bridging the gap between industry and higher education: training academics to promote student...
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by: [University of Otago]On: 03 October 2014, At: 04:27Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Innovations in Education & TrainingInternationalPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/riie19
Bridging the Gap Between Industry andHigher Education: Training Academics toPromote Student TeamworkElisabeth Dunne & Mike RawlinsPublished online: 10 Dec 2010.
To cite this article: Elisabeth Dunne & Mike Rawlins (2000) Bridging the Gap Between Industry andHigher Education: Training Academics to Promote Student Teamwork, Innovations in Education &Training International, 37:4, 361-371, DOI: 10.1080/135580000750052973
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135580000750052973
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, ouragents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to theaccuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions andviews expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are notthe views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not berelied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylorand Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply,or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
THE BP TEAM DEVELOPMENT IN UNIVERSITIES PROJECT
The need for graduates who are prepared foremployment and skilled in teamwork has been widelyadvocated over the last decade, in Britain and across theworld. As a practical response to delivering the trans-ferable skills required of graduates, British Petroleum(BP) are sponsoring an initiative to encourage the useof team skills in higher education. Expertise from the context of industry is being taken into universitiesto provide academics with the kinds of ongoingprofessional development in teaching skills advocatedby the National Committee of Inquiry into HigherEducation (NCIHE, ‘The Dearing Report’, 1997) andsupported by government. After the positive responsegained from a small-scale trial by BP over six yearsago in one university, a programme was devised whichnow includes 10 institutions across England andScotland. Groups of academics from each of these havebeen invited to attend BP-funded courses, with the aim of training them to promote team development
programmes in their own departments. The courses usea series of (mostly) outdoor problem-solving activities,with a speci� c focus on understanding the bene� ts ofworking with others, re� ecting upon how each task hasbeen performed, and learning about the theoreticalprinciples of teamwork and team review. This samecourse is then used with students to give them someidea of the potential and the dif� culties of teamworkand to enable them to recognize their strengths andweaknesses in this context.
Teamwork is becoming increasingly important withinhigher education, not only because of employerdemands but also as a consequence of pragmaticrequirements for change due to the increase in intakeof students. There is also a wide-ranging body ofresearch on team and group work, both from clinicalpsychology and � eldwork in education and premisedon theoretical underpinnings, which suggests that
Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Higher Education: Training Academics to Promote StudentTeamworkElisabeth Dunne, University of Exeter and Mike Rawlins, Chalybeate
SUMMARY
The need for graduates who are prepared for employment and skilled in teamwork has been widelyadvocated over the last decade, in Britain and across the world. This paper outlines a rationale for thedevelopment of groupwork in higher education and describes a BP (British Petroleum)-sponsoredprogramme and its impact in 10 institutions across England and Scotland. The major aims have beento provide academics with professional development in teaching such skills, and to deliver courses tostudents to give them an idea of the potential and the dif� culties of teamwork. A series of (mostly)outdoor problem-solving activities is used, with a specific focus on understanding the benefits ofworking with others, reflecting upon how each task has been performed, and learning about thetheoretical principles of teamwork and team review.1 A case-study of a programme run in a departmentof Law is briefly outlined. Summaries of progress in other universities highlight problems ofinstitutional change. Although discussion is set within the context of the BP-funded programme, theissues are far wider than this one initiative. For example, the bene� ts of strategic teamwork for students,the explicit training of both students and staff in teamwork skills, the strengthening of professionaldevelopment in teaching skills, effective partnership with external bodies and the difficulties ofinstitutional change are all issues that are worthy of attention throughout higher education.
Innovations in Education and Training Internationa lISSN 1355-8005 print ISSN 1469-8420 online © 2000 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
361 IETI 37,4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
groups and teams can provide a powerful context forlearning. Each of these perspectives suggests that thedevelopment of team- and groupwork is well worthsupporting and fostering.
This paper outlines a rationale for the development of groupwork in higher education, describes the BP-sponsored course and its impact on students, andoutlines aspects of the training of academics inteamwork skills. Although discussion is set within thecontext of the BP-funded programme, the issues arefar wider than this one initiative. For example, thebene� ts of strategic teamwork for students, the explicittraining of both students and staff in teamwork skills,the strengthening of professional development inteaching skills, effective partnership with externalbodies and the dif� culties of institutional change are allissues that are worthy of attention throughout highereducation.
PURPOSES OF HIGHER EDUCATIONTODAY
Over a decade ago in Britain, government White Paperson higher education (DES, 1987; 1991) recommendedthat graduates should be equipped to deal with thedemands of a rapidly changing working environment.This was to be achieved through the possession of‘core’ skills that are assumed to transfer readily acrossa range of contexts. Slee (1989), of the Confederationof British Industry, set out the employer perspective:
the common denominator of highly quali� ed manpowerwill . . . be the ability to think, learn and adapt. Personaltransferable skills – problem-solving, communication,teamwork – rather than technical skills de� ned withnarrow occupational ranges will come to form thestabilising characteristic of work: if higher education isto meet the needs of the economy and the individual itmust seek actively to develop these generic corecompetences . . .
The rhetoric about the importance of core skills inhigher education continues, led by the major employersof graduates, lead bodies and the government. Thereare many terms with similar connotations, for example,key skills, personal transferable skills, generic skills,employment skills. Within all these terms, aspects ofcommunication, problem solving and teamwork areprevalent. Graduate recruitment processes tend tofocus on these areas in the demands of applicationforms, interviews and assessment centres: hence toenter the labour market, graduates need to be equippedwith such skills. However, many initiatives to date
appear to have had little impact. Surveys of employersgive continuing evidence of their desire for graduateswith core or personal transferable skills, but also oftheir continued dissatisfaction with the level of skillsin new graduate employees (The Quality in HigherEducation Surveys, 1993/94).
A change in conception of the role of higher education is not unique to Britain: for example, a seriesof reports commissioned by the Australian BusinessHigher Education Round Table (1991, 1992, 1993), abody comprising 43 chief executives and 24 vicechancellors, demonstrates a commitment to jointinitiatives that will ‘advance the goals and improve theperformance of both business and higher education forthe bene� t of Australian society’. Another example canbe seen in a 1994 conference run by the Organizationfor Economic Cooperation and Development in Koreaand including participants from 16 other countries.This group proposed that universities should seethemselves as part of the transition to work and shouldadapt accordingly their teaching, their curriculum and,where appropriate, their research. Similar perspectivesare apparent across much of Europe, as well as NorthAmerica (see, for example, a series of research reportsfrom the National Center on the Educational Quality ofthe Workforce, Pennsylvania).
COPING WITH MASS EDUCATION
As student numbers increase and staff–student ratiosdecline, there will be pressure to find ways ofdelivering a similar curriculum to that traditionallycovered, of maintaining rigour and standards, ofensuring the motivation of students and, in manyuniversities, to ensure the continued output of highquality research. There often is an assumption that ifstudents become more independent as learners, thensome of the pressure can be removed from staff.However, it may not always be easy to promoteindependent learning. Case-studies (see for example,Dunne, 1995; Gibbs, 1995) suggest that, to encourageindependence, there needs to be more attention paid toplanning for the processes of learning. One of the waysof supporting independent learners can be through theuse of groups or teams. However, there seems also to be an assumption that students are equipped withteamwork skills or will learn them as they go along;attention is seldom paid to training them to recognizeand understand the processes, the roles, the tensionsand the means of resolving them. Evidence from thecontext of schooling (Dunne and Bennett, 1990) showsthat training in groupwork skills has a marked impact,
362 IETI 37,4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
both behavioural and cognitive, on the quality ofpupil’s work. This suggests that the team developmentcourse might serve as useful training to studentsundertaking teamwork at university.
A THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE ONGROUPWORK
Although the requirement for a different kind ofstudent product has been premised on demandsexternal to higher education, there is also a strong theo-retical rational for developing more communicativeand interactive ways of working within universities.Theories of social constructivism (originally emanat-ing from the works of Russian psychologist, Vygotsky,in the 1930s and pursued by educationists such as Bruner in the 1970s onwards in the USA and theUK), now underpin much current thinking at the levelof education in schools. However, this theory is equallyuseful at the level of higher education. The importanceof learning in a cultural context is emphasized, and inparticular the central role of communication withinthis. Talking is perceived as a major way in whichknowledge is constructed, developed and reconstructedby individuals and through which deep learning andunderstanding is promoted. In simple terms, whereaslearners have often been conceived as akin to emptyvessels to be filled with knowledge or wisdom, or as individuals who work alone to construct their own personal interpretations of knowledge and experi-ence (cf. Piaget), the role of social, or shared andcooperative, contexts is now considered crucial tolearning. Groups and teams provide one context inwhich communication for learning can be encouragedand a student-centred experience purposefullyachieved. In general terms this means a reconcep-tualization of the processes whereby students learn,that is, of the context provided and the strategiesdemanded of students to achieve the desired outcomes.It requires an emphasis on the application as well as the accretion of knowledge and skills, with theprocesses of learning being valued alongside thedisciplinary content. This may require time to plan andorganize. However, there is reason to believe, fromboth theory and practice, that investment of time in theorganization of team and group work can be wellworthwhile, as outlined by the following summary ofsome of the potential bene� ts.
ADVANTAGES OF TEAMWORK
� Group products or outcomes are often of a higherstandard than individual (in the context of HE, seeGibbs, 1995 and many clinical studies fromDeutsch, 1949 onwards).
� More able or more experienced students are likelyto model and demonstrate a variety of strategies andskills that enable others to work more effectively(cf Rogoff, 1990 and models of apprenticeshiplearning). To take the premise of Vygotsky (1962)– ‘what can be achieved through cooperation today,will tomorrow be achieved unaided’.
� Teamwork may be used strategically to promotecompetition between groups, hence strengtheninginternal group co-operation and productivity (manyhundreds of studies, especially in the USA, havedemonstrated this at all levels of learning; see forexample Slavin (1983), Johnson and Johnson(1991).
� Individual products or outcomes that have pro� tedfrom prior group support may also be of higherquality (Dunne and Bennett, 1990).
� Confidence of individuals can be supported bygroups, and can lead to higher levels of activeparticipation (Bennett and Dunne, 1992).
� In terms of traditional disciplinary study, it ispossible for all students to become acquainted witha wider knowledge base through pooling ofinformation and research skills, or peer-tutoring(e.g. Abercrombie and Terry, 1978, Collier, 1983,Topping, 1998).
� Tasks that reinforce discussion, explanation,argument, justi� cation of views, and so on, in teams,may promote understanding, or inter-relationshipsbetween knowledge bases, rather than collectionsof disconnected information (cf. Wertsch, 1985).
� Group/teamwork can be used to foster a wide rangeof individual transferable skills; for example, time-management, written communication, negotiation(Jacques, 1991).
� Friendship and membership of a community can bestrengthened, with evidence of enhanced motivationas a consequence of this (e.g. Pennsylvania StateUniversity, 1994).
� Teamwork or group work, in the long term, may bean essential organizational device in terms ofmaking more ef� cient use of staff time; it may alsoenable the saving of resources and equipment.
It has also been suggested, from the context of employ-ment, that ‘Groups are there not only to carry out tasks– they provide you with a series of unique opportunitiesto grow as a person’ (Adair, 1986).
Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Higher Education 363
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
THE TEAM DEVELOPMENT IN UNIVERSITIES PROGRAMME
BP has three main objectives in sponsoring the teamdevelopment programme; the enhancement of thecompany’s reputation by improving working links with universities; promoting awareness of the work and culture of BP; and providing students with theinterpersonal and transferable skills that companies andthe community need.
The team development courses for students have been designed and run by Chalybeate, a partnershipexperienced in areas such as leadership and teamdevelopment in a number of multinational companiesas well as in schools and the community. The pro-gramme, as many such programmes, is based on arepeated sequence of two main forms of activity:
� a challenging practical task undertaken in teams,usually in the open air, and requiring planning,cooperation, problem-solving skills, creativity,attention to detail, and so on; and
� a team review of the task, for the purpose of devel-oping awareness of self and of the team, of strengthsand weaknesses, of attitudes and motivations, etc.
To ensure optimum learning from a short programmesuch as this, the activity/review sequence is repeated,usually up to six times over the duration of one and ahalf days, to give a good opportunity for practisingskills and applying learning just acquired. It also allowsany group to go through a series of stages of teamperformance. Drexler et al. (1988) suggest that theprocess can be likened to a bouncing ball, and thisimage underlies the programme, as teams are takenthrough activities that orientate them to the course andits purpose; that provide an opportunity for trust-building followed by goal and role clari� cation; andthat, finally, lead to commitment to the team (thebounce of the ball). The move of the ball upwardssigni� es the team commitment being taken into suc-cessful implementation, and resolution of earlier stagesinto the harmony and excitement of high performanceas a team.
The programme has a series of theoretical under-pinnings. It is designed around Kolb’s (1984)‘Learning Cycle’, a model frequently used in the arenasof training and ‘experiential learning’. This ‘cycle’outlines four distinct phases to learning: experiencing,processing, generalizing and applying. Having aconcrete experience, the act of doing something, alone, in a team, pleasant or unpleasant, does not, of
itself, promote learning. It needs to be followed byobservations about and analysis of that experience.‘Processing’ is a reflective stage, encouraged in thecontext of teamwork by discussing the experience,sharing reactions and observing the reactions of others.Improved understanding of the experience enablesmovement towards ‘generalizing’. This involves theintegration of the new experience into prior learning,and development of understanding of patterns andconcepts, about why things happened as they did.‘Applying’ is a stage of active experimentation whenunderstandings are used to plan a modi� ed approach tothe next experience.
The structure of the course is designed to allowparticipants to go through these stages over and overagain, so that awareness and understanding can be builton, and the model evolves into a continuous learningspiral. The four stages of the ‘cycle’ are mutuallysupportive. None is effective in its own right, butHoney and Mumford (1986) suggest that most peopledevelop behavioural patterns that re� ect a preferencefor a speci� c stage of the cycle. Activists involve them-selves fully in new experiences, enjoy the excitementof the activity but not longer-term implementation and consolidation. Re� ectors tend to stand back andobserve, and like to think things through before comingto conclusions. Theorists prefer the generalizingprocesses, assimilating disparate facts into coherenttheories and are keen on principles, theories andmodels. Pragmatists like to experiment with the appli-cation of new ideas, trying out new ideas, theories andtechniques to see if they work in practice. Whateverthe truth of these categorizations, they serve to high-light that individuals do have preferences, do actdifferently in the context of teams and will bringdifferent approaches to the solution of problems.
Kolb perceives experiential learning as a process whichlinks education, work and personal development, butthe model could be applied equally well to any learningcontext. What is speci� cally emphasized in this pro-gramme is the way in which learning, and the growthof understanding, requires more than intellectuallearning processes, but also an emotional route. Tryingsomething new may involve fear of failure, disappoint-ment, exposure or frustration. But the risks can bebalanced against the rewards of success – the gainingof new awareness, the sense of pride and increasedcon� dence at having faced and overcome a challenge,in having coped.
364 IETI 37,4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
The tasks
The tasks last most often for between half and one hour.Being set in the open air means a change from the usualuniversity environment and the associated expectationsfor learning. Tasks are designed according to whetherthere is a known or unknown solution and a speci� c ornon-speci� c way of achieving an outcome, and each ispremised on a requirement for problem-solving. Eachtask demands a different kind of physical and mentalactivity and has a different emphasis on collaborationor individual input. Examples range from taking aburden and a team across a mine� eld by using � xedstepping stones and planks, or passing a team througha security network, to drawing an original map,executing a task when blindfold and designing anddecorating a T-shirt to represent the team. Althoughthe tasks are deliberately selected to support a range ofpurposes and interests, it is not the task itself which isimportant, but the learning that can be taken from it
Reviews
All review sessions are designed to follow a similarpattern: a period to write down personal thoughts and reactions about the last experience, what went well, what could be improved, what the writer will need to do differently (these questions correspond tothe processing and generalizing stages of KoIb’scycle). This is followed by an interactive session wherethe tutor helps to draw out the lessons, managing andcontrolling the process, but without dominating orimposing personal views.
A team can provide a reservoir of knowledge, experi-ence and skill; it can give strength, encouragement andfriendship. As members get to know each other, thereis a potential for trust-building, decreasing anxiety, andbuilding an ethos conducive to personal developmentand growth. Teams can provide honest feedback in supportive surroundings as well as challengingindividuals to push themselves. It can be a safe placeto practise, to explore and to experiment.
Asking each team member to express individualfeelings as a starting point to the review ensures that a personal voice is heard (linking in to the concept of learning from feelings as an emotional route). Theuse of ‘I’ rather than ‘we’ is always encouraged, sincethis allows individuals space for disagreement. The aimis to move beyond description and comment to a deter-mining of what caused feelings, so that action can betaken to either recreate or prevent them. An emphasison discussing ‘what went well’ stresses the importance
of keeping morale high, but also of recognizing thatthis did not happen by chance. Reviewing areas forimprovement allows the identi� cation of key points,how these can be drawn into planning for the next task,and what steps might be taken to improve performance.Over the programme, it will become apparent to allparticipants that putting principles into practice can beextremely dif� cult.
A model devised by Adair (1986) also underpinsreview sessions. Adair proposed three areas ofcommon need when people work in groups: those ofthe individual, the group as a whole, and the need toaccomplish the task. The model is presented as threeoverlapping circles to suggest that these needs, andtheir satisfaction, impinge on each other. All needsshould be met for effectiveness and satisfaction,although there could be great fluctuations in theattention given to any one area. Again, it is argued thatpeople have preferences for providing a particularfunction, but the importance of the model lies in itspotential for analysis or diagnosis of which need ismost pressing, or has been mishandled, in any situation.
THE TRAINING COURSE FOR ACADEMICS
The training course has a dual purpose:
� familiarization with the content of the courseoutlined above, its purposes, and the theoreticalunderpinnings – gained by undertaking theprogramme within teams of peers;
� opportunities for learning how to manage reviewsessions – by undertaking reviews and gainingfeedback, from peers and from trainers, on thehandling of this task.
The training emphasizes the role of the tutor infacilitating learning and creating an appropriate ethos by demonstrating warmth, support, trust and carefor safety. A number of features are highlighted, suchas responsibility for ground rules, or raising awarenessof personal impact on the group, ensuring thatindividuals and the team know how to move forwardand build on learning. There is attention to observation,and the need for feeding back observed behaviour andmaking sense of it. There is advice on how groups canbe guided to conclusions and to ways of overcomingproblems and frustrations. There is awareness-raisingof the need for questioning, challenging or confronting,and the importance of providing examples, analogies,stories, or helpful approaches, gained from personalexperience or provided by the training course.
Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Higher Education 365
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
However, the main learning comes from ‘experi-encing’ the course in the same way that the studentsdo, and having a memory and understanding ofresponses, surprises, ups and downs, strategies – both failures and successes – and outcomes of thisexperience.
The training course is supported by a detailed manualoutlining all activities, purposes, structures andadditional theory. A further stage of the programmewill be the development of a package includinginteractive video material to support training. Thismight in the future be available for use in accreditationof academics and could become a more formal part ofcontinuing professional development. It is also hopedthat these materials could be formalized into a trainingprogramme for newly appointed teachers in highereducation.
STUDENT RESPONSES TO THE TEAMDEVELOPMENT COURSE: AN INTEGRATEDPROGRAMME
There would be little point in training academics inteamwork skills if there were not a positive response to the course from students. Feedback is almost always extremely supportive and enthusiastic. Thefollowing brief case-study2 of a programme run in aLaw department highlights the nature of responses.This department had introduced a programme of groupworkshops in order to move away from didacticapproaches and to improve the quality of the learningenvironment. Some 150 � rst year students, in groupsof 10, were expected to work together over the courseof the year to satisfy workshop requirements. TheTeam Development course was used as an introductionto this and had three explicit aims: to emphasize thebene� t of effective teamwork; to give the students aframework and process for tackling group projects inan effective way, and to help build an identity for eachgroup of students working together. The restrictedlength of the course (one day), and the large size ofgroups, meant that it could serve merely to introducestudents to a structure for teamwork development. Theimportance of the training lay in whether they wouldbe able to apply their learning to more academicproblem-solving situations.
Student feedback on the course
Students described the day as excellent, valuable,worthwhile, useful, interesting, thought-provoking ,enjoyable, fun and as exceeding expectations. It was
suggested the course should be compulsory for all� rst year students and that it had been ‘an invaluableexperience for someone from overseas’. The day wasalso viewed as a precursor to law-based activities:‘brilliant fun, yet relevant to our work’. It was consid-ered to provide a ‘solid foundation for [the] future’, ‘Itallowed members of groups to learn and work withinan informal setting, before tackling more complicatedproblems’. One student wrote: ‘I feel a lot morecon� dent. I now know I need to speak out more whenI disagree’. They discussed the gaining of personal and communicative skills, knowing themselves better,the ability to contribute effectively and relevantly’, thedevelopment of ‘trust in each other’ and of ‘skills wehad but didn’t fully appreciate before’. The words ofone student provide a good summary of the bene� ts ofthe day ‘Extremely valuable, enjoyable and I havemany new experiences to take away with me and learnfrom. It has enabled me to value groupwork as a veryenjoyable and productive method of carrying out tasks.I believe I am more able to work as a team member andhave gained the ability to experience others’ qualitiesand adapt them’.
Feedback on tutors
University teachers who took part in the course had all experienced training in team development or hadexperience of a similar course. Feedback on theirperformance in delivering the course to students isimportant in the maintaining of quality and in makingdecisions about providing further support for academictraining if necessary. Much comment focused on their helpfulness, their manner which was friendly,relaxed and humorous, or the ease with which it waspossible to talk to them – that they were approachableand not intimidating or patronizing, over-critical, over-powering or dominant. The students described howtutors were thought-provoking, ‘pushed me harder thanI had anticipated in terms of thinking practically’ or‘would take us back to things we’d forgotten about’,how they drew out responses, worked to bring the teamtogether to develop skills and to enable students tounderstand the content, ideas and aims of the course.Tutors in these sessions were careful to point out howparticular students had interacted within the team,especially if this was considered important to theirdevelopment and had been overlooked in peer review.An ethos was created in which many students sug-gested they had been enabled to value their strengthsin new ways, and felt a personal commitment not justto the team, but to working at personal weaknesses.
366 IETI 37,4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
Student development over time
A three-week team simulation on negotiation at the end of the academic year became a vehicle for studentsto demonstrate skills. It is not possible to know howmuch of their success can be attributed to the teamdevelopment course However, the students demon-strated throughout the simulation that they were able tomanage their own team organization to good effect,without demands on teacher time. Self-assessmentschedules provided an opportunity for feedback on theextent to which students could be explicit about skilldevelopment. The quality of writing for these, coveringboth legal knowledge and skills, offers further reasonfor optimism about the processes of teamwork – at leastat the level of students being coherent and explicitabout their skills. Whether such coherence relates totheir abilities to work in teams in the future is yetanother question. Despite encouraging results, somestudents, although thoroughly enjoying the BP course,did not see any purpose to working collaboratively.They believe that subject content is all that matters, andis best learned independently. When this kind of beliefis very strong, it tends to have a negative in� uence onthe whole group.
OUTCOMES OF THE TRAINING COURSES
The aim of training academics is to create a ‘core’ ofteachers in each institution who will be willing andequipped to continue the team development coursewhen it is no longer � nancially supported by BP. Inmost institutions, the starting point has been a series ofChalybeate-run courses undertaken with students froma single department (usually chemistry or chemicalengineering, as this was where BP had existing links).To sustain the programme, suf� cient teachers – fromthat one department or from across departments – needto be trained to manage the programme independently.A good example is an initiative in a chemistrydepartment within a university which now has 28academics trained in team-development skills Thisdepartment has already organized three of its owncourses, the � rst two being overseen by Chalybeate,the last being fully independent. The same departmentis also leading the way in terms of embedding trans-ferable skills into the curriculum. Alongside, studentsand staff from a range of departments are graduallybeing drawn in, for example, from science, geography,oceanography and physics. There is also collaborationbetween the law department in this university and theone described above.
The success of the programme can be attributedoriginally to its having an enthusiastic and respectedchampion, though this in itself is not enough. TheUniversity Vice Chancellor and Senate have taken a keen interest in the activities of the chemistrydepartment and have recently acknowledged that theuniversity must provide opportunities for transferableskills to all students. A new post has been created sothat the university can deliver skills more effectively,with a focus being the team development programme.BP is also supporting a number of other initiatives, suchas a ‘Personal Development Folder’. It may also beimportant that this particular institution has had thelongest association with the programme (since 1993),giving most opportunity for ideas to take hold.
In one university, the introduction to the teamdevelopment programme was through a training courseattended by 12 staff from different departments. At theend of the course, a group decision was made that one particularly enthusiastic teacher should run acourse as a trial in their department and that this shouldbe evaluated by another trained academic. All staffattending the training course were invited to partici-pate. Several made it clear that they wanted no furtherpart in any such activities. Five (from law, education,psychology, biological sciences and the careersdepartment) were involved in this trial, which provedhighly successful; the psychology department laterbecame involved in the light of its success. These same academics have since been involved in observingor teaching courses in a range of departments, inpersuading their own departments to try out small-scaleevents, or in courses run in other universities.
Twenty five more staff have been trained, but thereremains a dif� culty in providing a consistent approach.For example, the department of computer science rantheir own programme. Over three days, � ve staff wereinvolved. Of these, two were full time academics from different departments in the university (one ofthese was on a year’s contract only), one (the courseorganizer) was a research assistant; one was a researchstudent and another was a visiting academic from the USA. Three had received training in teamworkdevelopment; one had previously taught on similarcourses and one was keen to learn. A second researchstudent who had been trained would have been awilling volunteer but was requested not to participateby their research supervisor. The course organizerclaimed to feel ‘well supported and encouraged by thetutors, who all showed the qualities of commitment,professionalism and friendliness that the task required’.However, of the participating tutors, one has returned
Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Higher Education 367
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
to the USA; one has no certainty of a future contract;one has left the university; and another is due to do soat the end of the academic year.
As it became clear that BP would not be continuingfunding beyond the year 2000, and that the schememight be forced to collapse in this university, seniormanagement responded to pressure and has ensured� nancial support over the next three years. This can beattributed to the determination of a few members ofstaff to keep up an enthusiasm for progress, to gatherevidence of success, and – above all – to embed theteam development into the curriculum and the ways ofworking. However, central university support does notnecessarily mean any more interest at departmentallevel.
A determination in another university to spread andsupport the message beyond the chemistry departmenthas proved dif� cult. There has been some unfortunatemanagement, for example, second year students havingexaminations two days after the programme and atutor-training course clashing with examination boardmeetings. However, the main problem has been lack ofreal support at senior levels, and allowing time andresources to be committed. To raise awareness andsupport at this level, a ‘taster’ session was run for 22 senior members of staff. A staff development of� ceris now involved and a small sample of humanitiesstudents have undertaken the course. Strategy devel-opment continues.
Elsewhere, a teacher who worked hard to set up courseshas been rewarded by being appointed faculty directorof transferable skills. There is enthusiasm for using the course more widely and the director is in theprocess of developing a strategy for his new respon-sibilities. In another establishment, there are plans to widen availability beyond chemical engineering, but there remains a need once again to establish astrategy for the university, involving senior staffdevelopers and a more detailed plan to create the coregroup of tutors. In another university, a chemistrydepartment and chemical engineering have shownenthusiasm, incorporating the programme into coursestructures, but there is no plan to build up a core ofteachers to deliver the programme, either within adepartment or across the institution. The institution is described by one head of department as ‘a collectionof fiefdoms’, which makes interaction difficult. The preference is to use professional support forprogrammes in future, but this means that departmentsare required to establish budgets, which may provedif� cult.
Another university has run several cross-departmentalprogrammes that were thoroughly enjoyed, but thesingle, part-time academic involved, despite preparinga positive report on applications of the programme,cannot engage staff. Elsewhere, a course run for a hall of residence is unlikely to be repeated; initialenthusiasm in chemistry, with three courses being runin the postgraduate school, seems to have waned.Another chemistry department uses the course as a‘kick-off’ to project work; there was initially littleinterest in training tutors, although two will be involvedin the near future.
The involvement of top management may be crucial toenabling innovation and change but, again, this is notenough. One Vice Principal sees the best way forwardas running university events in order to offer trans-ferable skills to as many students as possible – but it isnot clear what can be achieved by the team devel-opment programme until strategies for achieving thisare put in place.
DISCUSSION
Research on change in higher education suggests thatthe kind of dif� culties outlined above should come asno surprise. Stephenson and Weil (1992), with theirexperience of ‘capability’ approaches, suggest that, ingeneral, instigation of deep-level change will requirenot only a reconceptualization of higher education, but also a high level of commitment on the part of thestaff and flexibility on the part of the institution.Recommendations include supportive professionaldevelopment as being crucial, alongside small initialsteps towards change. They also suggest that aca-demics will have to address issues of their own identityand role. However, Becher (1989) found that mostacademics display satisfaction, enjoyment and evenexhilaration in relation to their discipline, and perceivethemselves ‘as seekers after knowledge rather than ascommunicators of it’. Allen (1991) and Gubbay (1994)describe the scepticism often found among universityteachers who believe it is not part of their role toprovide skills for employment, who feel they haveinsufficient time to teach disciplinary knowledge aswell as skills and who cannot, or do not wish to, assesssuch skills. As Gubbay highlights, there are profoundimplications for change in curriculum, pedagogy andassessment, at a time when many academics seeteaching for such skills as a distraction from improvingresearch ratings.
Issues and tensions such as those outlined above are
368 IETI 37,4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
not easily resolved. Interest in innovation is alwayshard to gain, and although supporters of initiativesclaim advantages, there is also evidence that as soon asany additional funding is removed, enthusiasmdisperses (DES, 1992). Biggs et al. (1994) suggest,from the evidence of a major programme of changeacross many institutions, that innovation failed whennot supported by top management. Universities havemission statements that value student preparation forthe future, for the community, for lifelong learning, foremployment, and make reference to transferable skills,quality in teaching and learning, and so on. They haveinternal systems that take account of funding councilrecommendations for change, and that have supportedmoves to modularization and clari� cation of expectedlearning outcomes, including skill development. Suchmoves have the potential for promoting change butmany institutions are not achieving a widespread, deep-rooted and fundamental shift in conceptions andpractices of teaching and learning. Strategies may be inplace, but often not the means of implementing themat the level of everyday practice. Middlehurst (1993)suggests the kind of leadership projected as necessaryfor managing major change in the academic worldemphasizes vision, risk-taking, etc, but that the cruciallink – the idea of ‘taking people with you’, and buildingcommitment, enthusiasm and trust in the directions and strategies imposed – has been ignored. It cannot be assumed that ‘implementation will proceed onautopilot’ (Hargreaves and Hopkins, 1991). There isstill marked evidence of widespread indifference orcontinuing resistance to skill development amonguniversity staff: ‘I fundamentally and categorically do not believe these skills should be part of a grad-uate degree’. In relation to the team developmentprogramme, there are also signs of antipathy to thosefrom business being involved with curriculum change.
Students, too, are not always convinced of the necessityfor transferable skills, believing a degree to be aboutdisciplinary knowledge, not processes, and that highlevel knowledge is what employers require. Entwistle(1992) describes ‘instrumental’ learners – who workto satisfy’ a quali� cation rather than look for qualityand depth of understanding. It is also well known thatstudents adhere to the ways of learning with which theyfeel most comfortable or successful, and by which theyare not challenged (or threatened). Fullan (1991) states:‘learning a new skill and entertaining new concep-tions create doubts and feelings of awkwardness orincompetence, especially when we � rst try something’.One of the problems of introducing new processes oflearning is that it tends to be dif� cult for both those thatprovide them and for those who should gain from them.
The Team Development Programme gives evidencethat it can satisfy ‘the need to create safe environmentsto encourage people to take the risk of learning’(Coffield, 1997). It can only provide this in a singlecontext, for a short period of time. But, by gaining theenthusiasm and commitment of those academicsinterested in learning themselves, and in enablingstudents to learn, it has provided valuable support andencouragement to those who are often least likely toreceive it.
What may be self-evident, but not necessarily easy toachieve, is the need for a dual approach – top-downalongside bottom-up change. The best chance ofsurvival for the programme is likely to be where boththe structures of the institution are supportive to changeand where the curriculum allows, or can be adapted toallow, the integration of teamwork into disciplinarystudy. In the example of the law department above,there was evidence of a considerable ‘pay-off’ fromputting time and effort into the team developmentcourse. Through training of the students to operate inself-managed teams, they were enabled to becomemore responsible for their own long-term learning(which is what employers really require), they achievedexpected standards in terms of disciplinary knowledgeand could also be explicit about skill development.Many of the advantages of teamwork outlined at thebeginning of the paper could be observed. The demandon staff time to prepare a learning environmentconducive to teamwork, and to manage the associatedchanges in monitoring and assessment, was great.However, in the long run, the efforts are expected tobetter the learning provision for students at the sametime as cutting down on contact time.
The Team Development Programme has continuedbuilding on what has been successful and what hasbeen learned about the nature of institutional change,developing new strategies, seeking out interestedindividuals, acknowledging that change is inevitablyslow. There have been many ideas from academics thatare enabling the venture to grow and to become trulycollaborative. Although the support provided by BPhas been crucial in financial as well as in practicalterms, the major bene� t claimed by academics has beenin the relationship with committed partners fromoutside the university, the feeling that – no matter thelack of support from within an institution – there wouldbe continued expertise and interest from others. Thiskind of partnership has meant that many initiativeshave � ourished in a way that would otherwise neverhave been feasible. The programme is playing a part inenabling and supporting change within a culture that
Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Higher Education 369
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
remains wary of change. It gives evidence of studentsenjoying and learning about skill development. Itallows academics the opportunity to develop profes-sional skills that may have a wider application than just within the programme. However, it is likely to have lasting impact only in those universities that areworking consistently to change the culture of teachingand learning, that have structures, strategies and acurriculum that can make use of and build on the exper-tise and bene� ts that the programme offers. It is also insuch universities that wider initiatives to promotecontinuing professional development, and to raise thestatus of teaching, are likely to have the most effect.
NOTES
1. ‘Team’ and ‘group’ are used interchangeably in thiscontext, but with the recognition that ‘team’ is usuallyassociated with more explicit group goals and intra- orinter-group dependence, etc.
2. For more detail on this study, see Prince and Dunne(1998).
REFERENCES
Abercrombie, M L J and Terry, P (1978) Talking to Learn:Improving Teaching and Learning in Small Groups, 4th edn, Society for Research in Higher Education,Guildford.
Adair, J (1986) Effective Teambulding, Gower, Aldershot.Allen, M (1991) Improving the Personal Skills of
Graduates, Final report, University of Shef� eld.Australian Business/Higher Education Round Table (1991)
Aiming Higher, Commissioned Report No 1, RoundTable, Victoria.
Australian Business/Higher Education Round Table (1992)Educating for Excellence, Commissioned Report No 2,Round Table, Victoria.
Australian Business/Higher Education Round Table (1993)Graduating to the Workplace, Commissioned Report No3, Round Table, Victoria.
Becher, T (1989) Academic Tribes and Territories:Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines,Open University Press, Milton Keynes.
Bennett, N and Dunne, E (1992) Managing ClassroomGroups, Simon and Schuster Education, London.
Biggs, C, Brighton, R, Minnitt, P, Pow, R and Wicksteed,W (1994) Thematic Evaluation of EHEI, Research SeriesNo 30. Shef� eld: Employment Department.
Cof� eld, F (ed.) (1997) A National Strategy for LifelongLearning, Department of Education, University ofNewcastle.
Collier, G (ed) (1983) The Management of Peer-GroupLearning. Syndicate Methods in Higher Education,SRHE, Guildford.
DES (1987) Higher Education: Meeting the Challenge, Cm114, HMSO, London.
DES (1991) Higher Education: A New Framework,HMSO, London.
DES (1992) A Survey of the Enterprise in Higher EducationInitiative, HMSO, London.
Deutsch, M (1949) An experimental study of the effects ofcooperation and competition upon group process, HumanRelations, 2, 129–52.
Drexler, A B, Sibbet, D and Forrester, R H (1988) The teamperformance model. In Reddy, W B and Jamison, K (eds) Team Building: Blueprints for Productivity andSatisfaction, NTL, Alexandria, VA.
Dunne, E and Bennett, N (1990) Talking and Learning inGroups, Routledge, London and New York.
Entwistle, N (1992) Student learning and instructionalprinciples in higher education. In Committee of ScottishUniversity Principals, Teaching and Learning in anExpanding Higher Education System, Appendix A,52–62, SCFC, Edinburgh.
Fullan, M G (1991) The New Meaning of EducationalChange , Cassell, London.
Gibbs, G (1995) Assessing Student Centred Courses,Centre for Staff Development, Oxford.
Gubbay, J (1994) A critique of conventional justi� cationfor transferable skills. In Bridges, D (ed.) TransferableSkills in Higher Education, University of East Anglia/ERTEC, Norwich.
Hargreaves, D and Hopkins, D (1991) The EmpoweredSchool: The Management and Practice of DevelopmentPlanning, Cassell, London.
Honey, D and Mumford, A (1986) Using your LearningStyles, Honey, Maidenhead.
Jacques, D (1991) Learning in Groups, 2nd edn, KoganPage, London.
Johnson, D W and Johnson, F P (1991) Joining Together:Group Theory and Group Skills, Prentice-HallInternational Editions, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Kolb, D A (1984) Experiential Learning, Prentice Hall,Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Middlehurst, R (1993) Leading Academics, SRHE/OUP,Buckingham.
National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education(1997) Higher Education in the Learning Society (TheDearing Report), HMSO, London.
Pennsylvania State University (1994) National Centre onPostsecondary Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
Prince, S and Dunne, E (1998) Group development: theintegration of skills into Law, The Law Teacher, 32, 1,64–78.
QHE (1993) Update (6), The Newsletter of the Quality inHigher Education Project. Birmingham: University ofCentral England.
QHE (1994) Update (7), The Newsletter of the Quality inHigher Education Project. Birmingham: University ofCentral England.
Rogoff, B (1990) Apprenticeship in Thinking: CognitiveDevelopment in Social Context, Oxford University Press,Oxford.
370 IETI 37,4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
Slavin, R E (1983) Cooperative Learning, Longman, NewYork.
Slee, P (1989) A consensus framework for highereducation. In Ball, C and Eggins, H (eds) HigherEducation in the 1990s: New Dimensions, SRHE/ OUP,Milton Keynes, pp. 63–8.
Stephenson, J and Weil, S (1992) Quality in Learning,Kogan Page, London.
Topping, K (1998) The Peer Tutoring Handbook:Promoting Cooperative Learning, Croom Helm,London.
Vygotsky, L S (1962) Thought and Language, MIT Press,Cambridge, MA.
Wertsch, J V (1985) Culture, Communication andCognition, Vygotskian Perspectives, CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge.
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
Elizabeth Dunne works as a senior research fellow andstaff development officer in the Staff DevelopmentUnit at the University of Exeter. She was previouslysenior research fellow in the School of Education atExeter and co-director of a study on core skills withina major national research programme on the ‘LearningSociety’. She has 25 years of experience in teachingand research at every level of education. The last fewyears have been devoted to research on transferableskills in higher education, the development andmaintaining of initiatives to promote such skills, andthe evaluation of innovative practices. She is at presentundertaking an evaluation of the BP TeamDevelopment Programme across ten universities. Hermany publications reflect a specific interest in theprocesses of learning.
Mike Rawlins has developed his leadership, facilitationand coaching skills in a variety of environments.Working independently for the past 7 years he has builtup a prospering business with a varied range of clients.Prior to this, his experience is based on 16 years withBP in line management positions involving work in theUK, Europe, USA and the Far East. With experienceof leading teams in research, commercial and strategicplanning activities within BP, Mike brings practicalbusiness experience to his development programmes.He has worked with teams and individuals throughoutorganizations up to Board level, designing and runningprogrammes, facilitating conferences and large groupmeetings, and coaching senior managers andexecutives. He is interested in alternative healingtherapies and practises as a healer.
Address for correspondence: Elisabeth Dunne, StaffDevelopment Unit, University of Exeter, Queen’sBuilding, The Queen’s Drive,Exeter, EX4 4HQ, UK.Tel: (+44) 01392 264510;Fax: (+44) 01392 233834;e-mail: [email protected]
Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Higher Education 371
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f O
tago
] at
04:
27 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014