Marina Harvey

Synthesising Theory and Practice: Distributed Leadership in Higher Education.

Changes facing higher education from increased government, student and community demands are resulting in a greater focus on leadership within universities. Attempts to adapt to higher education theory that underpins leadership in other sectors have been criticised for failing to recognise its unique role in the development of creative and innovative thinking required to increase and exchange knowledge. What is needed is a new approach to leadership that goes beyond individual control and management bureaucracy to embrace more sharing and collaboration. One such approach is distributed leadership; however, existing research into distributed leadership in higher education has been criticised for being normative and less democratic than is suggested in its theorisation. The research for this paper focuses on the reflections of participants in projects designed to use distributed leadership to build leadership capacity in learning and teaching in Australian higher education. The outcome was a resource designed to identify actions needed to enable a distributed leadership process that is genuinely aimed at engaging staff in influencing leadership decision making. The authors propose that this paper extends research in distributed leadership beyond the normative, subjectivist functionalist research for which it is criticised, towards a more universally applicable research paradigm.

A conceptual approach for blended leadership for tertiary education institutions

Over the last 20 years, the tertiary education sector has adopted new administrative management approaches, with the aim of improving accountable and strategic focus. Over the same period, the question of how to build leadership capacity to improve learning and teaching and research outcomes has led to discussion on what constitutes academic leadership. While both these advances are needed, what is missing is integration between the two such that academics and professional staff are engaged collaboratively to achieve learning and teaching and research outcomes that are accountable within a strategic focus. This article builds on research into the use of distributed leadership to build leadership for learning and teaching that resulted in the design of a conceptual framework for distributed leadership. Based on this conceptual framework, it proposes a conceptual blended leadership approach to engage academics and professional staff working in collaboration.

An Analysis of Internally Funded Learning and Teaching Project Evaluation in Higher Education.

– In the higher education sector, the evaluation of learning and teaching projects is assuming a role as a quality and accountability indicator. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how learning and teaching project evaluation is approached and critiques alignment between evaluation theory and practice. , – The emergent realism paradigm provides the theoretical framework with a pragmatic approach to mixed-methods data collection. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the transcripts of interviews with 15 project leaders. , – Four key themes on project evaluation emerged: how evaluation is conceptualized, particularly the overlap, even conflation, between evaluation and research; capability building within the sector; resourcing in terms of time and money; and the role of an action-oriented approach to evaluation. The authors conclude that misalignment exists between evaluation theory and the practice of project evaluation and that this relationship can be further inhibited by a project leader’s perception of evaluation. , – A series of strategies for developing capacity across the higher education sector for project evaluation are presented. These include the development and provision of: a time allocation for evaluation in future and ongoing project plans with procedures to revisit the project and assess impact; models of how to incorporate evaluation into the research cycle; constructive feedback on evaluation reports from the university funding body; and networking opportunities to disseminate learnings from project evaluations. , – This study focusses on the under-researched area of evaluation of learning and teaching projects in higher education, providing research-based evidence for strategies to develop sector capacity.

Reflection for learning: a holistic approach to disrupting the text

Reflective practice can support a mindful and focussed approach to deep learning, enabling the bridging between theory and the students’ learning experience. This practice can range from creative pursuits to heeding felt knowing, integrated into the curricula to support praxis. Indeed, the embedding of reflective mechanism(s) is a requirement of learning through participation known as PACE (Professional and Community Engagement), a pillar of the undergraduate curriculum, and core to the university’s new vision. Through this curriculum requirement and a number of fora extending beyond PACE, Australia’s Macquarie University engages with diverse reflective practices including digital storytelling and art. This chapter presents the holistic approach adopted to integrate reflective practice mechanisms across PACE curricula and practice. Firstly, the role of reflection for learning through participation (LTP) is established. The approach taken to achieve a holistic approach to practice is then unpacked. This holistic approach recognises the need to scaffold and embed reflective practice at, and across, many levels.

Peer Review in a Foundations in Learning and Teaching Program

Most universities offer a program to prepare their academics for university teaching. One common focus of these programs across Australia is that of developing academics as reflective practitioners. A variety of approaches and strategies are adopted towards achieving this outcome. This chapter presents a rationale and case study for the pivotal role of reflective capacity in developing the academy through the mandated practice of peer review in a university teacher preparation program.

A model for higher education policy review: the case study of an assessment policy

The development of a standards-based assessment policy represented a significant cultural shift in assessment practice at one university. Concurrently, the implementation of a policy framework represented a significant procedural shift in policy development and review. The assessment policy was the first policy scheduled to be reviewed through the new framework, specifically in recognition of the pivotal role of assessment to the credibility of qualifications and the academic reputation of the institution. However, the policy framework did not specify a review process. While examples of generic approaches to policy review methodology and process were provided in the literature, there were limited examples directly relevant to higher education. This paper presents a customised model for policy review developed and trialled through a higher education institution using an assessment policy as the case study.

CoPs: Enhancing Quality Learning and Teaching with Sessional Staff

The Australian higher education sector depends on sessional staff to undertake the majority of teaching. Despite the fact that sessional staff are central to the university, sessional staff report feeling isolated and invisible. There are few opportunities for sessional staff to participate in professional development or to engage in teaching teams and the wider academic community. Moreover, this reliance on sessional staff has been identified as a risk to quality learning in higher education. The Benchmarking Leadership and Advancement of Standards for Sessional Teaching (BLASST) framework has established national evidenced-based standards for systematising good practice for quality learning and teaching with sessional staff. Drawing on the BLASST framework, this chapter examines the potential for Communities of Practice (CoP) to support quality learning and teaching with sessional staff. Authentic examples are used to illustrate the ways in which CoPs can be used to improve quality learning and teaching, sustain good practice, and ultimately, to include sessional staff in academic communities. These CoPs can be implemented in a variety of ways—face-to-face, online or blended—and they may develop within traditional, structured university systems, or grow organically from a grassroots approach. Four factors for successful CoPs for sessional staff are identified: fit for purpose; a strengths-based approach; sharing of practice; and debriefing. The evidence suggests that learning and teaching CoPs for, and with, sessional staff are good practice.

Revealing the nexus between distributed leadership and communities of practice

Distributed leadership is a leadership approach that aligns with, and supports, the creating and sustaining of Communities of Practice (CoP) in higher education. Agreeing with the editors’ proposition that CoP need to be positioned within the broader social learning literature, the proposition is expanded to consider the relationship between CoP and distributed leadership (DL). This chapter argues that while the focus of DL is on building leadership capacity, its synergistic relationship with CoP results in it being indirectly linked to social learning. On the one hand, DL provides the context in which CoP are created and sustained, and, on the other hand CoP contribute to the enabling of distributed leadership. Together they support the social learning that occurs within the CoP. DL provides the ‘best fit’ for creating and sustaining a community of people within the CoPs and thus social learning (Green and Ruutz in Engaging communities, proceedings of the 31st HERDSA annual conference, Rotorua, pp. 163–172, 2008).