Background

This international research project views critical reflection on teaching practice as a vital capability for university lecturers. Critical reflection supports continuous development of teaching academics as facilitators of learning experiences who manage the constant change and complexity of the teaching profession (Mathisen & Bjørndal, 2016, p. 230). We use the term ‘Collegial Intervision[1]’ to synthesise the practices of peer observation, collegial discussion, and critical reflection that occur within professional development programs for lecturers at the three universities. The terminology emphasises that participants work together to gain clarity and insight into their practice and philosophy of teaching. The aim is to foster horizontal rather than hierarchical relations between peers (Wenger, 2011), where participants are positioned as co-learners who reflect together.

Comparisons and continuities – three international cases

Our three universities in Denmark, Norway, and Switzerland are connected through offering peer group collegial dialogues as foundations for professional development of university teachers. This study investigates structured dialogues aim to promote critical reflection as a common practice, seeking to elaborate previous research that documents a variety of beneficial outcomes from peer mentoring groups (de Lange and Wittek, 2023; Gardner et al, 2022). The effects may include professional unity and supportive collegiality, which can stimulate reflective discussions around teaching and supervision in addition to participants’ own peer discussions, informed by different peer mentoring frameworks (de Lange and Wittek, 2023, p. 187).

Despite the benefits, empirical research evaluating learning and development in structured collegial dialogue in academic development programmes is scarce. In our project we focus on participants’ experiences of change in their daily teaching practice – considering if they experienced any change. We are interested in how they themselves experience the learning and possible change. Our work is guided by the following research questions:

• Do participants experience any significant changes in their teaching practice after taking part in Collegial Intervision groups during university pedagogy courses?
• Do they experience changes in their reflective practice on their teaching?
• Do they perceive changes in how they talk about their teaching with colleagues?

These questions were explored through interviews and focus groups in the three countries. At each of the universities, individual and focus-group interviews have been conducted with participants who attended the programmes one to three years ago.

The data analysis is informed by Mezirow’s concepts of critical reflection and thoughtful action with reflection (Mezirow, 1991, p. 109). Currently, we envisage a convergent approach, where data from each country will be interwoven into a nuanced understanding of critically reflective practice.  

Proposed panel discussion – untangling unresolved tensions in academic development

The concluding discussion aims to focus on some of the key tensions and questions that recur in our research group conversations:

1. Method: how do/can/should we evaluate participants’ learning in academic development programmes? What methods are suitable for understanding ‘impact’ on learning and development?
2. Shared understanding: across three countries, we practise similar development programmes but still struggle to define key terms in a way that is both general and context-specific (e.g. critical reflection, peer mentoring, SoTL, collegial counselling). How can this be negotiated in a way that allows shared understanding and local responsiveness? 
3. Future research: we see value in the inclusion of cross-disciplinary efforts as an explicit part of research design (de Lange and Wittek, 2023). There is a need for better understanding of how such project-based collaborations evolve, not just as part of the Intervision practises among peers, but also to expand our understanding of academic and joint professional development processes and learning in higher education.

[1] The meaning of Collegial Intervision is directly translated as ‘collegial shared clear sight’

de Lange, T., Wittek, L. (2023). Experiences from the PeTS Project: What Lessons Have We Learned, and How Should We Proceed?. In: de Lange, T., Wittek, L. (eds) Faculty Peer Group Mentoring in Higher Education. Higher Education Dynamics, vol 61. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37458-6_10 Gardner, F., Southall, A. & Baxter, L. (2022) Effectively supporting teachers: a peer supervision model using reflective circles, Teachers and Teaching, 28:3, 369-383, DOI: 10.1080/13540602.2022.2062727 Mathisen, P., & Bjørndal, C. (2016). Tablets as a digital tool in supervision of student teachers’ practical training. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 11(4), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2016-04-02 Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Wenger, E. (2011) Social learning capacity: Four essays on innovation and learning in social systems. In A Boddington and J Boys (Eds) Re-shaping learning: A Critical Reader. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers:193-210.