Five new Technological Universities (TU) have been created through a series of mergers within the Institutes of Technology (IoT) in Ireland. The large scale sectoral changes have resulted in substantial organisational pressures on staff, students and stakeholders.  One significant change is the shift from the previous IoT academic 16-18 hours per week ‘teaching-only’ model to a ‘teacher-researcher’ one balanced across research, teaching and innovation. TU key performance indicators (KPIs) will measure organisational success through increased faculty levels of: i) engagement with research/research related activities; ii) increased postgraduate studies research and teaching; and, iii) engagement in knowledge transformation and innovation.

These changes to faculty roles at work are manifesting in a significant shift in individuals’ perceptions of their professional role, leading to an evolving professional identity from ‘teacher’ to that of ‘teacher-researcher’ in the new TUs.  Hazelkorn and Moynihan (2011) identify this as a ‘research-led teaching’ role that incorporates the three strands of ‘research, teaching and administration’.  The previous ‘academic hours allocation’ model of 16-18 teaching hours per week is still in place within the changing working environment, which doesn’t provide any allocation for research. This is problematic as TU success criteria stipulate the need for increased research outputs and metrics (HEA, 2014; OECD, 2022). The diverse nature and roles of individuals working in the TU sector has also added a layer of complexity as not everyone is in the same place, ready or willing for these changes to happen. Consequently, there is a growing need to explore faculty experiences as they grapple with these changes and endeavour to meet their organisation demands of engaging in research as an integral part of their teaching role at work.

This paper shares results from Phase 1 of the overall study on the profile of the potential population of interest.  It draws on a bibliometric analysis to map the evolutionary stages of faculty positions in relation to the personal changes required to move from a ‘teaching’ only to the new ‘teaching/researching’ role. Results from Phase 1 identify positions and roles that individuals typically occupy in IoT-TUs and share information on the nature of their work role as it currently is and what it may look like because of the proposed changes of the new TU.

Objectives

• Map the distinct types of teacher-researcher practice and the characteristics of these different types of practitioners.
• Examine the impact of the new TU ‘teacher-researcher’ role on the professional identity of individual’s working in the sector.

Literature

‘Identity self-states’ draws on ‘motivational self-systems’ that incorporate ‘possible’ and ‘ideal’ selves’ theory (Markus and Nurius, 1986) and informs emergent research on evolving educator identities (Beijaard, Meijer and Verloop, 2004; Rodgers and Scott, 2008; Beauchamp and Thomas, 2009; Graham-Cagney, 2020). Personal engagement as conceptualised by Kahn, (1990) is an internal state of being, comprised of three psychological domains of meaningfulness, safety and availability. They determine whether and to what extent an individual brings their ‘preferred self’ to their role as a professional working within a discipline and that of their role as a teacher-researcher within the organisation (Kahn, 1990; Lave and Wenger, 1991; May, Gilson and Harter, 2004; Saks, 2006; Shuck, 2011). The personal, professional and situational contexts of teacher’s lives, experiences, beliefs and practices are integral to one another. Tensions between these often impact to a greater or lesser extent upon teachers’ sense of self or identity (Day et al., 2006). Similarly, the complexity of moving from a singular role of ‘teacher’ to one of ‘teacher-researcher’ in a changed HE sector, requires a consideration of the distinct types of practice and the characteristics of these different practitioners (Rouna & Gilley, 2009). 

This paper is situated within a wider PhD study ‘An Exploration of the Nature of Personal Engagement in Research Work in Institutes of Technology-Technological Universities’ (SPaRC). Data drawn from Phase 1 is combined with a documentary analysis of reports relating to the proposed changes to the IoT-TU Higher Education sector (OECD, 2022). Phase 1 the quantitative stage is a sectoral analysis of the field of interest. Data collection involved a combination of data mining, bibliometric, and social networks. Data mining was conducted from government publications, academic publications, organisational reports, faculty individual professional profiles and websites. A bibliometric analysis was then conducted from the publications associated with each institution to ascertain cited researchers and their resulting publications. A social network analysis (SNA) was carried out in order to also identify individuals, and their co-authorship ties that could further contribute to the population of interest and if any, establish further academics involvement in relevant scholarly activities. The Phase 1 data led to a sectoral analysis of the field of interest that mapped and identified a multidisciplinary and diverse population of researchers and their research activities within each Technological University (TU). This resulted in the identification of a preliminary population of the interest that was of interest to the study. Documentary analysis A documentary analysis was conducted from the reports relating to the Technological University and the ‘hours allocation model’ (HEA, 2014; OECD, 2022). These were examined to gather information relating to the prosed changes within the Technological University and identity the current trajectory of faculty academic career paths and contracts. This paper presents an analysis of findings from one TU – the South East Technological University. SETU is a typical example of a merger between two institutes; Waterford Institute of Technology and Institute of Technology Carlow. Results from the analysis will create a framework to profile the overall population of interest and that of their distinct types of practice and the characteristics of these different types of practitioners.

Anticipated outcomes from this paper it will add to what is known about faculty roles in an IoT-TU. It will further the discussion about an evolving faculty professional identity and that of their engagement in their work roles in a changing IoT-TU sector. Additionally, mapping the work of a teacher-researcher as that of a scholar practitioner may provide useful insights into why an individual would either engage or disengage with research and research related activities in their new roles at work. Outcomes from this paper, will inform the development of an in-depth profile of the designated population of interest and identify typical characteristics of the individuals as they relate to their role at work as either a teacher or a teacher-researcher. Finally, this paper will aid the researcher in transitioning into the next stages of the PhD study.

Beauchamp, C. and Thomas, L. (2009) ‘Understanding teacher identity: An overview of issues in the literature and implications for teacher education’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(2), pp. 175–189. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640902902252. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P.C. and Verloop, N. (2004) ‘Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), pp. 107–128. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001. Day, C. et al. (2006) ‘The personal and professional selves of teachers: Stable and unstable identities’, British Educational Research Journal, 32(4), pp. 601–616. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920600775316. Graham-Cagney, A. (2020) ‘Constructing an evolving FE Teacher Identity: Professional voices from the field of futher education and Training.’, Education Matters, (2020), pp. 1–8. Hazelkorn, E. and Moynihan, A. (2011) ‘Transforming Academic Practice: Human Resources Challenges’, in S. Kyvik and B. Lepori (eds) The Research Mission of Higher Education Institutions outside of the University Sector. Springer Dordrecht, pp. 77–93. Available at: https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cserbkwww.springerlink.comhttp://www.springerlink.com/home/main.mpx. HEA (2014) ‘Review of workload allocation models in Irish Higher Education Institutions June 2014’, (June). Kahn, W.A. (1990) ‘Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work’, Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), pp. 692–724. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5465/256287. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) ‘Situated Learning’, Situated Learning [Preprint]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511815355. Markus, H. and Nurius, P. (1986) ‘Possible Selves’, American Psychologist, 41(9), pp. 954–969. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954. May, D.R., Gilson, R.L. and Harter, L.M. (2004) ‘The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(1), pp. 11–37. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1348/096317904322915892. OECD (2022) ‘A review of technological university academic career paths, contracts and organisation in Ireland’, (64). Available at: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/2b7ee217-en. Rodgers, C. and Scott, K. (2008) ‘The development of the personal self and identity in learning to teach’, in Handbook of Research on Teacher Education, pp. 732–755. Saks, A.M. (2006) ‘Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), pp. 600–619. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169. Shuck, B. (2011) ‘Integrative Literature Review: Four Emerging Perspectives of Employee Engagement: An Integrative Literature Review’, Human Resource Development Review, 10(3), pp. 304–328. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484311410840.