Large-scale innovation and change in UK higher education

Brown, Stephen C.

doi:10.3402/rlt.v21i0.22316

Cited by 19 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It should be noted here that the latter (Livingstone, 2015) relied solely on an online survey and included personal criticism of the institution with value-laden language. A further case study (Brown, 2013) makes no explicit reference to the methodology used and it was not possible to determine this from a detailed reading of the article.…”

Section: Empirical Studies 2013-2017mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cluster 3 studies took a holistic multi-stakeholder approach at project-level (Brown, 2013;Garrison & Vaughan, 2013;Stoddart, 2015), faculty or department level (King & Boyatt, 2015;Trevitt, Steed, Du Moulin, & Foley, 2017) or institution-wide, with one focussing on a single institution (Roushan, Holley, & Biggins, 2016) and four taking a multiple-institution approach (Cifuentes & Vanderlinde, 2015;Domingo-Coscollola, Arrazola-Carballo, & Sancho-Gil, 2016;Ng'ambi & Bozalek, 2013;Singh & Hardaker, 2017).…”

Section: Empirical Studies 2013-2017mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dawn or dusk of the 5th age of research in educational technology? A literature review on (e-)leadership for technology-enhanced learning in higher education (2013-2017)

Arnold

Sangrà

2018

Int J Educ Technol High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this article is to establish the extent to which the concept of e-leadership has taken off as a lens through which to study leadership for technology-enhanced learning (TEL) in higher education. Building on a previous study conducted in 2013, this article thus covers an exploratory review of the literature for the period 2103-2017. It analyses 49 articles which explore both the specific concept of e-leadership as well as other work dealing more generally with leadership and organisational change for TEL in higher education. The findings show that while none of the empirical studies identified in the literature refer explicitly to e-leadership, there are a number of interesting insights to be found in the theoretical articles. The results also highlight the widely different interpretations and applications of the concept of e-leadership and the consequent need for the definition to be refined. The paper concludes with recommendations for further multidisciplinary research at the intersection of the fields of educational technology and educational management, focusing on values, strategy, organisation and leadership interactions at meso level, the economy and public policy at macro level, and teaching and learning at the micro level, as well as for research in Leadership Development for TEL.

show abstract

Section: Empirical Studies 2013-2017mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Empirical Studies 2013-2017mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dawn or dusk of the 5th age of research in educational technology? A literature review on (e-)leadership for technology-enhanced learning in higher education (2013-2017)

Arnold

Sangrà

2018

Int J Educ Technol High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Brown (2013) identifies this approach of cross-team working at the middle management level as being more successful than either top-down or bottom-up approaches in instigating institutional change in technology practice. The staged approach to the policy approval over several months meant that it was considered several times at the committee level and allowed a secure basis for support.…”

Section: Research In Learning Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing the digital literacies of academic staff: an institutional approach

Newland

Handley

2016

Research in Learning Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Institutional engagement with digital literacies at the University of Brighton has been promoted through the creation of a Digital Literacies Framework (DLF) aimed at academic staff. The DLF consists of 38 literacies divided into four categories that align to the following key areas of academic work: Learning and teaching Research Communication and collaboration AdministrationFor each literacy, there is an explanation of what the literacy is, why it is important and how to gain it, with links to resources and training opportunities. After an initial pilot, the DLF website was launched in the summer of 2014. This paper discusses the strategic context and policy development of the DLF, its initial conception and subsequent development based on a pilot phase, feedback and evaluation. It critically analyses two of the ways that engagement with the DLF have been promoted: (1) formal professional development schemes and (2) the use of a 'School-based' approach. It examines the successes and challenges of the University of Brighton's scheme and makes some suggestions for subsequent steps including taking a course-level approach.

show abstract

“…It is, therefore, worthwhile to considering briefly how change is accounted for in the higher education sector, and what conceptual perspectives inform change agendas as well as professional development strategies. In a review of models of change management, Brown (2013) identified three approaches to large-scale change in universities: (i) 'top-down' or management driven approaches that are based on predictive outcomes, but may encounter resistance from staff who do not share the vision of change, (ii) 'bottom-up', participatory approaches led by innovative adopters (Rogers, 2003), where there is the risk that adoption is limited, and (iii) distributive leadership approaches, in which change agendas are distributed and managed by participant stakeholders. Brown makes the case for the effectiveness of the distributive leadership approach in large-scale university change projects, despite less predictable outcomes.…”

Section: Accounting For Teaching and Learning Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Change and obduracy in university teaching practices: tracing agency in professional development

Hannon¹

2016

CriSTaL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research into effectiveness of teaching practices and professional development invites questions of teaching and learning change: how it takes effect and is accounted for, and where its agency is claimed and contested across a range of institutional, disciplinary and pedagogical actors. This article investigates change in teaching practices and professional development through the notion of obduracy (Law, 2003): ordered arrangements that persist in the background and surface in a process of change. In focussing on practice as the object of inquiry, this study is part of a shift away from the study of professional learning drawing on individualist, cognitive traditions towards practice-oriented understandings of change and agency as an effect of social and material arrangements. The setting for this study of teaching practice is two disciplinary academic collectives, or workgroups, in one Australian university. Rather than approaching change as a human-centred and intentional process, the method of sociomaterial tracing was applied to teaching practice undergoing an institutional change process. The study highlights the process in which change is assembled, resisted or accomplished through heterogeneous networks of curriculum, discourses, technologies, and policies. Teaching and learning change, it is argued, involves recognising how obduracy is embedded in distinct networks across the university. The contribution of this study is to draw attention to the agentic role of materials and spaces in the negotiation and stabilisation of teaching practices and in approaches to professional development.

show abstract

Large-scale innovation and change in UK higher education

Cited by 19 publications

References 18 publications

Dawn or dusk of the 5th age of research in educational technology? A literature review on (e-)leadership for technology-enhanced learning in higher education (2013-2017)

Dawn or dusk of the 5th age of research in educational technology? A literature review on (e-)leadership for technology-enhanced learning in higher education (2013-2017)

Developing the digital literacies of academic staff: an institutional approach

Change and obduracy in university teaching practices: tracing agency in professional development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About