IIn an age of supercomplexity, Barnett (2000) argues, we need new forms of learning that enable students to live in a fragile, unknowable and uncertain world, which makes teaching particularly demanding. Nevertheless, university teachers invest most of their ingenuity in disciplinary research or the “scholarship of discovery” (Boyer, 1990), not teaching. Teaching is often reduced to imparting knowledge to students, not supporting them in the production of knowledge, and pedagogy often becomes a rather inert, disempowering activity for both teachers and students, with no relevant personal, professional and social consequences. Bearing in mind that there is no single definition for quality teaching in higher education (Harvey & Knight, 1996; Knight, 2002), we address issues of teacher and learner empowerment through “pedagogies of engagement” (Barnett & Coate, 2005) on the basis of our experience as university teacher-researchers within a larger multidisciplinary project – TPU: Transforming Pedagogy at University: reflection, (inter)action, and reconstruction (2007-2009). Its main goal has been to enhance the development of the scholarship of pedagogy (SoP) in different subject areas. SoP is here understood as the integration of teaching, research and professional development, mainly through teacher-led inquiry into teaching and learning processes, peer collaboration, and the dissemination of practices. Our work rests on the belief that improving the education of students depends on improving our own education as teachers. Therefore, we need a broad understanding of teacher education that includes higher education teachers more clearly than is usually assumed. Only then can we start to reframe our views of academic identity and professionalism. Making teaching “community property” and thus open to public scrutiny (Shulman, 2004) requires the development of new forms of inquiry and the creation of new forums for pedagogical reflection, as well as a renewed understanding of the relationship between teaching, research and the professional development of teachers. It also demands greater collaboration between academics within and among disciplinary fields (Kreber, 2009), thus counteracting pedagogical solitude and the territorialisation of education-oriented research. Our research questions are: Can SoP promote teacher and learner empowerment? What is the feasibility and value of SoP in institutional settings where pedagogy is not a priority of the professoriate? Bearing these questions in mind, we will highlight major aspects of SoP with reference to our experience as teacher-researchers and the views of colleagues in the TPU project. We will also reflect on how current policies deriving from the Bologna Process might enhance SoP.

SoP involves interpretative pedagogical inquiry as a form of self-study research in the fields we teach. Our approach to inquiry is akin to action research and involves the use data-collection strategies that articulate teaching and research purposes, with a particular focus on student records of learning (portfolios, journals, magazines, and other reflective/ evaluative records). The focus of inquiry is the empowering potential of pedagogy as regards subject-matter learning, the development of students’ autonomy, and teachers’ professional growth. Teaching strategies are evaluated on the basis of student data and analysed with reference to a set of pedagogical principles with transformative power: relevance, democraticity, reflectivity, self-direction, and creativity/ innovation (Vieira et al, 2002; Vieira, 2002). Constraints to and gains from SoP are identified through a questionnaire to the teachers participating in the TPU project, and discussed within the framework of current European policies for pedagogy in higher education.

Our main conclusions are as follows: (1) learner-centred pedagogies enhance student empowerment as regards critical subject-matter learning and competences for autonomy; (2) SoP enhances teacher empowerment as regards ability to innovate/ evaluate innovation, pedagogical research skills, peer collaboration and interdisciplinary dialogue; (3) constraints to SoP relate mostly to prevailing values in the academy: individualism, territorialism, discipline-based research, and research-based merit. Although SoP can be developed in tune with current European policies for higher education, it further implies structural and cultural changes that counteract mainstream values in a profound way. More attention needs to be paid to how the Bologna Process might enable conditions for pedagogical inquiry: lower teacher/student ratios, inquiry-based staff development, context-sensitive quality assessments, higher value of teaching in career promotions, (multi)disciplinary communities of practice, and funding policies for pedagogical research.