Conference Agenda

The ECER 2024 Symposium on Academic Development Initiatives Across Europe invites researchers, academic developers, and practitioners to share insights into diverse academic development initiatives and their impact on the academic community. It consolidates contributions from four distinct research studies, providing a comprehensive view of academic development processes, objectives, methodologies, findings, and future trajectories.

The first contribution comes from a six-university partnership within the COALITION Erasmus Plus HighEd project and advocates for sustainable faculty development (FD) processes to enhance Inclusive Student-Centred Pedagogy (ISCP), by focusing on one FD process, that is, peer-observation as a self-regulatory development tool (Tenenberg, 2016). The methodological approach includes comparative analysis of reflective reports by 18 academics and follow-up semi-structured interviews, uncovering insights into academics' engagement and expectations. Discussion presents the findings shaped by developmental peer-observation protocols and the crucial role of FD processes focusing on reflective engagement with Inclusive Student-Centred Pedagogy (ISCP) to promote inclusivity in teaching practice (Hockings, 2010; Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023).

The second study, is a bottom-up initiative from the University of Crete, exploring the feasibility of Student Engagement Associate Academic Development schemes with Academics and Students as Equal Partners (Cook-Sather et al., 2014; Obadare et al., 2022). Questionnaires and interviews reveal insights into challenges, steps for successful implementation, and the transformative potential of student perspectives. The findings highlight the importance of collaborative engagement and the need for a cultural shift in academia towards inclusive teaching and innovative pedagogies.

The third contribution explores academic development initiatives in Portuguese universities and problematises the mismatch between theory and practice (Almeida, Viana & Alves, 2022). The study maps professional development (PD) initiatives across 14 public universities, using document analysis and exploratory website analysis. The findings reveal a varied landscape of PD visions, emphasizing structured training, induction, continuous training, and recognition initiatives. The study addresses the gap in understanding PD practices in Portuguese universities, contributing valuable insights to the broader conversation on academic development.

Finally, the fourth contribution delves into the exploration of academic identities (Djerasimovic & Villani, 2020) in Portuguese public universities. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study analyzes academics' perceptions across disciplinary areas. Findings highlight self-identification, perceptions of transformations, and reactions to the academic environment. The study underscores the importance of recognizing academics' agency in shaping their identities amidst evolving higher education landscapes.

In summary, this symposium emphases on sustainable FD processes, bottom-up SEA schemes, PD practices in Portuguese universities, and the nuanced exploration of academic identities. By bridging these diverse perspectives, the symposium aims to contribute to a holistic understanding of the evolving landscape of academic development and its impact on higher education.

This paper proposes a shift towards faculty development (FD) processes emphasizing sustainability, specifically targeting Inclusive Student-Centered Pedagogy (I-ScP). The focus narrows to a key FD practice—peer-observations as a self-regulatory tool—and its impact on enhancing the competencies necessary for effective I-ScP implementation within diverse educational contexts. As a transformative methodology in higher education fostering self-directed learners, I-ScP places students at the core of the learning experience (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023). Reflective FD processes like peer-observations as a developmental tool for the observing teachers (Tennenberg, 2016) have been gaining track in academia. Peer-coaching and peer-observation are considered as an effective FD Programs method as it combines collaborative and reciprocal reflective input between teachers (Charteris and Smardon, 2018) in non-intimidating and non-hierarchical systems between peers (Netolicky, 2016). However, there exists a gap in understanding the practical implementation of I-ScP, especially when it comes to reflective FD processes. Building on Hockings' framework (2010), characterising I-ScP as a deliberate and forward-looking approach to teaching and learning, this paper specifically hones in on one aspect of FD—peer-observations—as a self-regulatory tool that fosters teacher reflexivity. The emphasis of peer-observation protocols lies on creating learner-centred opportunities that promote equity, student engagement, self-awareness, self-regulation, and learner autonomy without categorizing specific groups or individuals. In line with Tenneberg’s (2016) model, participants were asked to observe their peers’ teaching once, complete an observation protocol and write a report on the ways and the degree this experience changed their own current practices in terms of I-ScP. COALITION partners, engaged in a European project involving six universities, address the gap in exploring the pedagogical acumen of academics post FD modes. The study systematically documents academics' reflections and assessments focusing on peer-observations as a developmental tool within the broader scope of I-ScP pedagogies. The methodological approach involves a comparative analysis of reflective reports by 18 academics across six countries, followed by 18 semi-structured interviews to delve deeper into their engagement, challenges, key insights and recommendations for optimising peer-observation as an FD practice for teachers observing others (not being observed). Findings highlight the transformative potential of peer-observations, emphasising the nuanced understanding of I-ScP in a culture where faculty members are prepared and consistently advancing in their strategies and competencies (Zahedi & Bazargan, 2023).

Charteris, J., & Smardon, D. (2018). “Professional learning on steroids” : Implications for teacher learning through spatialised practice in new generation learning environments. Australian Journal of Teacher Education; v.43 n.12 p.12-29; December 2018, 43(12), 12–29. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/aeipt.221964 Hockings, C. (2010). Inclusive Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: A Synthesis of Research. York: Higher Education Academy. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2023). Coaching Instructors as Learners: Considerations For A Proactively Designed Inclusive Syllabus. Education Centre for Higher Education, Marijampoles Kolegija, Latvia. Netolicky, D.M. (2016), "Coaching for professional growth in one Australian school: “oil in water”", International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 66-86. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-09-2015-0025 Tenenberg, J. (2016). Learning through observing peers in practice, Studies in Higher Education, 41:4, 756-773, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2014.950954 Zahedi, S., & Bazargan, A. (2023). Faculty member's opinion regarding faculty development needs and the ways to meet the needs. Research and Planning in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-89.

Bottom-up Student Engagement Associate (SEA) schemes allow for the development of both student and staff partners in a unique and collaborative way (Obadare et al., 2022). This academic development (AD) approach is based on the seminal paper by Cook-Sather et al. (2014) on the Scholarship of Students as Equal Partners (SEP) and serves as a viable means of increasing the drive for educational transformation (Dunne & Zandstra, 2011). Unlike UK and USA universities, bottom-up academic development schemes at the University of Crete started in 2019 with the Training of the trainers (TotT) initiative in which teaching staff and senior faculty collaborated as equal partners in AD schemes. Since then, the very notion of “bottom-up” initiatives evolved including students as co-researchers in the design of a MOOC on “Higher Education Pedagogy: Teaching Methodologies in Tertiary Education” tailored to academics needs (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts et al., 2023, Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023a,b). To further increase the drive for transformational teaching and learning, this paper presents a new initiative which aims to explore student and academics’ beliefs regarding the design of SEP schemes and their employability as reliable bottom-up AD Schemes at the University of Crete. Twenty professors and 65 students submitted questionnaires regarding the feasibility, the challenges and the steps to be taken for such a scheme to be successfully employed by university teachers or academics. Following a course whose one of its main priorities was to encourage student engagement in course instructional design and assessment decision making, ten semi-structured student interviews were conducted in order to provide qualitative data towards the aforementioned issues. Ten academics were also interviewed. Data analysis was conducted using grounded theory and thematic analysis of open-ended questions and interview responses (Charmaz, 2008; Tuckett, 2005). Findings highlighted the main reasons why students and teachers may not be willing to engage in such schemes, how to overcome potential challenges and what steps should be taken before implementing SEA as Academic Development Schemes. The overlap between teachers and students’ initial views was expected due to the established cultural realities underpinning university teaching and learning. Yet, after the course completion, students offered key perspectives regarding inclusive teaching and provided realistic ways of engaging students in SEA developmental and pedagogical innovation schemes. Students’ perspectives can transform teacher beliefs about teaching and assessment provided this process is perceived as “doing with rather than doing to” students so as to ensure equity (O’Shea, 2018, pp 18).

Charmaz, K. (2008). Constructionism and the grounded theory method. In J. A. Holstein, & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 397 –412). New York: TheGuilfordPress. Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Wiley Dunne, E., & Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as Change Agents. New Ways of Engaging with Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Bristol: Escalate. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts K., Katsarou, E., Sipitanos, K. and Vavouraki, G. (2023.) Identifying Faculty competences and needs in a research-intensive university in Europe. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts K. (2023) Critical insights of instructional design of online reflective participatory spaces in an academic development course in Europe. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2023b) (Ed.) University Education: Teaching Methodology in Tertiary Education. Disigma Editions: Thessaloniki. In https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-JagQqQXh2ioOlx8Ymg-XsXmSsyX1Sg8/view Obadare, O. et al. (2022). Building equal partnerships: The Student Engagement Associate scheme at the University of Nottingham, International Journal for Students as Partners, 6 (1). O’Shea, S. (2018). Equity and students as partners: The importance of inclusive relationships. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(2). Tuckett, A. G. (2005). Applying thematic analysis theory to practice: A researcher’s experience. Contemporary nurse, 19(1-2), 75-87.

Professional development of higher education teachers (PD) has not yet received the desired attention in some countries, particularly in Portugal. Detached from national policies, PD has had little expression in the policies of portuguese higher education institutions (HEI), contrary to what is observed in some countries (Almeida, 2021a). Research has also been addressing this theme (Kuzhabekova, et al, 2015), providing significant contributions to the understanding of PD processes. With Portugal's integration in the ‘Bolonha Process’, learning and teaching in higher education have gained protagonism (Almeida & Costa, 2020). A fresh professionalism of academics is advocated as essential for pedagogical innovation, and the lack of pedagogical preparation among teachers and the mismatch between declared theory and theory in practice are problematized (Almeida, Viana & Alves, 2022; Trigwell et al, 2008). The diversity of initiatives and practices implemented by HEI (Day, 2017) and the impact of PD programmes on teachers and organizations (e.g., Hanbury, et al; Parsons et al, 2012) have been widely demonstrated. In Portugal, recent studies highlight the work of pedagogical advisory services (Xavier & Leite, 2019) and initiatives promoted by Polytechnic HEI (Gomes & Alves, 2023) leaving unexplored what is being done in this domain by portuguese universities. Therefore, this study aims to map the PD initiatives and the associated understanding of PD (Almeida, 2021b) of all portuguese public universities (14), identifying their underlying modalities, and objectives. Using a matrix for document analysis (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2006), a collection containing the Strategic Plans and Activity Plans of all universities was assembled. In a second phase, an exploratory analysis of institutional websites was conducted to i) characterize the measures supporting teacher PD identified in the first phase of the study, and ii) identify other initiatives not found in the previous analysis. The analysis allowed the characterizition of the PD vision of portuguese universities, where the dominant conception of PD is associated with the idea of structured training and the implementation of initiatives more or less scattered, with varying degrees of consolidation and coverage. Initiatives include i) induction and continuous training; ii) structured short and medium/long-term training; iii) scientific meetings, sharing forums and communities of practice; iv) dissemination of best practices; v) social recognition and financial support. These initiatives derive either from separate measures or from measures integrated into organizational policies.

Almeida, M. (2021a). Fatores mediadores no processo de desenvolvimento profissional de docentes do ensino superior. Educação e Pesquisa, 47, 1-20. Almeida, M. (2021b). Desenvolvimento profissional docente: anatomia de um conceito. In M.G. Alves, (coord.) (2021). Pedagogia do Ensino Superior - a (in)visibilidade do trabalho docente (p.49- 68). Ebook IE-Ulisboa. Almeida, M., Viana, J., & Alves, M. (2022). Exploring teaching conceptions and practices: aqualitative research with academics in Portugal. Studia Paedagogica, 27(2):35-53 Almeida, M. & Costa, E. (2020). A arquitetura de uma política transnacional de Ensino Superior para a Europa: o Processo de Bolonha. TMQ – Techniques, Methodologies and Quality, Número Especial, 17-38. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2006). Research methods in education. London: Routledge. Day, C. (2017). Revisiting the purposes of continuing professional development. In Professional development and institutional needs (pp. 51-77). Routledge. Gomes, S., & Alves, M. (2023). Estratégias e apoios institucionais ao desenvolvimento profissional docente: o caso dos institutos politécnicos portugueses, Docência Ens. Sup., 13. Kuzhabekova, A., Hendel, D. D., & Chapman, D. W. (2015). Mapping global research on international higher education. Research in Higher Education, 56(8), 861-882. Trigwell, K., Postareffa, L., Katajavuoria, N., & Lindblom-Ylännea, S. (2008). Consonance and dissonance in descriptions of teaching of university teachers. Studies in Higher Education, 33 (1), 49–61.

The landscape of higher education has been shaped by neoliberal influences such as managerialism and market regulation (Djerasimovic and Villani, 2020; Roberts, 2019). These changes have significant implications for the academic profession, including ways of being and doing in academia, well-being, and academic identities (Skea, 2021; Tülübaş and Göktürk, 2020). On one side, academic identities are constantly shaped by social and institutional contexts and external pressures; on the other, individual agency, personal narratives, experiences and beliefs play an important role in shaping them. These factors influence how academics respond to changes in the academic environment and how they perceive their roles within the profession (Fanghanel, 2011; Ybema et al., 2009). The purpose of this research is to analyse academic identities in Portuguese public universities, based on academics' perceptions of their work dimensions. After conducting a systematic literature review, we designed a mixed-methods study involving academics from different disciplines. Four focus groups were conducted, one for each disciplinary area (soft pure, soft applied, hard pure, hard applied). The data was analysed using a content analysis approach guided by abductive inference (Gondim and Bendassolli, 2014). The analysis was based on three dimensions of categorisation: (1) self-identification of the academics, (2) perceptions of the transformations, and (3) reactions to the scenario. The categories 'focus on professional field', 'focus on diversity of functions' and 'focus on teaching/training' emerged in the first dimension. Additionally, we discuss the different roles within the career and note a tendency to balance them, although some academics clearly see them as opposites. We also observe a recognition that the perceived tensions are not felt equally at all stages of the career. The categories of 'positive trends', 'negative trends', 'ambivalent trends' and 'continuity trends' emerged in the dimension of perceptions of change. Although some positive perspectives are presented, the discussion mainly focuses on the negative or ambivalent aspects of these changes. In the third section, we observe reactions of 'adaptation' and 'resistance', with hybrid identities prevailing. These identities both reinforce and resist discourses of change and management. This overview raises questions about the current state of the academic profession and the risk of distancing from its core values. To (re)consider this topic, it is important to recognise the agency of academics in performing their work, rather than simply analysing structural change and the demands of higher education policies.

Djerasimovic, Sanja, & Villani, Marialuisa (2020). Constructing academic identity in the European higher education space: Experiences of early career educational researchers. European Educational Research Journal, 19(3), 247-268. doi:10.1177/1474904119867186. Fanghanel, Joëlle (2011). Being an Academic. Abingdon: Routledge. Gondim, S. M. G., & Bendassolli, P. F. (2014). The use of the qualitative content analysis in psychology: a critical review. Psicologia em Estudo, 19, 191-199. doi: 10.1590/1413-737220530002 Roberts, Peter (2019). Performativity, big data and higher education: the death of the professor? Beijing International Review of Education, 1, 73-91. doi:10.1163/25902547-00101008. Skea, Claire (2021). Emerging Neoliberal Academic Identities: Looking Beyond Homo economicus. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 40(4), 399-414. doi:/10.1007/s11217-021-09768-7. Tülübaş, Tijen, & Göktürk, Şöheyda (2020). Neoliberal governmentality and performativity culture in higher education: Reflections on academic identity. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership, 5(1), 198-232. doi:10.30828/real/2020.1.6 Ybema, Sierk, Keenoy, Tom, Oswick, Cliff, Beverungen, Armin, Ellis, Nick, & Sabelis, Ilda (2009). Articulating identities. Human Relations, 62(3), 299-322. doi:10.1177/0018726708101904.