At the European level, substantial changes have been promoted in university educational policy since the establishment of the European Higher Education Area (Chuo-Chun and Huisman, 2017). Thriving on teaching preparation and training is one of the most important concerns in Europe (European Council, 2021). We are in a globalized, open, and digital-enhanced society that brings about an increasing scenario of competitiveness and sudden changes. 

This context account for two current challenges that universities have to face (with the key missions of teaching, researching and knowledge transferring): (1) getting qualified personnel who innovate, undertake, and globalize their work; (2) and drawing teachers along with researchers’ talent in order to expand the opportunities to be part of international programmes, projects, and networks (Rappoport et al., 2020). Because of that, Higher Education institutions (HEIs) should offer environments that allow academics to develop their work and training in the best way. When it comes down to supplying university teachers’ necessities to achieve professional enhancement, many universities have been promoting professional development (PD) centres of teaching and learning (Zimmerman, 2021).

In order to achieve high-quality Higher Education, it is essential to boost the PD of university faculty (Darling-Hammond and Richardson, 2009; Inamorato et al., 2019). We can understand the PD as a systematic process of critical review that aims to enrich the practice, look over teaching performance, realize the barriers that teachers face, find solutions, and foster knowledge about this learning process (Dută and Rafaila, 2014). 

Consequently, PD institutional strategies should be focused on providing support to university faculty, particularly those who are just starting out in their careers (Johannes et al., 2013). It is essential to involve early-career faculty staff in the educational community to reduce the apprehensions they commonly experience when starting their academic careers and, at the same time, increase the benefits of the university community as a whole (Iglesias-Martínez et al. 2014). 

International literature spotlights that there is a variety of PD programmes, but most of them are isolated activities of individual HEIs and are not implemented on a large scale (country-wide) (European Commission, 2017). Universities need to provide relevant and innovative PD programmes to update the pedagogical performance of academic staff thus contributing to the maintenance of quality and innovative educational standards (Bhutto et al., 2017). Moreover, there is a demand for studies that include rigorous studies on PD addressed to junior faculty.The questions that arise are: How are programmes for newly academics designed? Are there any recommendations on programme design and implementation?

Thus, the main objective of this work is to gather good practices in the field of PD for novice faculty, based on the in-depth analysis of the actions and programmes carried out in HEIs.

To achieve de above-mentioned objective, a systematic review of the relevant literature was carried out, based on the PRISMA statement (Moher et al., 2009). Systematic reviews have been utilized in the social sciences as a tool by which large bodies of information can be condensed while simultaneously identifying areas that require further study or in which uncertainty has arisen (Petticrew and Roberts, 2006). In the field of education, this methodology has gained popularity and has been utilized to inform policymaking, practice, and future research. To begin the process of selecting the literature to be included in the review, a search was performed using the search string (‘teacher induction’ or ‘teacher mentoring’) AND (‘higher education’ OR ‘university’), limited to the period 2011–2020. The online databases consulted for this review were the three most important in terms of scientific publications: Web of Science, SCOPUS, and ERIC. Four inclusion criteria were used: from Higher Education educational level; focus on novice teachers; propositive contribution (contain a proposal or programme); and written in English, Portuguese, Italian, Spanish or Catalan. Likewise, a five-stage selection process was carried out: (1) initial search and identification (n = 262, of which 40 were eliminated due to duplication); (2) screening phase of titles and abstracts (185 records excluded); (3) full-text review to assess eligibility (18 records excluded); and (4) in-depth analysis (n = 18). Four researchers were involved in all four phases of the review. Different iterations were done to avoid risks of bias and inconsistency, as well as disagreements were resolved via discussions among the researchers. The geographical distribution of the articles analysed was as follows: 3 papers Africa, 6 from Europe Africa, 4 from North America, 3 from Oceania, and 2 from Asia. 50% of the articles were published between 2011 and 2014, and the other 50% were published between 2015 and 2020. Of the 18 articles, 2 had a quantitative, 11 a qualitative, and 5 a mixed methodological approach.

University PD programmes for early-career academics are varied and encompass some lessons learned, related to design, content, and assessment. Regarding programme design, it is important to clarify the objectives, its voluntary nature, and being conceived as a process, not an isolated event. One of the most frequently mentioned aspects is the importance of careful mentor selection and training. In terms of content, the studies pinpoint the importance of focusing on discipline-specific aspects, which requires balancing general and specific teaching and for teachers to be guided in devising strategies appropriate to their specific working environments. Moreover, teaching theory and practice must be aligned, as there could be a risk of no real change in educational practice. Also, programme content should focus on teaching and not just on research. Issues such as the evaluation system, time dedicated to teaching, classroom allocation, or preparation of teaching guides should be included in the programme. Other PD programme contents need to incorporate socio-emotional activities. Finally, in terms of assessment, it is recommended to incorporate some model as a reference, in that it allows measuring the impact of the programme at different levels (such as participants’ reaction, learning, application/transfer to practice, and results). We also strongly believe that these programmes should be designed within the contextual framework of each university and country. In this study, the universities where induction programmes have been devised differ in their approach, depending on whether they are more focused on research or teaching, or whether they adopt a mixed model. At universities where research predominates, it will be more challenging, and additional efforts may have to be made to ensure attendance on induction programmes, as teaching may not be a priority.

Bhutto, G.M., Khoso, I., and Jhatial, A.A. (2017). Assessing the impact of higher education commission’s training on university teachers’ performance: Case study of University of Sindh. The Shield-Research Journal of Physical Education & Sports Science, 11, 27-45. Chuo-Chun H., and Huisman J. (2017). Higher education policy change in the European higher education area: Divergence of quality assurance systems in England and the Netherlands. Research Papers in Education, 32, 71-83. https://doi.org/10.10802/02671522.2015.1129645 Duta, N., and Rafaila, E. (2014). Importance of the lifelong learning for professional development of university teachers–needs and practical implications. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 127, 801-806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.358 European Commission (2017). Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: academic staff. Eurydice Report. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2797/9642 Iglesias-Martínez, M. J., Lozano-Cabezas, I., and Martinez-Ruiz, M. A. (2014). Listening to the Voices of Novice Lecturers in Higher Education: A Qualitative Study. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26(2), 170-181. http://hdl.handle.net/10045/45822 Inamorato dos Santos, A., Gaušas, S., Mackevičiūtė, R., Jotautytė, A., and Martinaitis, Ž. (2019). Innovating professional development in higher education: An analysis of practices innovating professional development in higher education. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/26224 Johannes, C., Fendler, J., and Seidel, T. (2013). Teachers’ Perceptions of the Learning Environment and Their Knowledge Base in a Training Program for Novice University Teachers. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(2), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2012.681785 Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., and Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine, 6 (7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 Petticrew, M., and Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide. Black -well Publishing. Rappoport, S., Thoilliez, B., and Alonso-Sainz, T. (2020). International organizations as trend marking systems in the global University. Revista Española de Educación Comparada, 37, 26. https://doi.org/10.5944/reec.37.2021.27721 Zimmerman, A.S. (2021). Three Challenges of Early-Career Faculty and the Importance of Self-Care. In N.L. Moffett (ed.), Navigating Post-Doctoral Career Placement, Research, and Professionalism (pp. 227-250). IGI Global. Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the Jaume I University (Spain) under Grant Ref. UJI-A2020-18 Universitat Jaume I. PI1: Francesc M. Esteve-Mon and PI2: Lucía Sánchez-Tarazaga. More info at https://unidpd.uji.es/english/; and by the Spanish Ministry of Education under Grant FPU21/00298.