Situating academic development in professional work: using peer learning

Academic development should be conceptualised not only as a university-wide process, but also as a local practice and as a process of peer learning in the workplace. The paper suggests that formal approaches need to more fully situate academic development in sites of academic practice. Two examples from the author’s own setting—teaching development projects and writing for publication groups—illustrate the argument. Challenges arising from such a shift in perspective are discussed. Most academic development takes place in locations where academics spend most of their time: departments, professional settings and research sites. It takes the form of exchanges with colleagues, interacting with students, working on problems, writing and associated activities. It is informal and not normally viewed as development. Nonetheless, it often has a more profound influence on staff than activities explicitly labelled as such. This paper argues that formalised approaches to academic development are also usefully conceptualised as being located primarily in sites of academic practice: the department, the laboratory or library, in supervisory relationships and in professional networks. The rationale for this is that it is in these sites that academic identity is formed and is most powerfully influenced. Organised development activities may productively occur elsewhere, but when they do, they must take careful account of these other influences, especially the influence of learning among peers. An illustration of what happens when this is not taken into account is given by Martin and Ramsden (1994) in their follow up of teaching and learning courses, the good effects of which were contradicted when staff return to their departments. The paper explores some of the implications of such a shift of thinking about academic development and illustrates ways in which it can be positioned to utilise reciprocal peer learning—learning with and from each other—which builds on a collegial view of academic work. There are also substantial implications for the role of heads and chairs, but full discussion of this falls outside the present paper. The paper examines differences of perception about the value of academic development which arise from different locations within an organisation and the opportunities and constraints which are created when one is working with peers in one’s own professional area or discipline. Examples are drawn from the practice of the author in the use of peer learning in development activities in his own Faculty. These are (a) the use of teaching development projects to provide a forum for discussing teaching and (b) programs on writing for publication. In previous papers it has been argued that there are competing conceptions of academic development (Boud 1995) and that new frameworks for preparation and development are needed to match the changing circumstances of academia (Brew and Boud 1996). In the latter, new approaches, which emphasise negotiation, flexibility and the importance of grounding development in the workplace were explored to promote a holistic view which acknowledges the staff member in context. The present paper extends earlier discussion to consider a view of academic development focusing on the centrality of workplace learning: in the department or faculty that forms the context for most academic work. Phases of academic development Before discussing the role of localised approaches, it is useful to set discussion in the wider context of changes which have occurred in thinking about academic development.