited programme, up to senior fellowship level.

Level 2 is enhancing curricula. EDCs work in partnership with experts from academic departments and professional teams across the university to incorporate current strategic requirements. They champion a renewed emphasis on coordinated ¡°programmes¡± of learning, as opposed to self-contained modules, between which there are often overlaps, gaps and inconsistencies.

Level 3 is building education leadership. EDCs convene networks of education leaders from across the institution to discuss strategic and operational issues and to respond to sector and regulatory issues, facilitating practice exchange and collaboration. Specific training programmes are devised to develop education-focused academics into strategic leaders with the skills to drive strategic educational innovation at department, faculty and university levels.

Level 4 is contributing to sectoral developments. EDCs raise the profile of their institutions and galvanise responses to sectoral challenges by convening discussions among national and international networks of educators and experts, as well as offering thought leadership on the critical questions of the day.

In short, EDCs need to serve as bridges between the senior leadership and the academic community in order to implement institutional strategy. For that to be effective, they need trust and convening power and building that trust will depend on changing perceptions about the usefulness of EDCs.

It will also depend on academic developers changing their own perceptions about being in a ¡°service¡± role. ¡°Doing more with less¡± will mean letting go of some scholarly and personal passions in order to focus on the priorities of the university. It will also mean closer partnership with other teams to deliver the most relevant expertise to academic teams in a seamless way.

If all of this is done, the rewards will be considerable. Education development professionals will enjoy higher institutional recognition and rewards. Senior managers will enjoy more strategic control of teaching and learning. And, most importantly of all, students will benefit from enhanced and highly relevant teaching and learning.

is director of the Eden Centre for Education Enhancement at the London School of Economics and Political Science. is academic director of King¡¯s Academy, King¡¯s College London¡¯s educational development centre.