Barry,
I've come across this discussion before and personally
have reservations about exempting colleagues from a PGCHE on the basis of
Academy registration. Quite a lot of it, depends on what is included in the
PGCHE.
A PGCHE that I once was responsible
for, included 'Effective Research in Higher Education', included
postgraduate research supervision in its core for most participants, and paid
particular attention to the research literature influencing L&T in the HE
sector (or so we hoped!). On the basis of
experience as an Accreditor for the Academy, (and at the time for the
ILTHE), I must say I would not have found the individual route to cover all of
the above as full as we did in the PGCHE.
In that case, the institution would have been badly
advised to equal a programme that includes all these additional areas, to
Academy registration, and so I advised strongly against it.
At the same time I have -again as an accreditor, it
really is a highly educational job- also seen a wide range of Pg programmes, a
few of which concentrate mostly on the practice of learning and teaching, based
on the current experience of the participant, and although (for instance)
theory has a place in that context, it is very much of an underpinning
nature. In some of those cases, I could well imagine that Academy registration
might be seen to cover the probationary requirement.
I have found in practice
that if the prospective participant gives your PGCHE team a copy of their
Academy application, you're halfway down a proper AP(E)L route already, which
could be the start of finding a solution to the policy
question.
Where it becomes more
difficult is if there is a discrepancy between probationary requirements and the
ILO-s of a PGCHE...
So what I am trying to say is that the old mapping
exercise is probably going to work best if you really want to answer the
technical question of whether Academy registration covers the probationary
requirements of your institution.
What I really enjoy about this discussion is that
you're also looking to compare between institutions: another form of peer review
to underpin teaching standards. Now there is an enhancement role for the Academy
on offer...
Best,
Gwen van der Velden
Director of Learning and Teaching
Enhancement
University of Bath
Apologies if you’ve already got this
message through another jiscmail list
Colleagues,
At Middlesex, we have a number of
categories of new teaching staff that are exempted from taking the normally
mandatory PGCert HE. These include, for example, people that have previously
acquired a similar SEDA/ILTHE/HEA accredited qualification or one of the other
professional qualifications recognised by HEA.
At present we don’t have a clear
policy about how to respond to people who have acquired HEA registered status
through the individual route - should such people be exempted from the PGCertHE?
We are currently discussing this issue with a view to clarifying
policy.
I’d be very interested to hear from
colleagues on the list:
- any views you have about this
question, and
- what policy other institutions have
on the matter
Regards
Barry
Professor Barry
Jackson
Pro Vice-Chancellor and Director of
Learning & Teaching
Middlesex University
North
London Business Park |Oakleigh Road
South | London N11 1QS
tel. +44 (0)20
8411 5018