Bringing together the pieces of the jigsaw: the experience of developing and implementing an institutional CPD framework Karin Crawford, Howard Stevenson, Paulina Babuchowska and Ros Pepper University of Lincoln

2 Overview  The University of Lincoln achieved HEA accreditation for its professional standards framework in 2009;  The scheme was piloted across the institution in 2010;  This presentation sets out our experiences of that ‘journey’.

3 The starting point  Institutional recognition of the importance of teaching and learning – strategic direction to support the professional development of all staff;  Complex range of approaches; cultures; priorities; beliefs; and actions – impacting on developers, institution and individual academics;  The need for a research/evidence-based foundation for any development work. ‘…good-quality teaching for everyone…(by)…staff that are trained to teach and continue to develop professionally…’ (DfES 2003: 49)

4 The research The research (See Crawford 2009)  Developing an understanding of the influences on the development practices of academics;  Offered a voice for academics and an opportunity to influence academic development processes in the institution;  Data collection through semi-structured interviews (with academics across the disciplines/Faculties and schools and key personnel); and documentary analysis;  Contradictions; ‘dualisms’; ‘fault lines’ (Clegg 2003: 37).

5 The research The research (See Crawford 2009) Key themes significant in informing the institutional approach 1.Professional development – content and focus – form and approach? 2.The academic role and identity! 3.In whose interests?

6 First steps  Importance of cross-institutional ‘ownership’ – collaboration and joint working embedded from the start;  Project with a designated Project Manager;  Early working group – wide representation Consultation with the HEA Advisor;  Contact and visits to other HEIs;  Moving forward with confidence!

7 Challenges and opportunities  Being research-informed;  Involvement and steer;  Conversations – debate - engagement – information – a communications strategy - ‘marketing’!  Developing explicit links to all strategies – to all relevant policies;  Stating values and objectives - learning from the work of others in this area … but doing it ‘the Lincoln Way’;  Funding issues;  Putting together the jigsaw pieces!

8 Implementation  Following accreditation the scheme was piloted across institution in 2010;  Initial cohort of applicants at SD1, SD2, SD3;  Workshops with applicants and mentors;  Process Individual approach - professional conversation; Awarding panel included externals;  Outcomes.

9 Lessons learned...  Developmental...or......Judgmental?...Managerial?...Instrumental?

10 Next steps  Refining Reflecting on experiences and reviewing processes.  Embedding Consolidating the system and increasing staff awareness.  Integrating Linking the framework to related processes such as academic appraisal, annual promotion cycle, embedding scheme into institutional CPD Framework. Shifting the institutional discourses relating to teaching, professional development and career progression

11 References Clegg, S. (2003) ‘Problematising Ourselves: Continuing Professional Development in Higher Education’ International Journal for Academic Development Vol 8, No. 1/2 pp Crawford, K. (2009) ‘Continuing Professional Development in Higher Education – tensions and debates in a changing environment’ in M. Neary, H. Stevenson, and L. Bell (eds) The Future of Higher Education: Policy, Pedagogy and the Student Experience Continuum Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2003) The future of higher education The Stationery Office

12 Contact details For further information please contact - Howard Stevenson – Karin Crawford – Paulina Babuchowska – Ros Pepper –