Encouraging Continuing Professional Development

These are some of my thoughts on the above subject, to generate discussion.
Eddie Ming, Editor/Educational Developer, Deliberations
3 May, 1999

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) can be informal (reading, discussions with colleagues and so on) or formal (attending conferences, workshops and formal programmes leading to an award, research, writing articles and other forms of scholarship). Many HE institutions in the UK and elsewhere provide internal CPD workshops on learning and teaching in addition to a programme of initial teacher training. The CPD workshops are usually voluntary in nature and attendance can be disappointingly low. In fact, it has not been unknown for the occasional workshop to be cancelled because of poor response! It may be that staff are too busy with their regular tasks to attend to, do not see attendance as a priority or simply are not interested. Experience tends to suggest attendances at CPD workshops are often sketchy, unplanned or non-existent in many cases.

It would be nice to think that teaching staff simply take responsibility for their own more formal CPD insofar as their teaching skills are concerned, but this does not appear to be generally true. What then can be done to encourage staff to take greater responsibility for continuing to develop their teaching skills and expertise? One of the major proposals of the Institute for Learning and Teaching (ILT) is that a member must have a clear and explicit programme of continuing professional development, and that this must be written up in a teaching portfolio which will be subject to review after three years. But will that be enough to encourage CPD in teaching? An article by Alsion Utley (A club no one wants to join) in the 9 May, 1999 issue of the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) seems to indicate that there may not be many teaching staff interested in joining the ILT. Is there a need for some kind of compulsion? Or are there some other alternatives?

In an editorial in the same issue of the THES, ILT proposals do not address the real concerns, it was suggested that one of the things needed in UK higher education is a "professional body with the power to strike off those who are seriously deficient". The implication of this is that membership of the body (perhaps the ILT) will be compulsory and that this body would have similar powers of dismissal to those enjoyed by bodies such as the Medical Council if the member is found to be seriously deficient (presumably in teaching!). Is there a system anywhere in the world in which a teacher, at any level, can be "struck off" and not be allowed to practise his/her profession because of 'serious deficiency' in teaching skill and expertise? Would you support such a move?

Many would hesitate to introduce compulsion of this kind. So, what are some of the alternatives to encouraging CPD? Some would argue that the annual appraisal process and promotion is dependent on evidence of CPD. Performance-related pay has possible links to CDP. This has already been suggested at the school level in the UK - will it eventually come to higher education? Many institutions now have some kind of "teaching excellence" award, which certainly can go some way in encouraging CPD (especially if the award is in the form of cash!! - but this in itself has its own set of problems).

Prime responsibility for one's CPD clearly rests with the teacher him/herself. But this is often not enough. CPD must be institutionalised in some way. The question is, how?

These are just some of my initial thoughts to get the discussion going. What are your views?

Summary of Readers' Comments

Search deliberations-forum archive - May/June 1999 - for the text of readers' comments.

There is clearly a need for some form of positive encouragement for CPD by insitutions, with somewhat less 'stick' and more 'carrot'. University of Coventry has an excellent scheme involving a Teaching and Learning Task Force which supports staff with time off to undertake teaching and learning development for up to three years. De Montfort University is also introducing a Teaching Fellowship scheme.

Other possible suggested schemes are:

• Readership in teaching and learning within academic departments.
• Teaching Excellence awards.
• Salary increments for some forms of CPD.

But whatever scheme is used it must be designed in such a way that it leads to a change in attitude and organisational culture (see Rob Walker's comments in the deliberations-forum archive).