SCHOLARLY TEACHING: WORK AND IDENTITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION DR KEIKO - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SCHOLARLY TEACHING: WORK AND IDENTITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION DR KEIKO YASUKAWA DR TONY BROWN DR NOUR DADOS

ABOUT THE PROJECT The presentation is based on the project funded by the Commonwealth Department of Education and Training Office of Learning and Teaching: SP16-5285 'Scholarly teaching fellows as a new category of employment in Australian universities: impacts and prospects for teaching and learning’. Research team: A/Prof James Goodman (Lead Investigator, UTS), Dr Keiko Yasukawa (UTS), A/Prof Anne Junor (UNSW & UTS), Professor Glenda Strachan (Griffith), Dr Kaye Broadbent (UTS), Dr Tony Brown (University of Canberra), Dr Nour Dados (UTS), Mr Jason Antony (UTS) Visit http://scholarlyteaching.net for more information

PROJECT AIMS • To investigate costs and benefits of STFs for various stakeholders • To identify individual academic and organization capabilities developed through establishment of STF positions • To determine how STF positions interact and redefine other academic roles and teaching-research nexus • To explore the extent that STFs offer alternate career pathways for qualified entry level academics and enable sector-wide renewal • To develop sector-wide best practice for the establishment and support of STFs

WHAT ARE SCHOLARLY TEACHING FELLOWS? • STFs are a new type of continuing education-focused roles for long-term academic casuals proposed initially in 2012 • Introduced through the enterprise bargaining round 2012-2013. By Feb 2018, 694 STFs had been recruited of the 854 agreed across 30 universities. • A convergence of priorities? STFs were seen as addressing the union’s priority of creating pathways for the sector’s long -term casuals while meeting the sector’s demands for increased teaching capacity in response to the growth in student numbers

TARGETS AND OUTCOMES Model STF NTEU target Implementation - variation by Implementation – variation by (from NTEU claim) sample sector Number of positions: 2553 9.6% median of NTEU target 33% of target by number of across interview sample positions agreed (854) Target of 20% of 12763 (Source: NTEU and DET) casual FTE, the “reported Wide variation: some sites almost 27% of target by number of casual rate” for 2012 20% and others around 1% positions implemented (694) according to DET) (Source: NTEU and DET; data not (Source: NTEU data for February available for all sites) 2018) Tenure: 100% of positions to be 87% of interview sample were Sector data not available but some continuing continuing EBAs specify only fixed-term Continuing employment for STF-like positions. Some providers advertised ‘Casual STFs’. Employment arrangement: Ratios not specified 84% of sample were full-time. Sector data not available but sampled EBAs make provision for Full-time or part-time Those employed part-time fractional employment of STFs and undertook additional part-time or do not preclude concurrent casual casual work for financial reasons. employment. Some providers advertised ‘Casual STFs’.

Model STF NTEU target Implementation - variation by sample Implementation – variation by (from NTEU claim) sector Career pathway: 100% of positions to have a 26% of sample had a conversion pathway to Sector data not available but many career pathway that would allow an integrated teaching-and-research role. EBAs do not provide a career Conversion to regular Level for conversion into an integrated pathway for STFs with salaries B teaching-and-research role after 3 years. Potential of emerging teaching-focused models capped at B3 and progression role after 3 years to absorb existing and future STF positions. beyond B3 only possible if incumbent applies for a different role. Some measures have been introduced at some institutions to address this in current bargaining round. Eligibility: 100% of positions to have 79% of sample had PhD at time of employment Sector data not available but eligibility criteria sampled EBAs include these PhD plus minimum of 1 93% of sample had casual/contract experience eligibility criteria. of more than 1 year. year casual or contract work experience at Australian university Workload: 100% of positions to have Variation across sample with teaching Sector data not available but teaching capped at 70% and a workloads between 50-80%. Wide variation in sampled EBAs include variation in Max. 70% teaching with minimum 20% scholarship or composition of teaching workloads and contact workloads with teaching as high as min. 20% scholarship or research allocation hours at the institutional and disciplinary level. 80% and some positions with no research scholarship or research allocation. Variation across sample with scholarship or research allocation between 0-20%. Uncertainty about allocation and expectations common in sample.

A CONVERGENCE OF PRIORITIES? The Scholarly Teaching Industrial Objectives Institutional Objectives Fellows Inititiave Reduce casualisation Improve the student experience Absorb previous casual work by bundling numerous contracts into a single role Employ previous casuals in Create job security for former Enhance teaching and learning continuing teaching-only roles casuals Provide a pathway for Create a career pathway for Strengthen teaching capacity conversion into integrated academics in teaching-only through workforce renewal work teaching-and-research roles after 3 years

Convergence or compromise: tensions between the industrial and institutional imperatives Job security Larger teaching workforce More Quality teaching Academic career path career entry, teaching- Institutional Industrial intensive academic imperatives imperatives positions. Reduction in TEQSA and other compliance casualisa- Teaching-research nexus tion Growth in student enrolments

THE GRAPHS: CASUAL, TEACHING ONLY & INTEGRATED SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING STAFF DATA APPENDIX 1 -1996-2017 CASUAL NUMBERS ARE COLLECTED AS FULL-TIME EQUIVALENCE (FTE)

% casual FTE of all academic FTE - 1996-2016 26.00 24.00 22.00 20.00 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Teaching-Only FTE as % of all academic FTE - 1996-2016 29.00 27.00 25.00 23.00 21.00 19.00 17.00 15.00 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

% of Teaching-Only Casual FTE versus Teaching-only Full-time and Fractional Full-Time FTE – 1996-2016 Casuals as % of Teaching-Only FT & FFT as % of Teaching-Only 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

INTERVIEW DATA • 80 interviews conducted between July 2017 and February 2018 • Extended interviews (up to 1.5 hours) with multiple stakeholders • Six interview sites: sites chosen to be representative of each type of university ( Marginson’s typology): Sandstone (1), Redbrick (1), Gumtree (1), New University (2) • Interview participants can be broadly divided into two groups: staff in managerial or executive positions (34), and staff in education-focused academic positions including STFs (46)

DISTRIBUTION OF MANAGEMENT INTERVIEWS Type of University Managerial Category Number of Interviews Sandstone & Redbricks (2) Senior Executive 2 Faculty Manager 5 Human Resources & Senior Staff 3 Gumtrees (1) Senior Executive 0 Faculty Manager 5 Human Resources & Senior Staff 0 Unitechs (1) Senior Executive 1 Faculty Manager 6 Human Resources & Senior Staff 0 New Universities (2) Senior Executive 3 Faculty Manager 6 Human Resources & Senior Staff 3 TOTAL (all universities) Senior Executive 6 Faculty Manager 22 Human Resources & Senior Staff 6 ALL MANAGER CATEGORIES 34

DISTRIBUTION OF STF AND EFR INTERVIEWS Gender History in Academia – Previous PhD at Tenure Employment No. of Years Professional Appointment Fixed-term Continuing Fractional Full-time Experience Female <1 year 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-5 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 5-10 15 4 12 1 14 1 14 10-20 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 >20 6 2 6 1 5 0 6 Subtotals - FEMALE 26 7 22 3 23 2 24 Male <1 year 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 1-5 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 5-10 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 10-20 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 >20 5 1 4 0 5 1 4 Subtotals - MALE 17 6 12 3 14 5 12 TOTALS 43 13 34 6 37 7 36 % 30 79 14 87 16 84

SCHOLARLY TEACHING: COLLECTIVE NARRATIVES & KEY THEMES  Workload  Pathway uncertainty   Job Security Impact on health and personal  Professional recognition life Sustainability  Enhanced academic identity

INTERVIEW RESPONSES: MANAGERS TOPIC + +/- - TEACHING STF-like roles recognize and STFs are good for those STF-like roles create a sub- reward good teachers class who want to teach but they won’t lead to a full academic career CASUALISATION AND Career path for those No net reduction in No net reduction in CAREER PATH wanting a teaching career casualization and casualization and no hope but no net reduction in pathway is only possible of pathway into balanced casualisation if STFs dedicate all their role spare time to research outputs PERCEPTION OF STF Partial agreement on need STFs part of a broader Universities had no choice PURPOSE AND UNION to address casualization but industrial strategy aimed but to implement STFs ROLE not to STF strategy at job security but does under pressure from the not create academic union pathways