Jaki and colleagues

I agree that this is really important. Working it through -

We obviously wouldn't want all current SEDA-recognised programmes to have
to undertake major revisions, and then be revalidated, at once.

(Extending your point, Jaki, we may also want to make sure that the new
SEDA values remain in some sense compatible with the values in the UKPSF.
More broadly, given that UKPSF includes underpinning knowledge and SEDA
doesn't, we need to make sure that the SEDA and UKPSF standards frameworks
as a whole remain compatible.)

At the same time, we would wish that the new SEDA values will in time lead
to improvements, to programmes and to practice; or what's the point in
making the changes?

As part of the process of agreeing the new SEDA values, I suggest that we
should carefully map the new values onto both the current SEDA values and
onto the UKPSF. It seems to me fine, even desirable, for the new SEDA
values to go beyond the current SEDA and UKPSF values. SEDA has done this
kind of mapping before, both with the ILTHE and then with the UKPSF,
successfully and non-contentiously. It needs clear analysis and thinking,
but it is not difficult. Then, over the normal review and renewal cycle,
programmes can adopt, probably piecemeal rather than abruptly, the new
values, and be recognised against them.

What's important in making the transition fem old to new is that the new
SEDA values don't miss out some significant features of the current
values. Mapping greatly reduces the risk of this happening. But from the
feedback and suggestions so far, I don't think missing important elements
out is a danger!

I hope this, or something like it, will give us a safe, clear, sensible
and productive process. What do you think?

Very best wishes

David
+++++++++++++++++++++
David Baume PhD SFSEDA SFHEA
[log in to unmask]
davidbaume.com
@David_Baume
01908 690 315
07747 045 931

On 10/02/2014 16:15, "Lilly, Jaki" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>This has been an interesting conversation and I concur with the
>suggestions, particularly the preface 'a commitment to' which makes the
>values make sense.  I just wonder about the process for the introduction
>of the new values however, how will it affect institutional programmes
>which have been recognised against SEDA PDF?
>
>Best wishes
>
>Jaki
>
>Dr Jaki Lilly, CertEd, DMS, University Teaching Fellow, PFHEA
>Academic Lead: Academic and Professional Development
>Anglia Learning and Teaching
>Anglia Ruskin University
>2nd Floor, St George's House
>Cambridge
>CB2 3NH
>
>Tel: 0845 196 2783
>
>
>http://vle.anglia.ac.uk/sites/LTA/APRS/Pages/Home3.aspx
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of MASON O'CONNOR,
>Kristine (Prof)
>Sent: 09 February 2014 11:49
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: SEDA Values Consultation reminder: Deadline for responses 10
>February
>
>Hi,
>
>A comment...
>
>I strongly endorse the commitment to '....institutions, nations and
>internationally'.  SEDA has been making a commitment to educational
>development internationally for many years through its membership of, and
>contribution to, the International Consortium for Educational Development
>(ICED) - as well as its conferences, journal and accreditation processes
>- and it is important to confirm and make visible commitment to this
>value.
>
>Suggestion...
>I suggest we don't need the word 'continually' in relation to 'develop
>our understanding of how people learn..'
>We don't have 'continually' in front of the other verbs.  Could this
>commitment be strengthened by, 'Develop and interrogate our understanding
>of how people learn.'
>
>Commitments to 'sharing/dissemination' and 'evaluation' are encompassed
>in the values below, but they could be emphasised.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Kristine
>
>Kristine Mason O'Connor
>
>_______________
>________________________________________
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Cooper, Alison
>[[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 09 February 2014 04:13
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: SEDA Values Consultation reminder: Deadline for responses 10
>February
>
>At nearly the final hour, for my part I have tried to draw on all the
>valuable ideas that has been offered in the last few days - Sally's
>original input, David's TNE additions, Janet's 'commitment' idea and her
>issue about the understanding of how people learn, and the point about
>critical reflection, to pull these suggestions together. It is hard isn't
>it to phrase them as values that are still action orientated, which guide
> both our own practice and those with whom we work....
>
>
> SEDA asks of colleagues that our practices, and those with whom we work,
> be underpinned by a commitment to the following values:
>
>.       To continually develop our understanding of how people learn, in
>different ways, in different local and global contexts and through
>different media;
>
>.       To conduct and encourage scholarly, professional and ethical
>practices, making best use of evidence-based scholarship and literature
>in the field to underpin our pragmatic proposals for change;
>
>.       To promote and foster learning in communities of practice, within
>and across subjects,  institutions, nations and internationally;
>
>.       To advocate inclusivity, recognising the diversity of both
>students and staff, and work to ensure academic equity, celebrate
>difference and redress disadvantage in higher education.
>
>.       To support engagement in critical reflection and professional
>development, both for ourselves and those with whom we work, aiming to
>ensure processes and practices are developmental, supportive, and
>appropriate to contexts and capabilities.
>
>
>Good Luck Sue and Jo  - and thank you both for doing this.
>
>Ali
>
>
>Ali Cooper | Educational Development Adviser | Organisation & Educational
>Development | HR | Lancaster University | LA1 4YW |
>[log in to unmask]  | 01524 510632 | Educational Development:
>http://www.lancs.ac.uk/celt/celtweb |
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sue Thompson
>Sent: 06 February 2014 06:10
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: SEDA Values Consultation reminder: Deadline for responses 10
>February
>
>Dear Colleagues
>
>Thank you very much to everyone who has responded so far. This is just a
>reminder that there are only a few days left to respond to the Values
>Consultation which closes midday on 10 February. Short and sweet is
>great- we would really like to hear from you. Many thanks. Sue and Jo.
>
>**********************************
>Reviewing the SEDA Values: a consultation SEDA is currently in the
>process of updating its Strategic Plan and, as part of this process, the
>SEDA Executive Committee feels it is timely to review the SEDA
>Underpinning Values. It's important that this review is informed by the
>SEDA community, so please do take a few moments to read what follows and
>respond with your views and feedback, either through the SEDA jiscmail
>list or in an email. Many thanks.
>
>Consultation responses: We hope response to the consultation questions
>will generate discussion on the SEDA jiscmail. Please also email
>individual responses to Sue Thompson [log in to unmask]
>
>by 12pm midday Monday 10 February. Responses will be collated and a
>report with recommendations prepared for the SEDA Executive Committee
>meeting on 27 February.
>
>*****************************************************************
>
> Consultation questions:
>
>1. To what extent do the current SEDA Values (listed below) continue to
>reflect what we hope to convey to our members/stakeholders in HE and to
>the public?
>(What does SEDA value? What deserves our commitment? What are the things
>that matter?)
>
>
>2. Are the current Values all expressed as Values?
>(Are some of the existing values actually skills and attributes? Are some
>statements more like principles than values? Is there overlap/unevenness
>in the current values statement?)
>
>3. Do any of the Values need redefining, clarifying, developing, revising?
>(Do the value statements reflect the full community that SEDA represents?
>Are the values, for example, over-focused on the academic teacher? Should
>the values have a stronger student perspective, eg. better reflecting the
>student experience and students as developers in student
>engagement/partnership work? Do any of the values lack clarity?)
>
>4. Are any of the values problematic in the context of their underpinning
>of professional practice?
>(eg. for those undertaking SEDA PDF programmes or applying for SEDA
>Fellowship)?
> *****************************************************************
>
>Current SEDA Values
>
>
>        .               An understanding of how people learn
>        .             Scholarship, professionalism and ethical practice
>        .             Working in and developing learning communities
>        .             Working effectively with diversity and promoting
>inclusivity
>        .             Continuing reflection on professional practice
>        .             Developing people and processes
>
> *****************************************************************
>
>References
>
>In framing these consultation questions we drew on the following:
>
>A.  An international perspective.
>Feedback on the SEDA Values presented to the SEDA Executive Committee by
>Alan Wright, Vice-Provost, Teaching and Learning, University of Windsor,
>Ontario, Canada
>
>B. A student perspective.
>An opinion piece by Debbie McVitty, National Union of Students, 'How
>relevant are SEDA's Values to students?'  Educational Developments, 14.3,
>September 2013, pp18-19 (attached)
>
>C. An earlier critique of the SEDA values Critique  put forward by Tony
>Brand, 'SEDA Values- The Jewel in the Crown', Educational Developments,
>10.1, February 2009, pp 5-7
>http://www.seda.ac.uk/resources/files/publications_112_Educational%20Dev%2
>010.1%20final.pdf
>
>
>
> D. A theoretical consideration of values in an educational development
>context See Gosling, D. (2010). 'Value Commitments and Ambivalence in
>Educational Development', Chapter 8 in New Directions for Teaching and
>Learning, No 22, Summer 2010, Wiley Periodicals
>
>http://www.academia.edu/2233149/Value_commitments_and_ambivalence_in_educa
>tional_development
>
>
>We look forward to receiving your comments
>
>Best wishes
>
>Sue Thompson and Jo Peat
>on behalf of the SEDA Executive Committee
>-
>'In the top 5 in the Green League Table; committed to sustainability'
>This email is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have
>received it in error please notify the sender and delete it from your
>computer.
>The University of Gloucestershire is a company limited by guarantee
>registered in England and Wales.  Registered number: 06023243.
>Registered office: The Park, Cheltenham, GL50 2RH Please consider the
>environment before printing this email.
>-
>--
>
>World-leading research.  The government rated 8 areas of our research
>activity as world-leading in the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) 2008,
>they were:   Allied Health Professions & Studies; Art & Design; English
>Language & Literature; Geography & Environmental Studies; History; Music;
>Psychology and Social Work & Social Policy & Administration.
>
>This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named
>recipient(s)only and may be privileged. If they have come to you in
>error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show
>them to anyone please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error and
>then immediately delete the e-mail from your system. Any opinions
>expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
>represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin University.
>Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and
>attachments are
>free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with good computing
>practice, the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free.
>Please note that this message has been sent over public networks which
>may not be a 100% secure communications