As an Educational Developer I have been fascinated by this discussion involving colleagues working in the related area of learning development. I would, however, have expected to hear more about how the remit of colleagues has changed in recent years with a shift from responsibility for skills development towards enhancing the learner's capacity to be academically literate in a broader sense. It appears to me that in some quarters there is a challenging shift towards Learning Development taking more of a lead in developing graduate attributes, especially within the context of graduate employability. Does developing digital literacy, for example, change the focus of LDs? And, if so, does the size of this challenge and others like it, change the nature of the work i(n that it affects all students)?
Setting these questions to one side for the moment, is the word 'literacies' one that may be helpful in describing roles in this area?
I am aware that academic literacies has been discussed theoretically, but I am not sure to what extent this has affected practice in LD. Apologies if this is not relevant to this discussion.
Andrew Middleton
Academic Innovation
Sheffield Hallam University
On 9 Feb 2011, at 13:26, "Nick Bowskill" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Kim,
> I certainly think 'advice' is clear and direct. It may however suggest
> 'we know stuff and you don't' - a bit unwelcoming in some senses. It's
> about the learner listening and at the same time its stern and
> reductive to some people's ears. Developer is ok and also clear enough
> for the purpose. However I wouldn't like someone to develop me. In
> fact I'd resist it with a sense of being dragged off to be 'improved.'
>
> If not 'orchestration' (of participation and learning in multiple
> settings and the co-construction of meaning etc etc) then maybe you
> are a 'cognitive-curator' ? You care for, preserve and manage 'a way
> of thinking' in our institutions. That could also sound a bit dusty to
> some. It may risk the 'us and them' message again. It's a different
> take on the role though. Maybe it will help you decide either way. I
> don't know. Developer has the advantage of having been around for a
> long time enough so that even if we don't like it, we understand it.
> That's a lot more than you can say for most new names we keep giving
> old things. Otherwise de-familiarisation has some value.
>
> Years ago as a child I used to help my grandmother do competitions.
> The winner was decided by the best slogan. We used to get afternoon
> tea organised with cakes, buns, and buttered toast in the lounge. We'd
> have a big pot of tea and this pile of competition leaflets. We'd then
> spend the whole afternoon working up the best words in the best order
> we knew how. I feel this activity has a lot of resonance with those
> days 40+ years ago.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Nick
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Nicholas Bowskill,
> School of Education,
> University of Glasgow
>
> Shared Thinking - Reflective Practice at the Collective Level
>
> http://www.sharedthinking.info
>
> Shared Thinking -
>
>
>
> Hi Kim,
> You may know their views already, but if not, would you benefit from
> having the collective-perspective on your role from either those in
> HR, your department, or those to whom you provide your service? The
> situated views of those around you would help you relate your own
> thinking to those with whom you are most directly involved. Otherwise
> we are all effectively filling in these forms from within our own
> lifeworld. Hence you return to the same views and language.
>
> Your situation relates very nicely to the wider issue of whether
> people should reflect/self-evaluate on their own. If they reflect
> together, a shared view may then inform *everyone's* individual
> thinking. Hence, the concept of 'individualised-learning' is really a
> dangerous and misleading term in the way it suggests, for some, a
> notion of autonomous isolated action. Ironically, I would argue that
> individuals have greater autonomy and are better at self-management in
> social contexts which they better understand (it's relational and
> social not disconnected individuals). Isn't it just the same for all
> of us who are filling in those dreadful forms?
>
> Good luck with the process how ever you go at it.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Nick
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Nicholas Bowskill,
> School of Education,
> University of Glasgow
>
> Shared Thinking - Reflective Practice at the Collective Level
>
> http://www.sharedthinking.info
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9 February 2011 10:28, Kim Shahabudin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> After much debate over the most appropriate and effective term, we have been calling ourselves Study Advisers and our service Study Advice for the last four years. Even so we often find ourselves referred to as "the Study Support service" or "Study Skills advisers" in the university, even in official contexts such as recruitment documents.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is definitely an area where the role of language as a tool of power becomes explicit. I was re-reading the comments on the TLS article about the closure of the LDU at London Met recently, and noted adverse comments (and well-judged responses) on the capitalization of Learning Development there. I don't want to exclude people by insisting on a non-standard use of language that can only be properly understood through the kind of lengthy (tough interesting) debate that is emerging here, but I do think that the word 'development' captures something unique about our work - and as such is, as other respondents have said, worth fighting for.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, I'm currently undergoing the torture of completing yet another HERA job evaluation questionnaire and am very conscious that terms like learning development and resources are unlikely to be clearly understood by the HR person who reads it, so using them could decrease my chances of a fair evaluation... 'support' has already crept back in, and though I've managed to avoid 'skills' so far, it's only a matter of time...
>>
>>
>>
>> Kim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> Dr Kim Shahabudin, FHEA, Study Adviser, Study Advice & Maths Support
>> 1st floor Carrington Building, Whiteknights, University of Reading, RG6 6UA
>> • 0118 378 4236/4218 • www.reading.ac.uk/studyadvice<http://www.reading.ac.uk/studyadvice>
>> Winner of Student Nominated Award for Outstanding Contribution to Teaching and Learning, 2010
>> ________________________________
>> From: learning development in higher education network [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Ann Barlow [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: 09 February 2011 09:58
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Learning Development Language
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I’m enjoying this discussion very much, so thank you all for providing so much food for thought, and thanks Marcia, for keeping the debate alive.
>>
>> I wonder whether there’s a distinction between what we do, which can be reflected in the title of the role, and what we are, in the sense of being members of a professional group or community of practice.
>>
>> I can think of several posts which I’ve been in where the best title would have been simply Study Adviser. It’s not what I do now but I still associate myself with a community of practice engaged with exploring/supporting/developing/orchestrating university learning in a non-discipline-specific way.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ann
>>
>> Ann Barlow
>> Head of Researcher Development Team,
>> Humanities Faculty,
>> Devonshire House,
>> The University of Manchester
>> Tel: 0161 275 0298
>>
>> From: learning development in higher education network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Hilsdon
>> Sent: 08 February 2011 16:58
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Learning Development Language
>>
>> Dear all
>>
>> My view is that the phrase learning development is hugely valuable and well worth fighting for. It has gained currency over the last decade and is becoming more widely used and understood – even outside of our own community of practice. ‘Learning development’ fulfils a number of important functions: it signals that we are talking about a developmental process and not some disembodied/abstract ‘skills’; and it includes both ourselves, our colleagues and our students. As such, I would much prefer to be called a learning developer than any of the available alternatives.
>>
>> I am wary of terms like ‘effective learning advisor’. Who is being effective and for whom? Of course one wants to be effective and wants one’s students to learn effectively - but there is a whiff of performativity about embedding the word ‘effective’ into our job titles, or using it as a way of referring to our work.
>>
>> I have further thoughts on this but will finish for now (it’s been a long day). Forgive the plug but we developed this theme in our book: ‘Learning Development in Higher Education’ (Hartley et al, 2010) …
>>
>> All the best for now
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> From: learning development in higher education network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marcia Ody
>> Sent: 08 February 2011 15:44
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Learning Development Language
>>
>> Hi Isabelle,
>>
>> Thanks for your reply and the useful links. I am a little cautious of the use of Enhancing Learning as there are so many different components that enhance the student learning experience and one needs to be careful not to label all activity under the ‘Enhancement’ or the ‘Student Engagement/Experience’ banner.
>>
>> I do however really like the use of ‘Effective’ and I think Adviser works much better than Support, it is much more positive and proactive rather than the reactive services we provided well over a decade a go.
>>
>> So…could Learning Developers become more commonly known as Effective Learning Advisers?
>>
>> Best Wishes,
>> Marcia
>>
>> From: Pottinger, Isabelle B [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: 08 February 2011 15:16
>> To: Marcia Ody; [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: RE: Learning Development Language
>>
>> Hello Marcia and others reading this,
>>
>> In Scotland a number of us refer to ourselves as ‘Effective Learning Advisers’. We describe our role as ‘Enhancing Learning’.
>>
>> In recent years QAA Scotland has overseen a programme of Enhancement Themes, designed to support institutions in Scotland in a process of continuous improvement. Recent themes include assessment, responding to student needs, flexible delivery and employability. The most recent Theme to come on stream is ‘Graduates for the 21st Century: Integrating the Enhancement Themes’. It is proposed that this new Theme will pursue an integrating approach that will consider aspects of all the previous Themes within the context of the overarching question: What attributes, skills and competencies will graduates need in the twenty first century and how can the achievement of these attributes best be supported?
>>
>> http://www.qaa.ac.uk/scotland/qualityframework/enhancementthemes.asp and
>>
>> http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/
>>
>> Certainly in Scotland, expressions such as ‘remedial help’ and ‘learning deficit’ have been swept away from our language. In Heriot-Watt University, the label of ‘Enhancing Learning’ makes it easy for lecturers to refer students on to me and makes it attractive for students to accept that help. I, of course, am doing much the same job that I’ve always done – however it’s labelled.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Isabelle
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Isabelle Pottinger
>> Effective Learning Adviser/ Academic Counsellor
>> Library
>> Heriot-Watt University
>> Edinburgh
>>
>> +44 (0)131 451 3062
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Effective Learning Service: http://www.hw.ac.uk/library/effective-learning-service.html
>>
>> Library Workshops: http://www.hw.ac.uk/library/workshops.html
>>
>> LearnHigher: http://www.learnhigher.ac.uk/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: learning development in higher education network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marcia Ody
>> Sent: 08 February 2011 13:19
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Learning Development Language
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I had a very interesting discussion with a colleague today about language to describe the services of ‘Learning Development’ Units/service providers/individuals.
>>
>> It is interesting how our language has changed over time – we talk less about skills and more about developing learning strategies and professional competencies….we rarely refer to support but instead development…remedial is a thing of the past…
>>
>> So, if we were wanting a phrase that encompassed ‘skills’ both support and development, group and individual, supporting independent learning and professional competencies…what should we be using?? Does Learning Development still work? What are students perception of ‘Learning Development’? What will this service be called in the future?
>>
>> Thoughts……?
>>
>> Best Wishes,
>> Marcia
>>
>> ________________________________
>> Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under charity number SC000278.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------
> Nicholas Bowskill,
> Faculty of Education,
> University of Glasgow
>
> Shared Thinking - Reflective Practice at the Collective Level
>
> Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info
|
