To act or not to act? That is the question!

The year was 2003. I was a new Research Manager working in a Māori tertiary institution that had a history of inequitable treatment by government, through not receiving establishment funding that had gone unproblematically to non-Māori institutions. Repeating a common pattern in New Zealand, our government had decided to implement a research funding scheme, to be measured at the level of the individual academic. My institution’s decision to participate in the PBRF was not without its difficulties, and it is here that the ethics of participation become problematic. This chapter is about our ability to articulate our values, to show how we work these out in our practice, and how we are accountable to ourselves and others for that practice. Would I, with the benefit of hindsight, have encouraged my institution to enter the PBRF again

Breaking down barriers in building teacher competence

Teachers may well be made, not born, and appointments to academic positions are often made without regard to the appointee’s prior experience or competence in teaching. In most New Zealand universities, compulsory teaching development is not required. Furthermore, enrolment in opportunities to help teachers to develop further, frequently do not attract high numbers. How can those of us who work in staff development work effectively with resistant staff? How can we ensure that what we offer has optimal value in diverse areas? This paper reflects on an action research process currently under way in a New Zealand university, which seeks to investigate the usefulness of current and new staff development initiatives and to maximise benefits to staff. The work was presented at the recent ALARA conference and reflections from this presentation are interspersed with accounts of the work. I have used italics to highlight the ‘process’ parts of the work as it was presented at ALARA

Viruses without vaccines, or valuing indigenous research? The tensions of introducing Western research assessment practices into an indigenous university

Over my past twenty-five years of educational practice, I have striven to develop a better understanding of indigenous ways of being and doing (in New Zealand’s case, this involves the values and knowledge of Māori). I have done this by visiting and occasionally staying on marae (Māori gathering-places); by reading relevant literature; by engaging in conversations with knowledgeable scholars and by researching the impact of Western practices on indigenous peoples. In 2003 I managed a research team for Te Wānanga o Aotearoa, a Māori tertiary institution with branches across the country. Our Tertiary Education Commission had just introduced a variation of the English RAE, called the Performance-Based Research Fund, through which government research funds would henceforth be distributed. In collaboration with Māori colleagues, we chose to enter this process, believing that Māori research would be recognised and funded by our participation. While this proved to be the case, there were significant examples of values clashes, such as the requirement for people to ‘boast’ of their research achievements in a context where such boasting is anathema; to claim ownership of knowledge where tradition often indicates that knowledge is not the property of individuals; and worst, at one point I found myself accused by my Māori manager of introducing ‘viruses without vaccines’. By this he meant Westernised ideas and practices which appeared to be benevolent but in fact were toxic (the idea derives from white settlers who apparently gave native Americans blankets permeated with a virus, causing thousands to die). In this paper I will explore tensions of operating cross-culturally, and whether/how we can protect people from unintended toxic consequences of intended benevolent actions

Can the goldfish see the water? A critical analysis of ‘good intentions’ in cross-cultural practice

We claim to hold values that our students are responsible and autonomous adults whose success in our courses is best facilitated by our understanding of and respect for their specific backgrounds. We wish to be judged on these values by feedback provided by our students and those with whom we work. However, how well, if ever, are we able to ‘see the water,’ the cultural conditioning that leads us to act in ways that seem supportive of our students to us, but may be perceived differently by them? In this paper, we present conflicting evidence around perceptions of our practice. We discuss where things have gone well, and where interventions have possibly been traumatic for the recipients. We question whether, and how, our practice cross-culturally can be safe. We challenge ourselves and others to think carefully about our responsibilities to our students, whether our privileged positioning obliges us to share and if so, how that sharing can occur in ways that validate and equally respect the values of those with whom we work

Researching our own practice

In this chapter, we argue that using research to inform our teaching is a vital element in the reflection process and empowers us to keep developing our teaching in ways that can be transformative for ourselves and our learners

Action for improvement in our own contexts

Discusses: The pedagogy of Paulo Freire – importance of emancipatory, not ‘banking’, education. Who needs emancipatory education in NZ, and why? Consideration of issues affecting Māori success in the New Zealand education system

Enhancing postgraduate supervision through a process of conversational inquiry

This paper outlines and begins to evaluate a process to build a critical and reflective community of postgraduate supervisors who can develop their supervision practice through reflective conversations, with the sharing of best practice and reference to research-based evidence. In 2009, the initiative of the Postgraduate Supervisors’ Conversations was set up through the collaboration of the Pro-Vice Chancellor (Postgraduate) and the Teaching Development Unit at the University of Waikato, New Zealand. We designed this initiative to complement the compulsory workshops for postgraduate supervisors that are intended to provide foundation skills. We aimed to create a professional development opportunity that could enhance supervisors’ capacity to manage the ongoing interpersonal and academic complexity of the supervision process as well as its dynamic character. This paper outlines the rationale for the Postgraduate Supervisors’ Conversations, describes its implementation and discusses the implications of an initial evaluative focus group discussion with attendees

Advocates for teaching: Reconceptualising the practice of teaching development in a university

Teaching development units have been provided at most Australasian and British universities over the last thirty years. Typically, units have provided workshops, courses and individual consultations in a variety of formats. These units have always attracted enthusiasts, but have often struggled to bring about a fundamental shift in organisational thinking about teaching. At the same time, external pressures such as Performance Based Research Funding (PBRF) draw academics away from teaching concerns and create additional challenges for staff developers

Developing a research culture in a polytechnic: An action research case study

This study is about the process of research culture development within a New Zealand polytechnic in the period 1992 - 1999. Prior to 1990, polytechnics tended to focus on vocational and technical, rather than academically-oriented, education. But with the passing of the 1990 Education Amendment Act they were offered the possibility of granting degrees. This required the rapid acquisition of research skills, which had previously not been strongly evident in staff, who tended to pride themselves on quality teaching. Working as a staff developer within the institution, I chose to use the action research approach as a compatible way for staff who had previously not carried out research, to learn the skills that the new environment demanded. The central question of my study is, “How effective is action research as a way of helping to develop a tertiary research culture?” While action research has previously been used extensively to improve teaching practice in educational institutions, it has not been used specifically to facilitate the development of research skills as a way of helping to develop a research culture. The study describes how I was able to introduce this method by teaching a certificated course, working within the quality assurance processes of the polytechnic, and constrained by its requirements to scrutinise the work of action researchers. I used interviews with the 1993 – 1995 graduates to contribute to this study. Michel Foucault’s tools, including his concepts of the panoptic gaze and of the linking of power and knowledge, have assisted me with my analysis of how the institution functions and shown me how I can operate as a ‘specific intellectual’ in an appropriate way. I have used interviews with a range of staff, and scrutiny of historical archives, to determine the appropriateness of my project. To carry out research in an institution where this has not been the norm is a challenging task. Basil Bernstein’s schema, showing how curricula, assessment methods and teaching practices combine to build up and shape departmental identities, was helpful to me in recognising the marginalisation that new researchers in an institution such as ours can face. The study has, overall, shown that action research – based on the reflective practice that is common in New Zealand polytechnic teaching – is a sound and familiar way of developing the research skills that many polytechnic educators now need to acquire

Portfolio pointers: Preparing and presenting high quality teaching portfolios

This goal of this project was to develop a set of guidelines for creating teaching portfolios for the Tertiary Teaching Excellence Awards or for other purposes. It includes key pointers to “getting started”, collecting evidence, interrogating practice, editing, and protecting the unique “voice” of the nominee and their student body. The guidelines consist of general principles and practical examples from both successful academic developers and award recipients and some examples from award-winning portfolios to illustrate good practice