Pedagogisk Meritering vid LU

Information about the Pedagogisk Meritering project, 2023

Grid View

Framework for pedagogical merit

Do all blogs have a few posts that start with “Sorry we haven’t updated for a while, it’s been busy”? This is (one of) ours.

We are nearing the end of this project, and we will start to release some of the main recommendations as we complete the final report. First, we present the framework we will be recommending for considering pedagogical merits. This framework can be used in the process of appointing new staff, in supporting teachers through their careers, as a self-assessment for teachers during their careers, and as part of formal recognition processes such as admission to a faculty academy or promotion to lektor, docent or professor from other teaching roles.

The framework has four steps, which you can read below. In future posts we will share information about the evidence teachers could use to demonstrate their progression through the steps.

  1. Effective educator / Kompetent lärare
  2. Skilled and Collegial educator / meriterad lärare
  3. Institutional leader  / excellent lärare
  4. National and international leader /  ledande lärare

Details of the steps

  • Effective educator / Kompetent lärare

Expected sphere of influence: Small groups of students and individual students at any level.

This level is expected of anyone beginning their careers in teaching roles at Lund University. In most cases, relevant experience will have been gained during postgraduate and postdoctoral work. In some situations, colleagues will be transferring into university teaching after a career in another profession. Competence as an Effective Educator is most likely to be demonstrated through evidence of engagement with basic introductory training, some supervision of students, observation of others teaching in universities, and reflection on your own capacity to develop your skills and knowledge of effective teaching in your discipline. You will need to show a reflective and professional attitude to teaching that has developed over time, and provide examples of ways you have used effective planning, organisation and evaluation techniques to manage your work, even if it was not necessarily in an educational context.

  • Skilled and Collegial educator / meriterad lärare

Expected sphere of influence: students at any level, colleagues in department and faculty

The level of skilled and collegial educator is likely to be demonstrated through evidence of planning and evaluating teaching sessions, working with colleagues to develop and enhance courses and programmes and/or to implement new approaches or policies in education, attendance at and reflection on educational development activities such as webinars and courses, departmental seminars and awaydays or external conferences.  You will need to show a reflective and professional attitude to student learning and engagement, a commitment to contributing to and supporting a collegial and collaborative environment in relation to teaching in your department and subject. You may also be beginning to contribute to professional networks inside and outside the university, perhaps developing a specialist expertise in an area of teaching. You may be mentoring or supervising less experienced colleagues or taking a lead on small-scale changes in a programme.

  • Institutional leader  / excellent lärare

Expected sphere of influence: students across programmes, colleagues across the faculty and university, professional networks inside and outside the university

At this level, a teacher will be a leader of educational activities and enhancement, with influence beyond their immediate colleagues. This is likely to be demonstrated through evidence of successful development activity which has impact on large numbers of students and staff, leadership of funded projects, creation of extensively-used resources or scholarly publications on higher education. This should also include providing mentoring or other direct support to less experienced colleagues in relation to education. You may also be developing a national and international reputation in a specialist area of teaching.

  • National and international leader /  ledande lärare

Expected sphere of influence: students and colleagues across the university, including senior leadership, international professional networks

At this level, a teacher will need to show national or international leadership of educational activities and enhancement, with influence beyond the university. This is likely to be demonstrated through evidence of successful activity which has impact on national and international practices, scholarly publications, extensively used educational resources and contributions to scholarship, development and/or recruitment in other universities.

.

October 1, 2023

This entry was posted in

Uncategorized

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Putting together evidence of teachers’ achievements

We all agree that teaching skills and experiences are important, but it is still difficult to find ways to provide evidence which can be understood easily by everyone. We all understand how to count research outputs, and we can use these as a proxy for research merits, even though we know that sometimes these metrics can be ‘gamed’ in ways which may not have been intended (Oravec 2017; Macdonald 2023). With pedagogical merits, the situation is more complex because many people contribute to the operation of a successful programme or educational service. We can’t just use student evaluations, although they are useful particularly for our ‘effective’ and ‘skilled and collegial’ categories of achievement: they only represent a small snapshot of the activity of teachers.

Teaching portfolios are a way to address this, by encouraging teachers to put together a selection of evidence and reflection from different sources.

Recently we were invited to meet colleagues from the University of Denver and they introduced us to this evaluation system (pdf) being used by the University of Colorado, Boulder.

Image of a scheme used at the University of Colorado Boulder, with three columns: dimensions of effective teaching on the left, three boxes with 'self-study'. 'student voice' and 'peer review' in the centre column, and 'tenure reapointment' and 'merit system' in the right hand column. Detailed contents not relevant to post but available in the linked PDF.

Caption: Part of the Teaching Quality Framework at University of Colorado, boulder

The three means of demonstrating achievement are interesting to us, because they bring different dimensions. It doesn’t say so, but I think it may be based on Brookfield’s four lenses of reflective practice:

  1. One’s personal reflections
  2. The views of our learners,
  3. Our colleague’s experiences, and
  4. The relevant literature (Brookfield 1998).

I think the Boulder model combines self-study and literature, but it probably should and does underpin all of the different lenses. We like the general idea of the model, with its apparently equal emphasis on different perspectives, but if we want to have relatively interchangeable evidence types and portfolio structures for teaching, research, and service, then we will need to make the ‘student voice’ section more generic. If you are reading this as a teacher and researcher, can you imagine producing materials to support evidence of your achievements using these headings? Use the comment box or get in touch with us if you have views!

References:

Brookfield, Stephen. 1998. “Critically reflective practice.” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions 18 (4): 197-205. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/chp.1340180402

Macdonald, Stuart. 2023. “The gaming of citation and authorship in academic journals: a warning from medicine.” Social Science Information: 05390184221142218. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/05390184221142218

Oravec, Jo Ann. 2017. “The manipulation of scholarly rating and measurement systems: constructing excellence in an era of academic stardom.” Teaching in Higher Education: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1301909.

May 23, 2023

This entry was posted in

evidence framework

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Students’ voices in pedagogical merit processes

Three students discussing something in front of a laptop computer.
Image (c) Lund University, used with permission

One of the elements of the project is to consider how and when students are involved in judgements of teaching competence which take place during appointment and promotion processes. Lunds Universitets Studentkårer (LUS: the umbrella organisation for the faculty students’ unions at Lund University) is represented on the project steering group, and we have met with the faculty representatives regularly through the project.

At the most recent meeting with the faculty representatives, in April 2023, we presented the interim report and asked how students could get involved and what support they would need. They identified two important areas: the role of individual students in contributing to a teacher’s portfolio, and the role of representatives in supporting appointments and promotions.

We talked about capturing individual student views through coruse evaluations, but the representatives were very aware of potential biases in such systems, as well as some apathy among students in relation to completing such surveys. It was suggested that this is sometimes because of a lack of knowledge of how the results are evaluated and followed up. We talked a little about different survey approaches, and the project team will make reference to these in the final report, as something to be followed up in faculties when they do their detailed planning.

In relation to student representatives, they need support and guidance to contribute to other processes, such as planning for faculty approaches to teacher appointment and promotion in faculty education boards or through membership of the Teacher Appointment Boards. There is some existing training for the Appointment Boards offered through AHU, which provides a good foundation.

One challenge expressed for both of these roles is that representatives report feeling that other members of the board may see them as temporary members presenting their individual opinion, rather than representatives able to present a collective view. We will take this into account when developing guidance and training for the Teaching Appointment Boards. In relation to these resources, representatives felt that they particularly needed more guidance on understanding and judging  pedagogical portfolios. Everyone agreed that test lectures were a very valuable part of the appointment process, so clear criteria for these should also be included.

April 25, 2023

This entry was posted in

hopes ideas teaching recognition

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Intentions are necessary but not sufficient

Looking at brain activity: subject on left has cap with electrodes and wires coming from it. On the other side of the wall are researchers looking at a computer. Subject and researchers are facing in opposite directions.
Image: Genom att avläsa hjärnans elektriska aktivitet går det att se hur tankarna vandrar. Totalt är det flera tusen parametrar som ska korskopplas. Osa Abendroths tankar övervakas av Inês Bramão och Mikael Johansson. Se även LUM 3 2019.

It was clear from the first part of our project that faculties at Lund University all have strong intention to consider pedagogic expertise in their recruitment and promotion processes: they are committed to excellent teaching. There is some variation between faculties, but in general, they all expect teaching expertise to be demonstrated for most recruitment or promotion activity. Sometimes a certain number of teaching hours is requested, or a sample lecture is to be given, for instance. However, most of the people we talked to expressed a wish to see clearer guidance about judging pedagogic competence, leadership, and scholarship.  

As part of the application process for academic posts, external experts are usually asked to comment on the research and pedagogical aspects of someone’s application. Mårtensson et al (2018) studied how teaching, supervision and Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) were evaluated in external reviews of professorial applications in the joint faculty of Humanities and Theology. They found that discussion of these aspects usually formed a small proportion of the total review. Figure 1 shows this for 18 sample reviews, organised by the length of each review.

Bar chart showing the proportion of 18 external expert reports devoted to pedagogic comments compared to research. The proportion ranged from around 1% to 25%, but the 25% was an outlier.
Figure 1: inclusion of pedagogic aspects in 18 external reviews of professorial applications Mårtensson, Larsson et al. 2018)

Mårtensson et al found that these external reviews mainly focused on what is easily quantifiable, with recurring themes of the scope, breadth and depth of teaching and supervision experience, rather than any qualitative assessment of teaching competence or leadership. They found little consideration of SoTL in the reviews. From our conversations with those involved in these processes, we know that they want to know more about these topics. This clear evidence of a disconnect between intention and practice gives us a good idea of the aspects to focus on when developing enhanced guidance for judging a candidate in relation to their educational experiences. We will be focusing on making these intentions concrete, so that we are all looking in the same direction when it comes to making decisions about pedagogical competence, scholarship, and leadership.

Reference: Mårtensson, K., Larsson, M., Ahlberg, A., & Holst, O. (2018). How is teaching, supervision and SoTL evaluated in reviews of professors’ educational qualifications? ISSOTL18


If you would like to know more or have ideas or examples to contribute to the project, please get in touch with us.

Lena Christensen and Rachel Forsyth 

April 3, 2023

This entry was posted in

framework

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Interim report

In March 2023, we presented an interim report to the project steering group. The report covers five main areas:

  1. A report on consultation with faculties and pedagogical units about existing practices and systems, including a proposal for future development
  2. A review of current practices in the university
  3. A review of practices on career development and pedagogical merit nationally and internationally
  4. Proposal for a university-wide framework to recognize pedagogical merit
  5. Proposals for phase 2 of the project

In a previous post, we summarised the hopes and expectations suggested by colleagues across the university. We have reviewed Lund University regulations and practices, and found that they already provide strong support for equal consideration of research and teaching in academic appointments and promotions, exactly as expected from the Higher Education Ordinance. LU’s current arrangements look for a balance of knowledge and skills which we think reflects a desire to have parity of esteem between teachers with the same job title and acknowledgement of the fact that teachers’ balance of effort, development and impact may develop during their careers, and our discussions with stakeholders show that this is something people want to preserve. This means that there is no need for regulatory changes to achieve these hopes and expectations, but rather that we need to provide stronger support and education to ensure that teaching competence and leadership can be recognised as clearly as research competence and leadership. This is our focus for the rest of our project.

A review of the national and international landscape in this area shows that many, if not most, universities are also revising their appointment and merit frameworks to make the teaching requirements clearer. Many of our colleagues in the Universitas 21 (U21) and League of European Research Universities (LERU) partnerships have generously shared their work in this area with us. We took a close look at the Career Framework for University Teaching (Figure 1), which was developed by the Royal Academy of Engineering in the UK in partnership with a group of international universities It is a model which can be mapped to the expectations of the existing LU faculty Academies, and there are many good international examples of its implementation. Several of the U21 and LERU universities have adopted a version of the Framework, and some were also involved in its development. We think this gives us a good basis for an LU framework, and we will return to this in a later post.

Teaching career framework image. Level 4: National/global leader inteaching and learning, Level 3, institutional leader or scholarly teacher, level 2,  skilled and collegial teacher, Level 1, effective teacher
Figure 1: the international Teaching Career Framework

If you would like to know more or have ideas or examples to contribute to the project, please get in touch with us.

Lena Christensen and Rachel Forsyth 

March 29, 2023

This entry was posted in

framework teaching recognition

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

About the project

Lena Christensen and Rachel Forsyth are leading a project on Pedagogical career development and the pedagogical merit system at Lund University from October 2022 to November 2023.

The project is reviewing the connections between pedagogical career development and pedagogical merit system in order to provide a suggestion for a comprehensive university-wide framework for the development of pedagogical competencies and the recognition of pedagogical merit. This work will help to value and incentivize individual engagement in pedagogic development, demonstrating the university’s strong commitment to excellence in teaching as well as research.  The project is sponsored by the vice-rector for education and culture, Ann-Kristin Wallengren, and is overseen by a steering group.

The project has two major aims:

  1. To review how higher education pedagogical competence development, formal higher education programs and educational qualification models look and function at different universities, including LU
  2. To propose a transparent and equitable framework for the development, recognition and maintenance of pedagogical merit across the university

The proposed framework will need to reflect both the needs of the individual to have a good career path which takes into account their pedagogic expertise alongside other aspects of their professional life, and the needs of the university to have the best teachers.  We have been talking to people about their hopes and expectations for a university-wide framework for the development, recognition and maintenance of pedagogical merit across the university. The following list of the ‘top ten’ hopes and expectations has been created from these discussions. What do you think? Is there anything missing? Do you disagree with anything? Let us know through the comments form.

  1. A clear framework for making appointment and promotion decisions which include pedagogical merit:
    • Ensure “Safe recruitment” – gaining criteria and tools to help to ensure that we  are appointing new colleagues who have a genuine interest in and commitment to teaching.
    • Provide support for the Lärarförslagsnämnder by having clear shared criteria for assessing teaching expertise, community contribution and team work
    • Provide training for prefekter to understand university and faculty criteria for assessing teaching expertise, community contribution and team work so that they can support colleagues to achieve recognition as part of their individual employment plans and annual reviews.
    • Make records of teacher achievements (such as completion of courses at the pedagogical units) more easily available to prefekter
  1. Clear policies for encouraging teachers to continue to develop their pedagogical expertise throughout their careers:
    • Provide ideas for interesting ways to reward good teaching in addition to the current career structures
    • Provide ideas for interesting ways to incentivise and reward pedagogical leadership
    • Suggest ways to include recognised teachers (t. ex those with ETP) in faculty work connected to teaching development
    • Develop and disseminate a clear institutional message that teaching is important as research
    • Offer resources and support for the framework through the pedagogical units
    • Regular opportunities for university-wide discussion about recognising and rewarding excellent teaching, including through rådet för högskolepedagogisk
December 6, 2022

This entry was posted in

hopes ideas

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment