In recent decades, several international guidelines have encouraged the reconfiguration of higher education (HE) teachers’ ways of being and acting, namely arguing for the rejection of a conception of a teacher who holds and transmits knowledge, with inevitable implications for pedagogical practices. These ideas are in line with the recommendations of the European Higher Education Area (Crosier & Parveva, 2013), as well as with the teaching-learning paradigm proposed in the Bologna framework; and continue to pose several organisational and pedagogical challenges to HE institutions (Ó et al., 2019).

Nevertheless, the access and progression within the academic profession is highly dependent on criteria linked to research activities and achievements, as teaching is generally less valued within the regulation mechanisms related to this profession (Kwiek, 2019; Nóvoa & Amante, 2015). Furthermore, comparative studies in Europe in the last two decades indicate a general trend towards splitting teaching and research, highlighting that almost all senior academics in universities in Europe are in charge of both, but amongst the junior ones there is a high percentage that is active in just one of these core functions (Teichler, 2017). This trend challenges the close link between teaching and research put forward by Von Humbolt as a characteristic of the modern university that has spread all over the world being considered a distinctive feature of the academic profession (Ó et al., 2019; Teichler, 2017).

Within this context, the argument that it would be important to include the need for teaching competence in job profiles, salary scales and promotion schemes in HE systems has been gaining relevance (Inamorato dos Santos et al., 2019). Furthermore, the development of strategies based on the dialogical relationship between research and teaching and the respective praxis (Cochran-Smith et al., 2020) has been pointed out as facilitating "powerful learning environments" (Entwistle & Peterson, 2004, p. 424). So, the high importance of pedagogical training is admitted to improve the thinking and practices of HE teachers and the quality of teaching (Kwiek, 2019; Nóvoa & Amante, 2015).

Nevertheless, it should be highlighted that pedagogical training is not required to start lecturing in HE in most European countries, as well as academics are not fully exposed to formal teaching training (Inamorato dos Santos et al., 2019). The importance of pedagogical training does not seem to be fully embedded within HE institutions’ initiatives and this does not benefit teachers’ professional development, particularly in Portugal (Almeida, 2020; Alves, 2020).

Within this context, the overall aim of the paper is to discuss a documental research that explores how certain Portuguese HE institutions create opportunities for teachers’ professional development. The focus is on institutional strategies and projects, even if we are well aware that professional development might  also rely on non-formal processes of learning to teach, anchored in elements such as lived/observed experiences (both as students and teachers) and peer cooperation amongst colleagues in a certain institution (Alves, 2020).

The institutional strategies and projects within Portuguese universities have already been analysed by other researchers (Xavier & Leite, 2019). Since the Portuguese HE system is a binary one, a lack of knowledge about the similar initiatives developed within polytechnics was noticed and became the focus of this empirical study.

The research questions guiding the research are the following: What guidelines and strategic proposals for teachers’ professional development are included in the strategic documents of the Portuguese polytechnics? What strategic orientations and proposals directed specifically to pedagogical training are set out in the strategic documents of the polytechnic? Which are the similarities and differences between institutional strategies and projects when considering polytechnics and universities?

In this study we used a documentary research methodology since data sources correspond to institutional documents. Data collection was carried out throughout an analysis of documents collected on the institutional websites of 15 polytechnics. This set of institutions composes the Portuguese Public Polytechnic Higher Education Network and the data was accessed on the institutional websites between October 28th and November 1st, 2021. We identified several institutional documents supporting the management, monitoring and evaluation of activities available on the websites. To define the corpus, we adopted the following inclusion criteria: documents produced by the top management units (presidency of the polytechnics), institutional documents for plans implemented in 2021 and strategic management and action guidelines. As a result, the corpus supporting documentary analysis was composed of two types of documents: Strategic Plan (SP) and Annual Activity Plan (AAP) 2021. Considering the 15 institutions, we found 12 SPs and 8 AAPs available online. Among the 15 polytechnic institutes, SP and AAP were not available on the website only in 3 institutions. The corpus was organised and explored using the MaxQda software. This tool allowed us to organize the corpus by institution, determine a set of deductive categories to support coding and identify the registration units by institution and type of document. Within a qualitative approach that is usually rated as secondary research, the documents were a primary source in this study in order to correspond to its aim and research questions. Subsequently, being aware that this source of data might have multileveled interpretations (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007), the document analysis was conducted in two phases. First, after an initial inspection of documents within the corpus, the procedures aimed at determining categories to cover the main areas of content. Specifically, objectives, measures, indicators, training modalities and theme, incentives extra to the training modality, responsibility and training plan. In a second phase, we went through the documents based on thematic/semantic descriptors. Namely, teacher training, pedagogical training, teacher training, pedagogical capacity building, continuous teacher training, lifelong learning, training actions, training plan, support and awards. The descriptors helped in the categorical validation and identification of the units of record.

HE in Portugal is a binary system composed of universities and polytechnics. Previous research focusing universities suggests that there are various levels of commitment within these institutions concerning the training of its teachers; namely there are those that seem to be in the implementation phase of projects that could result in institutional training spaces, but also those that do not yet deal with the issue of pedagogical training and support for teaching (Xavier & Leite, 2019). The study presented in the paper intends to complement that research, contributing to knowledge and understanding about institutional strategies and projects aimed at enhancing teachers’ ways of being and acting within Portuguese polytechnics. Similarities and differences regarding universities will be taken into account. Besides, the paper is expected to contribute to characterize HE initiatives focusing pedagogical training in Portugal, having the context of European trends in this field as a reference. The preliminary analysis of data suggests conclusions about a quite moderate investment towards strategies and projects focusing formal training on pedagogical practices and teaching by the top management of Portuguese polytechnics. Moreover, the empirical results might enable to envisage possible effects and implications of institutional initiatives focusing on pedagogy in HE, discussing its possible contribution to the reconfiguration of teachers’ ways of being and acting. Overall, given that research about teaching academic work appears to be an issue that is not sufficiently developed in the research field on HE (Kwiek, 2019; Teichler, 2017; Tigh, 2019), the paper is expected to enhance knowledge and understanding about it.

Almeida, M.M. (2020). Formação pedagógica e desenvolvimento profissional no ensino superior: perspetivas de docentes. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 25, 1-22. http://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-24782019250008 Alves, M.G. (2020). A (in)visibilidade do trabalho docente dos académicos. Revista Techniques, Methodologies and Quality, Número Especial – Processo de Bolonha. Cochran-Smith, M., Grudnoff, L., Orland-Barak, L., & Smith, K. (2019). Educating Teacher Educators: International Perspectives. The New Educator, 16(1), 5–24. http://doi.org/10.1080/1547688X.2019.1670309 Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). London: Routledge Crosier, D., & Parveva, T. (2013). The Bologna Process: Its impact on higher education development in Europe and beyond. UNESCO: International Institute for Educational Planning. Entwistle, N. J., & Peterson, E. R. (2004). Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: Relationships with study behaviour and influences of learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 407–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.009 Inamorato dos Santos, A., Gausas, A., Mackeviciute, R., Jotaytyte, A., & Martinaitis, Z. (2019). Innovating Professional Development in Higher Education: an analysis of practices. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Kwiek, M. (2019). Changing European Academics - a comparative study of social stratification, work patterns and research productivity. London and New York: Routledge. Nóvoa, A., & Amante, L. (2015). Em Busca da Liberdade. A pedagogia universitária do nosso tempo. REDU: Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 13(1), 21-34. Ó, J. R., Almeida, M., Viana, J., Sanches, T., & Paz, A. (2019). Tendências recentes da investigação internacional sobre pedagogia do ensino superior: uma revisão de literatura. Revista Lusófona de Educação, 45, 205-221. Sachs, J. (2016). Teacher professionalism: why are we still talking about it? Teachers and Teching, 2284), 413-215. Teichler, U. (2017). Teaching Versus Research: An Endangered Balance? In M. L. Machado-Taylor, V. M. Soares, U. Teichler (eds.), Challenges and Options: The Academic Profession in Europe.(pp. 11-28). London: Springer. Tigh, M. (2019). Higher Education Research - the developing field. London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Xavier, A., & Leite, C. (2019). Mapeamento da Formação Pedagógica de docentes universitários nas Universidades Públicas Portuguesas. Revista Lusófona de Educação, 45, 109-123.