This question was raised in the context of a session on ‘Evaluation of Teaching’ on a postgraduate course on teaching and learning in higher education. The ‘students’ are all academics who have chosen to do this course. And this aspect is important because in a way they are a self-selecting sample of those who are interested in developing their practice as university teachers. So, it is of note that this question should arise in this context.
Another aspect of the context was the immediate focus of the afternoon – evaluation of teaching.
In a way this focus of attention could have produced a good deal of defensiveness, of complaints about unfair student commentary. Sure, there was some discussion of the difficulty of interpreting student feedback on teaching, of contradictory statements.
But what would provoke the above question?
Well, it arose in a broader discussion about the ethics and politics of institutional systems for collecting student feedback on teaching.
The question was asked whether it was ethical to collect such feedback if it was not going to be used improve teaching and learning at an organisational level. In other words – why bother, why should students or educators bother if academic managers do not use this information wisely?
Why, it was asked, were incompetent teachers allowed to continue?
It is important to remember that this question came from university teachers about university teachers. It did not come from a tabloid journalist or populist politician.
This led to a further question: in what sense are academics a ‘profession’ like others?
If we are not required to undertake regular professional development then in what sense can we claim to be professionals like clinical psychologists, or medical doctors, or nurses and midwives – all of whom are require to demonstrate engagement with continuous professional development (CPD)? Indeed, in Ireland over recent years, Pharmacists and Pharmacy Technicians have been required to undertake CPD in order to continue practicing. So, why not university teachers?
One defence could be that the gaining of a PhD is a suitable proxy for a license to teach. But is it? It might be a requisite qualification to join the ranks of academic researchers, but teaching? In many respects, as academics, our identities are formed around knowledge and acceptance by an epistemic community. But teaching? Is a PhD an adequate proxy for a license to teach?
I leave this as an open question because I don’t know. I say I don’t know because I am not necessarily trustful of university managers (who are also academics) to act wisely in the face of a possible call for this particular form of professional license.
However, governments and academic leaders turned higher education business leaders may lead the charge towards such licensing as a way of achieving other objectives, such as greater managerial control over academic labour. There is a growing trend in the UK of promotion for early career academics being requisite on completion of training in teaching and learning in higher education courses, membership of the Higher Education Academy, and possibly achievement of a Higher Education Academy teaching award. This was not planned. It has emerged.
So, the current situation is not stable. To paraphrase Marx, the only constant is change. The question is – who will determine the direction of that change?