Notes from the Round Table on Rethinking Teaching and Learning

within Professional Higher Education

Brussels, October 12, 2017

Round Table on Rethinking Teaching and Learning within Professional Higher Education

Proceedings of the meeting on 12 October 2017

Content

Briefing note

Proceedings

Next steps

Pre-event briefing note

The society has progressed in the last decade by an immense speed, technological developments are changing the way we think, work and communicate, but has the education sector followed these trends to ensure learners are thought to the level society expects from them?

Four challenges in particular demand that our institutions develop further their capacity to led the way into a new higher education future:

  • New target groups: With academic education become the standard model for the larger part of a cohort, higher education institutions need to rethink their approach
  • Digitalisation: Digital educational media enable institutions to provide teaching and learning in a new, different and more personalised way, higher education institutors need to develop their capacity to understand potential of modern ways of innovative delivery and organisation forms of education.
  • Professions: More and more society is moving in a direction that the definition of professions is blurring in favour of flexible and fast developing job profiles. Thus, the standard orientation of academic programs which are largely based on existing definitions of professions needs to be made more flexible. Not a standard body of knowledge for a lifetime employment is demanded for but rather qualification and competence development for lifetime employability is demanded.
  • Lifelong learning: Qualification and competence need to be updated in a steady faster moving cycle. Higher education institutions need to be responsive to these demands and open up their institutions profiles, so that they offer academic education, reskilling and training throughout the lifetime.

Teaching and learning methods are currently in the spotlight on the European, national and institutional levels. Digitalisation agenda has brought us to continuous improvements of online learning provision, while STEM disciplines struggle to attract students, causing a big labour market gap between low number of students and high market demand. Arts follow this trend joining the STEAM group.

European Commission’s renewed modernisation agenda of higher education expects to address many of these challenges, understanding that teaching and learning is a complex issue and its improvements require commitment from all the stakeholders.

Professional higher education naturally has a unique perspective when it comes to this subject, promoting the quality and innovation in teaching and learning not just in the classroom, but also at the work place. In its efforts to harmonise approaches to PHE in Europe, EURASHE has with several partners developed a set of characteristics showcasing the specificity of professional higher education. When it comes to teaching and learning, this has showed that PHE institutions stand out by their methods of curriculum development, learning outcomes, content of teaching and learning, learning methodology, learning environment and programme team.

In order to adequately address the issue of modernisation and innovation in teaching and learning, we first wish to understand how we integrate learning in the classroom with work based learning. Among questions to be discussed, we wish to know what is the future of education; will theory learning be moved from classrooms to online courses, while education institutions focus on skills development, balancing the role of teachers between passing on the knowledge and skills development? And what are the challenges in learning for different target groups coming to PHE?

In addition to that it is clear that also new ways of management and leadership have to be developed in order to involve more and other stakeholders into the discourse of moving institutions towards meeting the new challenges. Therefore, rethinking teaching and learning also means to rethink higher education leadership concepts.

Finally, while discussing the above issues, we should keep in mind links between teaching and research, and involvement of students in research, as well as the role of education in promoting civic values.

Join EURASHE’s roundtable on Teaching and Learning to discuss the above issues and analyse what are the strengths and weaknesses of PHE in the area of teaching and learning, and what are the next steps we will be doing to ensure institutional adaptability to the trends of societal development and timely response.

Round table proceedings

The participants of the round table were sent in advance a briefing note highlighting some of the challenges and developments in this area. Moreover, Prof. Ulf-Daniel Ehlers, provided a short input by a video sent from the ASEM Rectors’ Conference, in Singapore, on the Future Universities debating challenges for global quality education.

Teaching and Learning is getting more attention within European higher education policy-making nowadays reflecting its keyrole formeeting the new demands of diversified population of students, the world of work and society as a whole. Some of those new demands are related to the two following factors:

  • Demographic change.

Academic education will be more and more a life experience of an increasing number of students, increased participation rates will lead to an even more diversified student population and therefore a wide range of different expectations, as well as of varied profiles of preparation in terms of pre-knowledge, skills and life-context.

Higher education institutions will welcome students from various social background, with different motives and expectations and learning capacities, they will have to accommodate not only fresh secondary schools’ graduates, but also non-traditional students’ groupslike those coming with a professional experiencefrom employment, various prior learning experience, adults withtheir own family responsibilities, diverse groups of students from other cultures.

The success of those non-traditional students will depend on the ability and flexibility of higher education institutions to deal with this diversity.

  • Digitalisation.

Higher education institutionshave toconsider if their teaching/learning provisions offer an added value to students who can easily access knowledge and information in the internet and other resources.

Furthermore, students have nowadays at their fingerprints online courses from other academic institutions and other resources that they might want to bring into their studies. Schoolshave to think about how to build upon their experience so far and the strengths of on-campus education with open online resources, collaboration opportunities with other students and teachers, inquiry-based projects.

There is a need not only to move forward for the leadership, but to get other colleagues on board and design strategies to encourage our higher education institutions to rethink the way in whichteaching and learning takes place.

We need to continue discussing aspects of innovation in teaching and learning, and how can leaders in higher education act to transform their organisations to addressnew opportunities without leaving out the values and the experience that higher education institutions can bring to students and to the societies they serve.

A brief roundtable discussion based on the briefing note attempted to draft the first outline of aSWOT analysiswith focus on professional higher education (PHE), identify directions and topics for further development, ideas for potential projects, actions, events. This exercise aimed to identify the main internal and external factors deemed as important and grouped into two main categories whether they were internal or external factors.

Strengths

  • Practical aspect of learning.
  • Connection with the world of work.
  • Flexibility.
  • Appreciation of the activities of the Professional higher education sector.
  • Programmes based on the needs of the world of work. The employers need the academic input that only the PHE sector can bring, and the institutions listen to their needs and take decisions within their autonomy.
  • Clearerand determined use of Learning Outcomes approach.
  • PHE institutions are drivers of change as they prepare future graduates. Their innovation and research activities are reflected in the reactiveness of their graduates.
  • Pedagogic skills of the teaching staff of PHE.
  • Strong links with professional associations.

Weaknesses

  • Not too much attention paid to the quality assurance of work-based learning and assessment.
  • Work-based learning not always supports the learning aspect (many times too much focus on the work itself rather than on learning).
  • Lack of communications channels for community mission and contributions.
  • There is a need for stronger co-creation between learners and employers.
  • Low research background.
  • Diversity is not reflected in the focus of how we deliver inside the classroom.
  • Gender equality.
  • Not individualised approach to students and groups. (not SCL)
  • PHE loses the students at the bottom and at the top of the cohort.
  • Conservative approach of teaching staff to changes.

Opportunities

  • Need for better integration of teaching and research.
  • Digitalisation of teaching and learning and its limitations.
  • Possibility to contract professionals as teaching staff, e.g. on a part-time basis.
  • Collaboration with academic universities in delivering PhD education.
  • Need from employers on innovation and applied research.
  • Trends in higher education: learning analytics and alumni network.
  • Private companies investing in the training of their new and current employees.

Threats

  • The assessment systems could be too bureaucratic and slow in responding (it takes time to react).
  • Perception of PHE as another type of VET.
  • Research from PHE institutions is perceived as “second class”.
  • Male students fail more in their transition from secondary education, in particular VET, to higher education.
  • Demographics.
  • Lack of recognition. Moreover, students not enrolling might be afraid of lack of recognition.
  • Lack of implementation of the Bologna Process key commitments.
  • Competition in the HE sector and beyond (private providers).
  • Employers caring less about formal degrees.
  • Funding.

* Many statements were based on personal perceptions and they can vary quite substantially between countries.

The Austrian case of universities of applied sciences was shortly presented at the end of the roundtable. It is a relatively young sector (1994). 21 Universities of Applied Sciences have been established since then, reaching in total a similar number of institutions to academic universities, yet on a smaller scale with ca 15% of total higher education student population. There is a high level of organisation within the sector, like the rectors’ conference (which provide training to new staff). Almost all UAS are doing continuing education and LLL. The annual budget has grown more than in academic universities, however there is a conservative approach from the ministry. UAS are not weak in research, but they face difficulties in partnering in big projects (e.g. Horizon 2020) where they succeed only whenengaging researchers from outside. UAS collaborate with universities for offering PhD programmes.

Next steps

The roundtable discussion fed into defining themes and topics to work on the following years. Moreover, there will be a further series of exchange on the topic, into EURASHE policies on behalf of the complex area of professional higher education at various qualification levels of European Higher Education Area.

  • Webinar on teaching & learning on October 31 (note: postponed in the meantime due to capacity reasons)
  • A roundtable with external partners and stakeholders in the spring 2018
  • Relevant project submission(s)
  • EURASHE Policy paper for the Ministerial conference within the Bologna process in April 2018

Recorded by Georgios Triantafyllou, EURASHE

Reviewed by Michal Karpisek, EURASHE Secretary General

November 3, 2017